“Docket No. 89-2195 SECRETARY OF LABOR, Complainant, v. SPRINKLE MASONRY, INC., Respondent.OSHRC Docket No. 89-2195ORDER This matter is before the Commission on aDirection for Review entered by Commissioner Donald G. Wiseman on September 24,1990.\u00a0 The parties have now filed a Stipulation and Settlement Agreement.Having reviewed the record, and based upon therepresentations appearing in the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement, we conclude thatthis case raises no matters warranting further review by the Commission.\u00a0 The termsof the 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 theStipulation and Settlement Agreement into this order.\u00a0 This is the final order of theCommission in this case.\u00a0 See 29 U.S.C. ?? 659(c), 660(a) and (b).Edwin G. Foulke, Jr. ChairmanDonald G. Wiseman CommissionerVelma Montoya CommissionerDated: August 22, 1991LYNN MARTIN, SECRETARY OF LABOR, Complainant, v. SPRINKLE MASONRY, INC., Respondent.OSHRC Docket No. 89-2195STIPULATION AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTIn full settlement and disposition of the issuesin this proceeding, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the Complainant,Secretary of Labor, and the Respondent, Sprinkle Masonry, Inc., that:1. This case is before the Commission uponrespondent’s contest of Citation 2, items 1(a) and 1(b), which alleged willful violationsof 29 C.F.R. 1926.451(a)(4) and 29 C.F.R. 1926.451(d)(10), along with a proposed penaltyof $7,000; Citation 3, Items 1(a) and (1)(b), which alleged repeat violations of 29 C.F.R.1926.500(e)(1)(iv), along with a propose penalty of $1,000; and Citation 4, Item 1 whichalleged an other-than-serious violation of 29 C.F.R. 1926.5(a).\u00a0 The citations wereaffirmed by the Commission’s administrative law judge and a combined penalty of $6,000 wasassessed for the violations of 29 C.F.R. 1926.451(a)(4) and 29 C.F.R. 1926.451(d)(10), anda combined penalty of $1,000 was assessed for the two instance violations of 29 C.F.R.1926.500(e)(1)(iv) (Decision and order, August 1, 1990).2. The Secretary hereby amends Citation 2 to characterize the violations of 29 C.F.R.1926.451(a)(4) and 29 C.F.R. 1926.451(d)(10) as violations of Section 17 of theOccupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. ?666.3. Respondent hereby withdraws its notice ofcontest to Citation 2, Items 1(a) and 1(b) as amended above and to the notification ofproposed penalty.4. Respondent agrees that the above-mentionedviolations have been abated.5. This Stipulation and Settlement Agreementdoes not affect the judge’s disposition of the following citation items: Citation 3, Items1(a) and 1(b); Citation 4, Item 1.\u00a0 The parties agree to the Commission entering anorder affirming these citations and items.Nothing set forth in this Stipulation andSettlement Agreement can be construed as an admission of willful conduct on the part ofrespondent for any violation for which a notice of contest has been withdrawn.\u00a0 Theparties have entered into this stipulated settlement with the intent and on the basis thatis related solely to the disposition of this case and is determinative of issues in thiscase only. \u00a0 It shall not be binding in any subsequent actions, proceedings or eventsconsistent with the terms of this Agreement and it in no way affects any rights, defenses,or remedies which may be available in the future to Respondent or any other party.6. Respondent agrees to submit to the OSHA Area Office $7,000 in full andcomplete payment of the penalty within 30 days of this Agreement.7. Respondent certifies that a copy of thisStipulation and Settlement Agreement was posted at the workplace on the 5th day of August,1991, in accordance with Rules 7 and 100 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure.\u00a0There are no authorized representatives of affected employees.8. Complainant and Respondent will bear theirown litigation costs and expenses.ANTONY F. GILCounsel for the Secretary of Labor, U.S. Department of Labor Office of theSolicitor DONALD D. ANDERSONAttorney for Respondent(Sprinkle Masonry)McQuire, Woods, Battle & BootheELIZABETH DOLE, SECRETARY OF LABOR, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Complainant, v. SPRINKLE MASONRY, INC., and its successors, RespondentOSHRC DOCKET No . 89-2195REGION IIIORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SEVERAND APPROVING SETTLEMENTComplainant having moved to sever Citation 1,Items 1a and 1b from the remaining citations and items litigated in the above captioneddocket, and it being represented that Respondent is in agreement with said Motion, and theparties having advised the undersigned that the said Citation 1, Items 1a and 1b have beenamicably resolved and agree to entry of the Order set forth below, It is therefore ORDERED:1. Citation 1, Items 1a and 1b are severed fromthe remaining citations and items contested by Respondent and litigated by the parties inthe docket; and2. The Stipulation of Settlement is approved andthe terms thereof are incorporated into this order; and3. Items 1a and 1b of Citation 1 are modified inaccordance with the Stipulation of Settlement; and4. The total penalty associated with Citation 1,Items 1a and 1b amounts to $300.00.\u00a0 Respondent agrees to pay the reduced penalty asset forth in the Stipulation in Settlement. Irving SommerJudge, OSHRCDated: August 21, 1990”