” Puget Sound Power & Light Co., Docket No.15p{\tmargin-top: 0px;\tmargin-bottom: 1px}table{\tborder-collapse: collapse;\tborder-spacing: 0pt;\tborder-color: black;\tempty-cells: show;\tfont-family: \”Calibri\”, sans-serif;\tfont-size: 11pt;\tfont-weight: normal;\tfont-style: normal}td{\tborder-color: black}td.table1column1{\tpadding-left: 0.075in;\tpadding-right: 0.0816667in}td.table1column2{\tpadding-left: 0.075in;\tpadding-right: 0.075in}hr{\theight: 0.0125in;\tbackground-color: black}td.table2column1{\tpadding-left: 0.075in;\tpadding-right: 0.0816667in}td.table2column2{\tpadding-left: 0.075in;\tpadding-right: 0.075in}body{\tfont-family: \”Calibri\”, sans-serif;\tfont-size: 11pt;\tfont-weight: normal;\tfont-style: normal;\tmargin-left: 0.075in;\tpadding-left: 0.1in}UNITED STATES OF AMERICAOCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSIONSECRETARY OF LABOR,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Complainant,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0v. OSHRC DOCKET NO. 15PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT CO.,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Respondent.\u00a0ORDER OF REMAND\u00a0January 28, 1972Before MORAN, Chairman; VAN NAMEE and BURCH, CommissionersBURCH, COMMISSIONER:This matter is before the Review Commission pursuant to a Direction for Review which Iissued on November 23, 1971.Respondent and the Secretary through their respective counsel had entered into astipulated withdrawal. The Hearing Examiner issued an order approving such disposition.By the terms of the stipulation the parties agreed, inter alia, that this case embracedlegitimate issues of law and fact including the amount, if any, of the proposed penalty.Respondent agreed to withdraw its notice of contest and pay the agreed sum of $550 \u2018in lieu of\u2019the proposed penalty of $600. Respondent\u2019s agreement to settlement of this dispute was notdeemed to be an admission or adjudication of the violation charged and the settlement andconsequent disposition of this case was not to be considered an adjudication of a violation of theAct.Pursuant to the Commission\u2019s invitation (issued subsequent to the Commission\u2019sDirection for Review) Respondent submitted a \u2018Memorandum of Undisputed Facts and Pointsand Authorities in Support of Examiner\u2019s Decision\u2019 and the Secretary submitted a \u2018Petition forRemand.\u2019Having reviewed the record in this case, including the representations and arguments ofthe Respondent and the Secretary, it is apparent that a hearing is appropriate.The Commission subscribes to the principle that settlements are to be encouraged.However, the issues raised in Respondent\u2019s memorandum make the disposition of this case bysettlement at this time inappropriate. The misunderstanding that arose between the partiesconcerning the interpretation of the stipulated agreement persuades the Commission to grant theSecretary\u2019s motion, and it is therefore ORDERED that the Hearing Examiner\u2019s recommendeddecision and order be set aside and this case be remanded to a Hearing Examiner for furtherproceedings not inconsistent with this order.\u00a0\u00a0UNITED STATES OF AMERICAOCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSIONSECRETARY OF LABOR,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Complainant,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0v. OSHRC DOCKET NO. 15PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT CO.,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Respondent.\u00a0\u00a0November 12, 1971WISE, JUDGE, OSAHRC:The parties, through their respective counsel, hereby agree and stipulate as follows:I. On July 9, 1971, a citation was issued by the Director of the Occupational Safety andHealth Administration of the Department of Labor to Puget Sound Power & Light Company (the\u2018Company\u2019) alleging a violation of Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of1970 (the \u2018Act\u2019) and a proposed penalty in the amount of $600 was assessed on July 12, 1971.II. The Company filed a notice of intent to contest this citation, and requested a hearingbefore the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, on the ground that the citationhas no legal or factual foundation and that no penalty should be imposed.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0III. The parties agree that this is a disputed matter with legitimate issues of law and facton both sides including the amount, if any, of the proposed penalty.IV. The parties have agreed to settle this action by the Company withdrawing its noticeof intent to contest the citation, which shall remain outstanding, and paying the agreed sum of$550 in lieu of the proposed penalty of $600.V. The Company\u2019s action in settling this dispute is no admission or adjudication of aviolation of Section 5(a) of the Act, and this settlement and consequent disposition of this actionwill not be considered to be an adjudication of a violation of the Act for any purpose whatsoever.VI. This settlement promotes and is consistent with the provisions of the Act, and theCommission may enter an order consistent with its terms.ORDERIt is ORDERED that the foregoing stipulation is consistent with the provisions of the Actand it shall be accepted and adopted by the Commission. Further, it shall be deemed the finalorder of the Commission and not subject to review by any court or agency within the meaning ofSection 10(a) of the Act, and that no cost shall be assessed.”