Stipulations of compliance

A stipulation of compliance is an agreement the Assistant Solicitor in charge of trial litigation may enter with a prospective respondent before a complaint is issued, where the respondent admits the material facts and agrees to stop the acts or practices that OSHA intends to allege. See 1921.7.

• These stipulations are designed to resolve factual issues and secure corrective action before formal enforcement proceedings begin.
• Because the regulation expressly allows them to be entered "at any time prior to the issuance of a complaint," they are a pre-complaint tool used at the Assistant Solicitor's discretion. See 1921.7.

Only the Assistant Solicitor in charge of trial litigation (or that official's designee) may, in his or her discretion, enter into stipulations with a prospective respondent prior to issuing a complaint. See 1921.7.

• This means field inspectors (CSHOs) do not themselves enter binding stipulations of compliance; such agreements are handled at the Assistant Solicitor/trial litigation level. See 1921.7.

A respondent must admit the material facts and agree to discontinue the acts or practices that are intended to be alleged as violations of the Act or parts 1915 and 1918. See 1921.7.

• "Material facts" means the key factual matters that would be relied on in a complaint or hearing.
• The agreement to discontinue the acts is the corrective or compliance commitment the respondent makes as part of the stipulation. See 1921.7.

A stipulation must be entered at any time prior to the issuance of a complaint in the proceeding to qualify under 1921.7. See 1921.7.

• The regulation emphasizes the pre-complaint timing: once a complaint is issued, 1921.7 no longer governs entry of these particular stipulations. See 1921.7.

Yes. A stipulation of compliance entered under 1921.7 is admissible as evidence of the acts and practices admitted in any subsequent proceeding in law, equity, or under these regulations. See 1921.7.

• That means the admissions and agreed facts in the stipulation can be relied upon by OSHA or third parties in later administrative hearings or civil actions. See 1921.7.

No; 1921.7 allows the Assistant Solicitor to enter stipulations before a complaint is issued but does not say stipulations automatically bar issuance of a complaint or other enforcement action. See 1921.7.

• In practice, a stipulation may resolve the issues if the parties perform its terms, but the regulation itself is silent about automatic dismissal or the exact consequences—those details depend on the terms agreed and subsequent proceedings. See 1921.7.

Yes; 1921.7 specifically references admissions and discontinuance of acts or practices intended to be set up as violative of the Act or parts 1915 and 1918 of the subtitle. See 1921.7.

• While 1921.7 focuses on Parts 1915 (Shipyard Employment) and 1918 (Longshoring), other Parts have their own rules and procedures—consult the applicable rule for other industries. See 1921.7.

Yes; a stipulation under 1921.7 can admit material facts about PPE or protective measures that relate to alleged violations of Part 1915, and such admissions are admissible later as evidence. See 1921.7.

• For example, OSHA's interpretation on shipyard eye and face protection clarifies what "potentially injurious light radiation" means under 29 CFR Part 1915; a respondent could stipulate to the relevant facts about welding or sunlight exposures as part of a 1921.7 agreement. See Shipyard eye and face protection and 1915.

Yes; a 1921.7 stipulation may include admissions about whether an employer's "competent person" recognized hazards or specified protections under Part 1915, and those admissions would be admissible later. See 1921.7 and OSHA's interpretation on competent person requirements in shipyards. See Competent person requirements in shipyards and 1915.

• OSHA's interpretation explains that a competent person must be capable of recognizing hazards and specifying necessary protection; a stipulation could admit that those duties were or were not performed. See Competent person requirements in shipyards.

Yes; under 1921.7 an employer may stipulate to material facts such as providing first-aid or bleeding-control training, and those admissions would be admissible in later proceedings. See 1921.7.

• OSHA's letter about first aid and bleeding control explains applicable first-aid training and preparedness expectations in various industry standards (including longshoring and marine terminals); those factual matters could be the subject of a stipulation. See First aid and bleeding control and 1918.

Once entered, a stipulation under 1921.7 is admissible evidence of the admitted acts and practices and can be relied on in administrative hearings or courts, but whether it is "binding" on final disposition depends on the terms of the agreement and the forum's procedures. See 1921.7.

• Practically, a stipulation's admissions are strong evidence; parties and adjudicators will typically treat them as controlling factual concessions unless the stipulation itself provides otherwise or is successfully challenged. See 1921.7.

Yes; 1921.7 contemplates agreements where the prospective respondent admits facts and agrees to discontinue the violative acts or practices, which may include corrective measures such as changing procedures, providing training, or supplying PPE. See 1921.7.

• The regulation does not prescribe exact remedy language, so specific corrective steps are typically negotiated and spelled out in the stipulation itself and become part of the admissions that are admissible later. See 1921.7.

1921.7 does not specify the form (written or oral) required for a stipulation, but because the regulation states such stipulations "shall be admissible as evidence," best practice is to document stipulations in writing and have the parties sign them to ensure clear proof of the admissions. See 1921.7.

• Courts and administrative bodies generally prefer written, signed agreements as evidence of admissions; documenting scope, timing, and remedies reduces later disputes over what was agreed. See 1921.7.

Yes; because 1921.7 makes stipulations admissible as evidence in subsequent proceedings, OSHA can introduce the respondent's prior admissions and failures to perform as evidence in later enforcement or judicial proceedings. See 1921.7.

• Failure to carry out agreed corrective actions can be proven by the stipulation itself and by subsequent evidence of noncompliance; the stipulation's admissibility strengthens OSHA's case in later proceedings. See 1921.7.

Yes; a stipulation can incorporate or rely on authoritative OSHA interpretations to define the legal or technical meaning of terms when the parties agree those interpretations describe the material facts. See 1921.7 and OSHA's letter on shipyard eye and face protection. See Shipyard eye and face protection and 1915.

• For example, OSHA's interpretation clarifies that "potentially injurious light radiation" refers to intense radiant energy like welding arcs (not ordinary sunlight); parties could use that interpretation to frame a stipulation about whether eye protection was required for a particular activity. See Shipyard eye and face protection.