Document inspection procedures

A party may serve a request to inspect or copy documents or property any time after the filing of the first responsive pleading or after a motion that delays the filing of an answer. This timing rule is stated in 2200.53(a).

• If no responsive pleading or a delaying motion has been filed, the party cannot yet use the procedure in 2200.53(a).
• If a motion delays the answer (for example, a motion to dismiss), the discovery request may be served after that motion is filed.

A request can ask a party to produce and permit inspection and copying of any designated documents, and to inspect, copy, test, or sample any tangible things that are in that party’s possession, custody, or control. See 2200.53(a)(1).

• "Documents" includes paper records and electronic files if described with reasonable particularity.
• "Tangible things" covers physical items, materials, samples, equipment, or other objects that can be inspected, tested, or sampled.

Yes — a party may request entry onto designated land or other property in the possession or control of the responding party for purposes like inspection, measuring, surveying, photographing, testing, or sampling. See 2200.53(a)(2).

• The right applies only to land or property that the responding party possesses or controls; it does not automatically reach third-party property unless the responding party controls access.

The request must list the items to be inspected either by individual item or by category and must describe each item or category with reasonable particularity. This requirement is in 2200.53(b).

• Good practice: identify date ranges, department names, or document types (e.g., "safety inspection reports from Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2023") to meet the reasonable particularity standard.
• Vague requests (e.g., "all records") are more likely to be objected to as not sufficiently particular.

The request must specify a reasonable time, place, and manner for making the inspection and performing related acts. See 2200.53(b).

• "Reasonable" depends on the circumstances — consider business hours, access restrictions, safety needs, and the responding party’s operations.
• Include several mutually convenient dates/times and describe how inspections, testing, or sampling will be conducted to reduce disputes.

The responding party must serve a written response within 30 days after service of the request unless the requesting party allows a longer time. This deadline is in 2200.53(b).

• The Commission or the Judge may order a shorter or longer time if the requesting party refuses an extension.
• If the parties agree in writing to extend the time, the agreed extension controls.

The response must state for each item or category whether inspection and related activities will be permitted as requested or, if objected to in whole or in part, state the reasons for the objection and specify the part objected to. See 2200.53(b).

• If permitting inspection, the response should confirm the time, place, and manner or propose alternatives.
• If objecting, explain the specific legal or factual grounds (e.g., privilege, undue burden, lack of possession/control).

To obtain a ruling on an objection, the requesting party must file a motion conforming to 2200.40 with the Judge and must annex the original request along with the response and objections. This procedure is specified in 2200.53(b).

• The motion should explain why the requested inspection is necessary and why the objections are unfounded or insufficient.
• Follow the formal requirements in 2200.40 for filing motions to avoid procedural defects.

Yes — the requesting party may have a person acting on its behalf perform the inspection, copying, testing, or sampling. This permission is explicit in 2200.53(a)(1).

• The response may set conditions for the representative’s access (for example, safety training, protective equipment, or supervision) as part of the reasonable manner requirement in 2200.53(b).

Yes — a request may ask to inspect, test, or sample tangible things in the responding party’s possession, custody, or control, as stated in 2200.53(a)(1).

• Plan testing carefully and describe the proposed tests or samples in the request to satisfy the particularity and manner requirements in 2200.53(b).
• The responding party can object if testing would unreasonably interfere with operations or damage items; such objections must be stated with reasons.

"Possession, custody, or control" means documents or tangible items that the responding party has or has the legal right to obtain, use, or direct, and therefore can produce for inspection or copying under 2200.53(a)(1).

• This can include items held by the party, stored by a third party under its direction, or otherwise within the party’s legal authority to access.
• If the responding party lacks control or legal ability to produce an item, it should state that in its response and explain why.

If objecting to part of an item or category, the response must specify which part is objected to and give the reasons for the objection, as required by 2200.53(b).

• Do not blanket-object to entire categories without explanation — the rule requires identifying the specific portion being withheld.
• The requesting party can seek a ruling by filing a motion under 2200.40 if disagreement remains.

No — 2200.53(a)(2) only authorizes requests to enter land or property that is in the possession or control of the responding party. A party cannot be compelled under this section to give access to property it does not control.

• If the requesting party needs access to third-party property, it should identify that property and consider subpoena or other means, or seek the responding party’s cooperation if it can obtain access.

If there is no response within the 30-day period, the requesting party should file a motion with the Judge seeking an order compelling a response or production, following the procedures in 2200.40 and referencing 2200.53(b).

• In the motion, annex the original request and note the lack of timely response to support the request for relief.
• The Judge may impose sanctions or order compliance as appropriate under the rules.

2200.53(b) allows the Commission or the Judge to permit a shorter or longer response time if the requesting party denies an extension; the Judge can adjust timing as the case warrants.

• If the parties disagree about extensions, move promptly to the Judge to avoid delay.
• The Judge balances the need for timely discovery against fairness and operational burdens.

Electronic files must be described with reasonable particularity — for example, identify file types, date ranges, custodians, systems, keywords, or locations — to meet the requirement in 2200.53(b).

• Saying "all electronic files" is usually too broad; instead specify things like "emails sent or received by Safety Manager between Jan 1 and Jun 30, 2024 with the subject line containing 'inspection' or 'hazard.'"
• Provide preferred format and method for production to reduce disputes over manner of production.

A reasonable request proposes specific dates/times that align with business hours, describes how inspections/testing will be done, and accounts for safety and operational limits, as contemplated by 2200.53(b).

• Offer multiple time windows and allow advance notice for access.
• State safety requirements (e.g., required PPE) and whether the inspecting party will provide its own equipment or use the site’s resources.
• Propose neutral locations for copying or specify electronic delivery to avoid on-site disruption.

A party may request privileged or confidential materials, but the responding party must object and state the reasons; privilege is a valid basis for objection under 2200.53(b).

• If privilege is asserted, the response should identify the document’s type, date, author, and general subject matter without revealing privileged content.
• The requesting party may move under 2200.40 to challenge the privilege assertion if the parties cannot resolve it.

No — the rule requires that a party serve the inspection request on the other party and receive a written response within the time limit; only if there is an objection that cannot be resolved does the requesting party file a motion with the Judge under 2200.40, as stated in 2200.53(b).

• Do not file discovery requests with the Judge unless seeking relief for noncompliance or a ruling on objections.
• Keep copies of the served request and the response to attach to any motion.

The requesting party must file a motion conforming to 2200.40 and annex the original request, the written response, and any objections, as required by 2200.53(b).

• The motion should clearly state the relief sought (e.g., compelled production, entry for inspection, or an order setting inspection terms).
• Attach the document history so the Judge can see service dates, communications, and the nature of the dispute.

OSHA posts some major settlement agreements publicly, but the vast majority of settlement agreements are not placed on the OSHA website; settlement agreements are generally subject to disclosure under FOIA, and the matter is discussed in OSHA's interpretation letter on website citation postings at https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2004-09-27-0. This interpretation explains OSHA’s practice of posting certain public information and notes that settlement agreements may be public.

• The letter states that OSHA posts citations and proposed penalties that would be available under the Freedom of Information Act and that settlement agreements on the web site are typically major agreements, while most settlements are not posted but remain subject to FOIA disclosure (see https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2004-09-27-0).
• Employers concerned about confidentiality should consult the FOIA process and consider raising confidentiality concerns promptly, but OSHA’s web postings are controlled by agency policy and FOIA rules.