“SECRETARY OF LABOR,Complainant,v.SHANK-OHBAYASHI, INC.,Respondent.OSHRC Docket No. 88-2674_ORDER_This matter is before the Commission on a Direction for Review enteredby former Chairman Linda L. Arey on November 21, 1989. The parties havenow filed an Amended Stipulation and Settlement Agreement.Having reviewed the record, and based upon the representations appearingin the Amended Stipulation and Settlement Agreement, we conclude thatthis case raises no matters warranting further review by the Commission.The terms of the Amended Stipulation and Settlement Agreement do notappear to be contrary to the Occupational Safety and Health Act and arein compliance with the Commission’s Rules of Procedure.Accordingly, we incorporate the terms of the Amended Stipulation andSettlement Agreement into this order. This is the final order of theCommission in this case. _See_ 29 U.S.C. ?? 659(c), 660(a) and (b).Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.ChairmanVelma MontoyaCommissionerDonald G. WisemanCommissionerDated: October 23, 1990————————————————————————ELIZABETH DOLE, SECRETARY OF LABOR,Complainant,v.SHANK-OHBAYASHIRespondent.OSHRC Docket No. 88-2674_NOTICE OF CORRECTION TO STIPULATION AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT_1. The parties in the above-captioned case entered into a Stipulationand Settlement Agreement which was signed by Respondent on August 28,1990 and then signed by the Secretary on September 4, 1990. The originaland four copies of the document was mailed to the Occupational Safetyand Health Review Commission.2. Paragraph 10 of the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement reads asfollows:10. This Stipulation and Settlement Agreement does not affect thejudge’s disposition of the following citation items:Citation 1, Items 1(a) and 1(b); Citation 1, Item 2; Citation 1, Item 3;Citation 1, Items 4(a) and 4(b); Citation 1, Items 5(a) through 5(e);Citation 1, Item 6; Citation 2, Items 2(a) and 2(b); Citation 3, Items 1through 4.3. The next to the last sentence in Paragraph 10 should have read, andis hereby corrected to read:Citation 2, Items 1(a) and 1(b).4. Respondent has been notified of this correction and consents thereto.ANTONY F. GILAttorney for theSecretary of Labor ELIZABETH DOLE, SECRETARY OF LABOR,Complainant,v.SHANK-OHBAYASHIRespondent.OSHRC Docket No. 88-2674*_Stipulation and Settlement Agreement_*In full settlement, and disposition of the issues in this proceeding, itis hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the Complainant,Secretary of Labor, and the Respondent, Shank-Ohbayashi, that:1. This case is before the commission upon respondent’s contest ofCitation 2, Items 2(a), 2(b) and 2(c) which alleged willful violationsof 29 CFR 1926.800(c)(2)(vii) along with a proposed penalty of $10,000,and Citation 2, Item 3 which alleged a willful violation of 29 CFR1926.800(k)(6) along with a proposed penalty of $10,000. The citationswere affirmed by the Commission’s administrative law judge, and apenalty of $7,000 was assessed for the violation of 1926.800 (c)(2)(vii)and $4,000 for the violation of 29 CFR 1926.800(k)(6). (Decision andOrder, September 27, 1989.) Respondent was also cited in pertinent part,for violations of 29 U.S.C. 654(a)(1) (Citation 1, Item 7(a) and 29 CFR1926.800(h)(2)(ii) (Citation 1, Item 8). These citations items werevacated by the administrative law judge. (Decision and Order, September27, 1989.)2. The Secretary hereby amends the citation to characterize theviolations of 29 CFR 1926.800(c)(2)(vii) and 29 CFR 1926.800(k)(6) asviolations of Section 17 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29U.S.C. ? 666.3. The Secretary hereby amends the proposed penalty to a combined totalof $4,400 for items 2 and 3 of Citation No. 2.4. Respondent hereby withdraws its notice of contest to Citation 2,Items 2(a), 2(b), and 2(c) and to Citation 2, item 3, and to thenotification of proposed penalty as amended above in paragraph 3.5. The Secretary hereby amends the proposed penalty in Citation 1, Item7(a) for violation of the general duty clause, 29 U.S.C. ? 654(a)(1) to$100.6. Respondent hereby withdraws its notice of contest to Citation 1, Item7(a) and to the notification of proposed penalty as amended in paragraph 5.7. The Secretary hereby amends the proposed penalty in Citation 1, Item8 for violation of 29 CFR 1926.800 (h)(2)(ii) to $100.8. Respondent hereby withdraws its notice of contest to Citation 1, Item8 and to the notification of proposed penalty as amended in paragraph 7.9. Respondent agrees that the above-mentioned violations have been abated.10. This Stipulation and Settlement Agreement does not affect thejudge’s disposition of the following citation items:Citation 1, Items 1 (a) and 1 (b); Citation 1, Item 2; Citation 1, Item3; Citation 1, Items 4 (a) and 4 (b); Citation 1, Items 5(a) through5(e); Citation 1, Item 6; Citation 2, Items 2(a) and 2(b); Citation 3,Items 1 through 4.Nothing set forth in this Stipulation and Settlement Agreement can beconstrued as an admission of willful conduct on the part of respondentfor any violation for which a notice of contest has been withdrawn.11. Respondent agrees to submit to the OSHA Area Office $4,600 in fulland complete payment of the penalty within 30 days of this Agreement.12. Respondent certifies that a copy of this Stipulation and SettlementAgreement was posted at the workplace on the 29th day of August 1990, inaccordance with Rules 7 and 100 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure.There are no authorized representatives of affected employees.13. Complainant and respondent will bear their own litigation costs andexpenses.Antony F. Gil Kate RaabeCounsel for the Attorney for RespondentSecretary of Labor (Shank-Ohbayashi)”