“Docket No. 88-2674 SECRETARY OF LABOR, Complainant, v. SHANK-OHBAYASHI, INC., Respondent.OSHRC Docket No. 88-2674ORDERThis matter is before the Commission on a Directionfor Review entered by 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 therepresentations appearing in the Amended Stipulation and Settlement Agreement, we concludethat this case raises no matters warranting further review by the Commission. The terms ofthe Amended Stipulation and Settlement Agreement do not appear to be contrary to theOccupational Safety and Health Act and are in compliance with the Commission’s Rules ofProcedure.Accordingly, we incorporate the terms of the AmendedStipulation and Settlement 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 Montoya CommissionerDonald G. Wiseman CommissionerDated: October 23, 1990ELIZABETH DOLE, SECRETARY OF LABOR, Complainant, v. SHANK-OHBAYASHI Respondent.OSHRC Docket No. 88-2674NOTICE OF CORRECTION TO STIPULATION AND SETTLEMENTAGREEMENT 1. The parties in the above-captioned case enteredinto a Stipulation and Settlement Agreement which was signed by Respondent on August 28,1990 and then signed by the Secretary on September 4, 1990. The original and four copiesof the document was mailed to the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.2. Paragraph 10 of the Stipulation and SettlementAgreement reads as follows:10. This Stipulation and Settlement Agreement does not affect the judge’s disposition ofthe following citation items:Citation 1, Items 1(a) and 1(b); Citation 1, Item 2; Citation 1, Item 3; Citation 1, Items4(a) and 4(b); Citation 1, Items 5(a) through 5(e); Citation 1, Item 6; Citation 2, Items2(a) and 2(b); Citation 3, Items 1 through 4.3. The next to the last sentence in Paragraph 10should have read, and is hereby corrected to read:Citation 2, Items 1(a) and 1(b).4. Respondent has been notified of this correctionand consents thereto.ANTONY F. GILAttorney for the Secretary of Labor\u00a0\u00a0ELIZABETH DOLE, SECRETARY OF LABOR, Complainant, v. SHANK-OHBAYASHI Respondent.OSHRC Docket No. 88-2674Stipulation and Settlement AgreementIn full settlement, and disposition of the issues inthis proceeding, it is 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 uponrespondent’s contest of Citation 2, Items 2(a), 2(b) and 2(c) which alleged willfulviolations of 29 CFR 1926.800(c)(2)(vii) along with a proposed penalty of $10,000, andCitation 2, Item 3 which alleged a willful violation of 29 CFR 1926.800(k)(6) along with aproposed penalty of $10,000. The citations were affirmed by the Commission’sadministrative law judge, and a penalty of $7,000 was assessed for the violation of1926.800 (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 of29 U.S.C. 654(a)(1) (Citation 1, Item 7(a) and 29 CFR 1926.800(h)(2)(ii) (Citation 1, Item8). These citations items were vacated by the administrative law judge. (Decision andOrder, September 27, 1989.)2. The Secretary hereby amends the citation to characterize the violations of 29 CFR1926.800(c)(2)(vii) and 29 CFR 1926.800(k)(6) as violations of Section 17 of theOccupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. ? 666.3. The Secretary hereby amends the proposed penaltyto a combined total of $4,400 for items 2 and 3 of Citation No. 2. 4. Respondent hereby withdraws its notice of contestto 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 penaltyin Citation 1, Item 7(a) for violation of the general duty clause, 29 U.S.C. ? 654(a)(1)to $100.6. Respondent hereby withdraws its notice of contestto Citation 1, Item 7(a) and to the notification of proposed penalty as amended inparagraph 5.7. The Secretary hereby amends the proposed penaltyin Citation 1, Item 8 for violation of 29 CFR 1926.800 (h)(2)(ii) to $100.8. Respondent hereby withdraws its notice of contestto Citation 1, Item 8 and to the notification of proposed penalty as amended in paragraph7.9. Respondent agrees that the above-mentionedviolations have been abated.10. This Stipulation and Settlement Agreement doesnot affect the judge’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; Citation2, Items 2(a) and 2(b); Citation 3, Items 1 through 4.Nothing set forth in this Stipulation and SettlementAgreement can be construed 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 AreaOffice $4,600 in full and complete payment of the penalty within 30 days of thisAgreement.12. Respondent certifies that a copy of thisStipulation and Settlement Agreement was posted at the workplace on the 29th day of August1990, in accordance with Rules 7 and 100 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure. There areno authorized representatives of affected employees.13. Complainant and respondent will bear their ownlitigation costs and expenses.Antony F. Gil\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 KateRaabeCounsel for the\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Attorneyfor RespondentSecretary of Labor\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 (Shank-Ohbayashi)”