Occupational Safety and Health

ORS 654.086
Civil penalty for violations

  • classification of violations
  • payment and disposition of penalty moneys

(1)

The Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services or the authorized representative of the director has the authority to assess civil penalties as provided by this section for violation of the requirements of a state occupational safety or health statute or the lawful rules, standards or orders adopted under the statute. In setting maximum penalties, the director or the director’s representative shall consider, but may not exceed, the maximum penalties under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.).

(a)

Any employer who receives a citation for a serious violation of such requirements shall be assessed a civil penalty of not less than $50.

(b)

Any employer who receives a citation for a violation of such requirements, and such violation is specifically determined not to be of a serious nature, may be assessed a civil penalty.

(c)

Any employer who willfully or repeatedly violates such requirements may be assessed a civil penalty of not less than the minimum penalty under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.).

(d)

Any employer who receives a citation, as provided in ORS 654.071 (Citation for safety or health standard violations) (4), for failure to correct a violation may be assessed a civil penalty for each day during which the violation continues.

(e)

Any employer who knowingly makes any false statement, representation or certification regarding the correction of a violation shall be assessed a civil penalty of not less than $100.

(f)

Any employer who violates any of the posting requirements, as prescribed under the provisions of ORS 654.001 (Short title) to 654.295 (Application of Oregon Safe Employment Act), 654.412 (Definitions for ORS 654.412 to 654.423) to 654.423 (Use of physical force by health care employee in self-defense against assault) and 654.750 (Definitions for ORS 654.750 to 654.780) to 654.780 (Providing basic information to employees), may be assessed a civil penalty for each violation.

(g)

Any person who violates the provisions of ORS 654.082 (Prohibiting use of equipment involved in violation) (2) or (3) shall be assessed a civil penalty of not less than $100 for each violation.

(h)

Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of this subsection, an employer who substantially fails to comply with ORS 654.174 (Sanitation facilities for workers harvesting food crops) (1) shall be assessed a civil penalty of not less than $250 for each violation.

(i)

Any insurer or self-insured employer who violates any provision of ORS 654.097 (Consultative services required), or any rule or order carrying out ORS 654.097 (Consultative services required), shall be assessed a civil penalty. Each violation, or each day a violation continues, shall be considered a separate offense.

(2)

For the purposes of ORS 654.001 (Short title) to 654.295 (Application of Oregon Safe Employment Act), 654.412 (Definitions for ORS 654.412 to 654.423) to 654.423 (Use of physical force by health care employee in self-defense against assault) and 654.750 (Definitions for ORS 654.750 to 654.780) to 654.780 (Providing basic information to employees) a serious violation exists in a place of employment if there is a substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a condition which exists, or from one or more practices, means, methods, operations or processes which have been adopted or are in use, in such place of employment unless the employer did not, and could not with the exercise of reasonable diligence, know of the presence of the violation.

(3)

When an order assessing a civil penalty becomes final by operation of law or on appeal, unless the amount of penalty is paid within 20 days after the order becomes final, it constitutes a judgment and may be recorded with the county clerk in any county of this state. The clerk shall thereupon record the name of the person incurring the penalty and the amount of the penalty in the County Clerk Lien Record. The penalty provided in the order so recorded shall become a lien upon the title to any interest in property owned by the person against whom the order is entered, and execution may be issued upon the order in the same manner as execution upon a judgment of a court of record.

(4)

Except as provided in subsection (5) of this section, civil penalties collected under ORS 654.001 (Short title) to 654.295 (Application of Oregon Safe Employment Act), 654.412 (Definitions for ORS 654.412 to 654.423) to 654.423 (Use of physical force by health care employee in self-defense against assault) and 654.750 (Definitions for ORS 654.750 to 654.780) to 654.780 (Providing basic information to employees) shall be paid into the Consumer and Business Services Fund.

(5)

Civil penalties assessed under this section for a violation of ORS 658.750 (Camp operator registration) shall be credited to the Farmworker Housing Development Account of the Oregon Housing Fund. [1973 c.833 §21 (enacted in lieu of 654.050); 1981 c.696 §5; 1983 c.696 §22; 1985 c.423 §4; 1987 c.884 §56; 1989 c.962 §20; 1991 c.67 §159; 1991 c.570 §1; 1991 c.640 §2; 1995 c.640 §1; 2001 c.310 §4; 2007 c.432 §2; 2017 c.238 §2]

See also annotations under ORS 654.050 in permanent edition.

Notes of Decisions

A jury trial is not required by Art. I, §17 of the Oregon Constitution for the imposition of a penalty imposed under this section. Accident Prevention Div. v. No. Am. Contractors, Inc., 22 Or App 614, 540 P2d 391 (1975)

Where monetary penalties assessed for violations under this section were within statutory limits, court was without power to redetermine assessment. Accident Prevention Division v. Van Eyk, 31 Or App 1355, 572 P2d 671 (1977), Sup Ct review denied

Under rules adopted by Accident Prevention Division under this section, hearings referee has no authority to impose penalties less than those required by rules. Accident Prevention Div. v. Asana, 110 Or App 103, 821 P2d 432 (1991)

Assessment of employer's exercise of reasonable diligence requires consideration of (1) time of violation; (2) employer's proximity to and opportunity to witness violation; (3) foreseeability of violation; (4) general circumstances of, and level of danger inherent in, work; (5) potential need for continuous supervision of employee; (6) nature and extent of employer's other duties; (7) employee's training and experience; and (8) extent and efficacy of employer's safety programs. Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division v. CBI Services, Inc., 254 Or App 466, 295 P3d 660 (2013), aff'd on other grounds, 356 Or 577, 341 P3d 701 (2014)

Under this section, whether employer "did not, and could not with the exercise of reasonable diligence, know of the presence of the violation" refers to what employer was capable of knowing or discovering under circumstances. Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division v. CBI Services, Inc., 356 Or 577, 341 P3d 701 (2014)

Whether employer exercised "reasonable diligence" as used in phrase "could not with the exercise of reasonable diligence, know of the presence of the violation" is determination for agency to evaluate with specific factors. Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division v. CBI Services, Inc., 356 Or 577, 341 P3d 701 (2014)

Law Review Citations

26 WLR 393 (1990)

§§ 654.001 to 654.295

Notes of Decisions

Safety codes under Oregon Safe Employment Act apply to all work places and not only to work places covered by Employer Liability Law. Miller v. Ga.-Pacific, 294 Or 750, 662 P2d 718 (1983)

Violation of Workers' Compensation Department rule resulting in injury to nonemploye is not negligence per se, but it does not follow that rule is irrelevant to determination of due care in case grounded in common law negligence. Shahtout v. Emco Garbage Co., 298 Or 598, 695 P2d 897 (1985)

Where right of action for injuries exists resulting from violation of Oregon Safe Employment Act, right belongs only to employee whom Act directly protects not "indirect" employee. Flores v. Metro Machinery Rigging, Inc., 99 Or App 636, 783 P2d 1024 (1989), Sup Ct review denied

Referee did not err in finding employer in violation of rule requiring workers to be "properly...supervised" where employee killed in accident was skilled and experienced supervisor working with two other supervisors during strike, but none of the three was in charge. Accident Prevention Div. v. Roseburg Forest Prod., 106 Or App 69, 806 P2d 172 (1991)

Whether identity of complainant falsely reporting violation is subject to disclosure under Oregon public records law ([former] ORS 192.410 et seq.) depends on complainant's good or bad faith in making complaint. Hood Technology Corp. v. Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division, 168 Or App 293, 7 P3d 564 (2000)

Chapter 654

Notes of Decisions

An administrative regulation requires Accident Prevention Division to prove reasonableness of civil penalty imposed for violation of Oregon State Employment Act. Accident Prevention Div. v. Sunrise Seed, 26 Or App 879, 554 P2d 550 (1976)

Accident Prevention Division rule allowing citation for "repeat violation" of division's safety standards while prior citation is contested and not yet upheld by final order is within agency's authority to promulgate rules consistent with purpose of Act to assure as far as possible safe and healthful working conditions. Accident Prevention Div. v. Hoffman Construction, 64 Or App 73, 667 P2d 543 (1983)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Inapplicability of occupational safety and health laws to inmates in prison work programs, (1996) Vol 48, p 134

Source

Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021

REMOVE ADS