- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Administrative Law
- Date Filed: 06-16-2021
- Case #: A168084
- Judge(s)/Court Below: DeHoog, P.J. for the Court; Aoyagi, J.; & Linder, S.J.
- Full Text Opinion
OR-OSHA appealed an administrative law judge’s order that vacated a citation given to UPS. OR-OSHA cited UPS for a violation of 29 CFR § 1910.219(c)(4)(i), a federal workplace safety rule which provides that an unguarded “projecting shaft end” of a power-transmission apparatus may not project more than one-half the diameter of the shaft. UPS was cited because a shaft in operation did not have any of the shaft’s end guarded by a nonrotating cap or safety sleeve and the shaft’s end appeared to the inspector to project out from the conveyor more than one-half the shaft’s diameter. On appeal, OR-OSHA argued that absent federal OSHA guidance with respect to measurement process of the statute, OR-OSHA is a state agency that determines for itself what workplace safety rules to adopt. Under OAR 437-001-0025, OR-OSHA’s only express interpretive constraints are those that OR-OSHA, itself, mandates, but “rules shall be liberally construed to accomplish the preventative purposes expressed in the [OSEA].” The Court held that OR-OSHA exercised the authority delegated to it by the director to promulgate rules because OR-OSHA may independently interpret a federal rule for adoption. Reversed and remanded.