Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

National Maritime Safety Association v. Occupational Safety and Health Administration

649 F.3d 743 (2011)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...

National Maritime Safety Association v. Occupational Safety and Health Administration

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

649 F.3d 743 (2011)

Facts

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (defendant) published a final rule regulating a method of hoisting known as a vertical tandem lift (VTL). The National Maritime Safety Association (NMSA) (plaintiff), a trade association representing marine-terminal operators, petitioned for review of the rule. A VTL used a crane to lift multiple interconnected shipping containers at once. At the time the rule was promulgated, marine cargo handlers had been performing VTLs for more than 20 years. OSHA estimated that one million VTLs had been performed since 1986. No injuries had been reported as having occurred during a VTL. The final rule limited the weight of two-container VTLs and banned VTLs of certain types of containers. The rule also required that certain equipment be inspected immediately prior to being used in a VTL despite OSHA’s acknowledgement that this might make ship-to-shore VTLs impractical. The NMSA argued that OSHA had failed to demonstrate that VTLs posed a significant risk to worker safety. Specifically, the NMSA challenged OSHA’s finding of significant risk on two grounds: (1) that OSHA was required to, but did not, quantify the risk that VTLs posed to worker safety; and (2) that OSHA relied on a finding that unregulated VTL operations posed a significant risk to worker safety without considering existing voluntary standards and current industry practice.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Henderson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 602,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership