Under 2200.54(a)(1), a request for admission may ask another party to admit facts, the application of law to facts, opinions about either, or the genuineness of described documents. See Scope in 2200.54(a)(1) and the subparts 2200.54(a)(1)(i) and 2200.54(a)(1)(ii).
Under 2200.54(a), a party may serve requests for admission any time after filing the first responsive pleading or a motion that delays filing an answer (for example, a motion to dismiss). See Scope and timing in 2200.54(a).
Under 2200.54(a)(2), you may serve up to 25 requested admissions, counting all subparts, unless the parties agree to more or the Commission or Judge orders additional requests. See the numerical limit in 2200.54(a)(2).
Yes. Under 2200.54(a)(2), each matter in a request for admissions must be stated separately so the responding party can admit or deny each distinct matter. See the form requirement in 2200.54(a)(2).
When asking for admission of a document's genuineness, you must attach a copy of the document unless the document has already been furnished or made available for inspection and copying. See the document copy requirement in 2200.54(a)(2).
A party has 30 days after service to serve a written answer or objection, unless the parties stipulate to a different time or the Commission or Judge orders otherwise. See the time-to-respond rule in 2200.54(a)(3).
If the party does not serve a written answer or objection within 30 days, the matters are deemed admitted. See the effect of not responding in 2200.54(a)(3).
Under 2200.54(a)(4), if a matter is not admitted the answer must either specifically deny it or explain in detail why the party cannot truthfully admit or deny it; denials must fairly respond to the substance and, if only part is denied, the answer must specify what is admitted and what is denied. See answer content rules in 2200.54(a)(4).
A responding party may assert lack of knowledge or information only if it states that it has made reasonable inquiry and that the information it knows or can readily obtain is insufficient to enable it to admit or deny the matter, per 2200.54(a)(4).
An objection must state the grounds for the objection; a party may not object solely because the request presents a genuine issue for hearing. See objections rule in 2200.54(a)(5) and 2200.54(a)(6) and the prohibition on objecting only because an issue is for hearing in 2200.54(a)(6).
Yes. The requesting party may move to determine the sufficiency of an answer or objection; unless sustained, the Judge or Commission must order that a compliant answer be served and may require amendment or order the matter admitted. See motions on sufficiency in 2200.54(a)(6).
An admission under 2200.54(a) is conclusively established for the pending action unless the Commission or Judge allows withdrawal or amendment, and it is not admissible against the party in other proceedings. See effect of admission in 2200.54(b).
The Commission or Judge may permit withdrawal or amendment if doing so would promote presentation of the case on the merits and would not unfairly prejudice the requesting party in maintaining or defending the case. See the withdrawal/modification rules in 2200.54(b).
No. A party must not object solely on the ground that the request presents a genuine issue for hearing; the objection must state a valid legal ground. See prohibition on that type of objection in 2200.54(a)(6).
If an answer does not comply with the rule, the Commission or Judge may order that the matter be deemed admitted or that an amended answer be served; the decision may be deferred until a prehearing conference or before hearing. See remedies for insufficient answers in 2200.54(a)(6).
Under 2200.54(a)(2), subparts count toward the 25-request limit, so when you draft multipart requests you should count each separately stated matter as one request unless the parties agree otherwise or the Judge permits more. See the 25-request limit in 2200.54(a)(2).
OSHA posts major settlement agreements and other public enforcement documents on its website as FOIA-available material, but most settlement agreements are not posted even though they remain subject to FOIA; this is an agency publishing practice rather than a discovery rule and does not change the scope of admissible documents under 2200.54(a)(1)(ii). See OSHA's interpretation explaining posting practices in OSHA website citation postings.