U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

(OSHRC 25)

LANGUAGE ACCESS PLAN

May 1, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1

II. Commission Policy Statement............................................................................................ 3

General Language Access Policy Statement..............................................................3

Purpose and Authority ...............................................................................................4

III. PS/LAP ............................................................................................................................... 4

Definitions..................................................................................................................4

Implementation and Administration of the Commission’s PS/LAP..........................6

IV. Approval ........................................................................................................................... 12

V. Appendices........................................................................................................................ 13

Appendix 1 - Sample Trial Script When Using an Interpreter and Oath .............................. 14

Appendix 2 - Notice of, or Request to Arrange for Approved LEP Services F (Internal Use 

Only)...................................................................................................................................... 16

Appendix 3 - List of Translated Agency Documents.......................................................... 188

Appendix 4 - Notice of Policy Statement and Language Access Plan.................................. 19
1

 U.S. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

Language Access Plan

Policy Statement and Language Access Plan of the Occupational Safety and 

Health Review Commission for Improving Access to Services for Persons with 

Limited English Proficiency1

I. Introduction

The United States is home to millions of national origin minority individuals who have limited 

English proficiency (“LEP”). Because of their limited proficiency in speaking, reading, or 

understanding English, otherwise eligible LEP persons are often denied pertinent information or 

services, experience delays, or make decisions based on inaccurate or incomplete information. This 

potential barrier to the exchange of information is of particular importance to the Occupational 

Safety and Health Review Commission (hereafter “OSHRC,” “Commission,” or “Agency”). 

Members of the public, including LEP persons, are the principal beneficiaries of the Agency’s 

mission to provide administrative trial and appellate review of citations or penalties resulting from 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) inspections of American work places. 

The Commission functions as a two-tiered federal administrative court, with established procedures 

for: 1) conducting trials, receiving evidence, and rendering decisions by its Administrative Law 

Judges (“ALJs” or “Judges”) and 2) discretionary review of ALJ decisions by a panel of 

Commissioners.

Executive Order 13166, 65 Fed. Reg. 50, 121 (Aug. 16, 2000), directs all Federal agencies to 

“examine the services it provides and develop and implement a system by which LEP persons can 

meaningfully access those services consistent with, and without unduly burdening the fundamental 

mission of the agency.” The Executive Order further directs each agency to “prepare a plan to 

improve access to its federally conducted programs and activities by eligible LEP persons.”2 On 

December 7, 2000, the Commission issued its original LEP Plan, in which the Commission noted 

the importance of providing the LEP community with meaningful access to administrative trials 

and appellate review of citations issued by OSHA. The initial plan also described the Commission’s 

efforts to provide services to the LEP community and the steps the Commission planned to take in 

order to ensure that a proper level of service would continue to be available to persons with little 

or no ability to communicate with the Agency in English.

1 This document supersedes all prior directives, policies, plans, or statements on the same topic.

2 The Executive Order directs each agency providing federal financial assistance to issue guidance to recipients of such 

assistance on their legal obligations to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access for LEP persons under the 

national origin nondiscrimination provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of1964, and its implementing 

regulations. The Commission is exempt from this requirement because it does not provide federal financial assistance.
2

On February 17, 2011, the United States Attorney General issued a Memorandum For Heads 

of Federal Agencies, among others, regarding the Federal Government’s Renewed Commitment to 

Language Access Obligations Under Executive Order 13166 (“AG Memo”). The AG Memo 

requested that each agency join the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) in recommitting to the 

implementation of Executive Order 13166 by: 1) establishing a Language Access Working Group 

(“LAWG”) to be responsible for implementing the Executive Order; 2) evaluating and/or updating 

its LEP Plan; 3) establishing a schedule to periodically evaluate and update its LEP services, 

policies, plans, and protocols; 4) ensuring agency staff can competently identify LEP contact 

situations and take the necessary steps to provide meaningful access; 5) notifying the public of its 

LEP policies, plans, and procedures; 6) assessing non-English language proficiency when 

considering hiring criteria; 7) collaborating with other agencies for written translations intended for 

mass distribution; and 8) including a statement that it does not provide federal financial assistance 

when transmitting its language access plan (together “Eight Steps”).

In August 2011, the Commission updated its original LEP plan and reiterated the Commission’s 

commitment to the LEP community. The updated plan (“2011 LEP Plan”) utilized information 

provided at the March 15-16, 2007 LEP National Conference sponsored by the DOJ’s Civil Rights 

Division, along with several other federal agencies, as well as information obtained from point-ofcontact OSHRC personnel, including judges.

In May 2014, the Agency head delegated responsibility for developing, implementing and 

administering the Policy Statement and Language Access Plan (“PS/LAP”) to the Office of Chief 

Administrative Law Judge (“OCALJ”) since the largest number of interactions with LEP persons 

and the Commission occur in the context of a proceeding conducted by one of the Commission’s 

Judges.3 The Chief Administrative Law Judge (“CALJ”) has re-delegated the responsibility for 

implementing and administering the PS/LAP to the PS/LAP Administrator.4 The PS/LAP is the 

product of the Commission’s periodic evaluation and updating of its LEP services, policies, plans 

and protocols. It also takes into consideration feedback to the 2011 LEP Plan offered by DOJ’s 

Federal Coordination and Compliance Section.

In November 2015, OSHRC submitted another revised version of its LAP to DOJ. There was 

no additional feedback and the agency continued to operate under the 2015 revised LAP. On 

November 21, 2022, the Attorney General issued a memorandum titled, “Strengthening the Federal 

Government’s Commitment to Language Access”. The memo reminded federal agencies of the 

ongoing obligation to fulfill the goals set forth in E.O. 13166 and appointed a Language Access 

Coordinator within DOJ’s Office of Access to Justice to provide information and resources to assist 

agencies with improvements to their current LAPs. Thereafter, the newly appointed DOJ Language 

Access Coordinator set up a series of virtual workshops to address various language access issues. 

Also, Agencies were required to submit copies of their revised LAPs to DOJ by May 22, 2023. In 

response, OSHRC submitted its revised LAP on May 1, 2023. Additionally, OSHRC made some 

3 The PS/LAP is not intended to limit any Commissioner’s authority or discretion to review OSHRC cases handled 

by Judges.

4 The CALJ may choose to serve as the PS/LAP Administrator.
3

changes to its website to ensure that its language access information is easily found and added a 

Spanish version of the LAP to its Spanish publications. OCALJ translated more documents into 

Spanish for use by the Judges and parties.

II. Commission Policy Statement

General Language Access Policy Statement

In carrying out its statutory mission, the Commission functions as a judicial body and is 

responsible for the adjudication of workplace safety and health disputes under the Occupational 

Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. §§ 651 - 678 (“the Act”). The Commission, which serves 

as a federal administrative court at the trial and appellate levels, acknowledges that English 

proficiency is useful for meaningful participation in Agency proceedings. This is due to the use of 

legal terms, principles and procedures involved in adjudicating the rights and responsibilities of 

employers and the rights of employees under the Act.

The Commission’s Rules of Procedure, codified at 29 C.F.R. § 2200 et. seq., state that “[i]t 

shall be the duty of the Judge to conduct a fair and impartial hearing, to assure that the facts are 

fully elicited, to adjudicate all issues and avoid delay.”5. Judges are empowered to regulate the 

course of each proceeding. Witnesses are examined orally and subject to cross-examination. The 

process of Commission adjudication is structured to assure that Judges exercise independent 

judgment on the evidence before the Court, free from pressures from other Agency officials.6 The 

role of Commission ALJs is similar to that of an Article III judge presiding at a federal district 

court.7 The trial judge is in the best position to assess a party’s or witness’s language usage, comfort 

level and intelligibility. Within the limits of funding available for LEP services, the appointment 

and use of an interpreter or the translation of a document in a proceeding is committed to the sound 

discretion of the trial judge.8 Federal Rule of Evidence (“Fed. R. Evid.”) 604, made applicable to 

OSHRC proceedings through 29 C.F.R. § 2200.71, states that “[a]n interpreter must be qualified 

and must give an oath or affirmation to make a true translation.” A sample interpreter’s oath is 

attached as Appendix 1.

5 See 29 C.F.R. § 2200.67.

6 See the Act; Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 554 (“APA”); Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 513 (1978).

7 7 See, e.g. Fed. Mar. Comm’n v. S.C. State Ports Auth., 535 U.S. 743, 758 (2002) (“the role of the ALJ ... is similar 

to that of an Article III judge”).

8 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 43(d) (applicable to OSHRC proceedings through 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2(b)). This is the case even 

though proceedings brought under the Act before the Commission are not criminal proceedings. See also, e.g., Perovich 

v. United States, 205 U. S. 86, 91 (1907) (appointment of an interpreter is a “matter largely resting in the discretion of 

the trial court”); United States v. Osuna, 189 F.3d 1289, 1296 (10th Cir. 1999) (Brorby, J., dissenting) (“Because the 

Trial Judge is in the best position to assess a ... witness’ language usage, comfort level and intelligibility, the 

appointment of an interpreter under § 1827 [Court Interpreters Act] is committed to the sound discretion of the Trial 

Judge.”), aff’d. 3 F. App’x 739 (10th Cir. 2001) (unpublished); United States v. Arthurs, 73 F.3d 444, 447 (1st Cir. 

1996) (Trial Judge had considerable discretion to determine if defendant’s English testimony was intelligible); United 

States v. Yee Soon Shin, 953 F.2d 559, 561 (9th Cir. 1992) (as a constitutional matter, the appointment of interpreters 

is within the court’s discretion), aff’d sub nom. Jung v. United States, 988 F.2d 120 (9th Cir. 1993) (unpublished); 

Valladares v. United States, 871 F.2d 1564, 1566 (11th Cir. 1989) (use of interpreter under § 1827 is committed to the 

sound discretion of the Trial Judge); United States v. Martinez, 616 F.2d 185, 188 (5th Cir. 1980) (The use of courtroom 

interpreters is committed to the sound discretion of the Trial Judge), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 994 (1981).
4

The Commission’s goal is to ameliorate LEP as a barrier to accessing its programs and 

activities; consequently, the Agency is committed to taking reasonable steps through which LEP 

persons can meaningfully access its services consistent with, and without unduly burdening, its 

fundamental mission and existing law. In accordance with Executive Order 13166 and the AG 

Memo, the Commission will satisfy the Eight Steps identified above by which LEP persons can 

meaningfully access its programs and activities to the extent that Agency resources are available 

and will permit, and without precluding a Judge from exercising independent judgment in a pending 

proceeding as it relates to LEP matters in accordance with the Act, APA, Commission Rules of 

Procedure, Fed. R. Civ. P., Fed. R. Evid., Executive Order 13166, and the AG Memo (together 

“applicable authority”).9

Purpose and Authority 

Because the largest number of interactions within the Agency is between the LEP population 

and Judges and Judges’ support staff, the Commission has delegated primary responsibility for 

administering the PS/LAP to the OCALJ, specifically to the PS/LAP Administrator.

The purpose of the PS/LAP is to establish guidelines for improving access to Commission 

services for persons with LEP in accordance with applicable authority. It is intended only to 

improve the internal management of OSHRC’s Language Access program and does not create any 

right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party against the United 

States, its agencies, Judges, Commissioners, officers or employees, or any person. Administration 

of the cases, programs, and activities discussed herein is within the sole discretion of the Agency.

III. PS/LAP

The PS/LAP is designed to enhance the ability of individuals with limited proficiency in 

speaking, reading, or understanding English to participate in the Commission programs and 

activities.

Definitions

Some terms used in the PS/LAP are defined in the Act, specifically § 3 of the Act, and 

Commission Rules, specifically 29 C.F.R. § 2200.1. Those definitions will control for the 

purposed of the PS/LAP. Other terms are set forth below.

1. Commissioner. A member of the Commission appointed by the President by and with 

the advice and consent of the Senate.

2. Court. A tribunal within the Commission’s adjudicatory system where decisions are 

made by a Judge.

3. Direct “In-Language” Communication. Monolingual communication in a language 

other than English between a multilingual staff person and an LEP person (e.g., Spanish to 

9 The Agency is also aware that it may reach out to the Civil Rights Division, DOJ, anytime for suggestions and 

technical assistance on available language access options.
5

Spanish).

4. Effectively Communicates. Communication sufficient to provide a LEP individual

with substantially the same level of services received by individuals who are not LEP.

5. Interpretation. The act of listening to a communication in one language (source 

language) and orally converting it to another language (target language), including sign language 

for the hearing impaired, while retaining the same meaning.

6. Interpreter. A person who is fluent in both English and another language, who listens

to a communication in one language and orally, or by using sign language, converts it into another 

language while retaining the same meaning.

7. Judge [or ALJ]. See 29 C.F.R. § 2200.1(f).

8. Language Access. The provision of the necessary services to Persons with LEP to

access the service or program in a language they can understand, and to substantially the same 

extent as those with English proficiency.

9. Language Access Services. Oral, sign and written language services needed to assist

LEP individuals to communicate effectively usually in a Commission proceeding, as determined 

by the Judge.

10. Individuals with LEP. Individuals who do not speak English as their primary 

language and who have a limited ability to read, write, speak, or understand English; or 

individuals who do not hear any language. Individuals with limited English proficiency may be 

competent in English for certain types of communication (e.g., speaking or understanding), but 

still be LEP for other purposes (e.g., reading or writing).10

11. Meaningful Access. For LEP individuals, meaningful access denotes access that is 

not unduly restricted, delayed, or inferior as compared to Commission services provided to 

English proficient individuals.

12. Policy Statement and Language Access Plan. The written plan used by the 

Commission to implement its language access services consistent with applicable authority. This 

plan may also be referred to as the “PS/LAP”.

13. Primary language. An individual’s primary language is the language in which an 

individual most effectively communicates.

14. PS/LAP Administrator. The OSHRC Judge responsible for implementing and 

administering the PS/LAP.

15. Program(s) or Activity (ies). Commission programs or activities, including 

conferences conducted by a Judge, hearings, trials, and associated significant services usually in 

10 The DOJ has determined that EO 13166 applies only to persons who are located within the United States and its 

territories and does not apply extraterritorially.
6

matters where a Commission Judge is presiding in the context of a proceeding brought under the 

Act. At the Judge’s discretion, it may or may not include matters that arise in discovery e.g.

depositions. It also includes proceedings on review before the Commission.

16. Qualified Translator or Interpreter. A government or contractual translator or 

interpreter who has demonstrated his or her competence to interpret, translate, or use sign 

language through court certification and/or by a finding made by a Commission Judge. 11

17. Sight Translation. Oral rendering of written text or a document into spoken 

language by an interpreter without change in meaning based on a visual review of the original 

text or document.

18. Source Language. The language of the original speaker, which the interpreter 

interprets into a second language.

19. Target Language. The language of the listener, into which the interpreter renders 

the interpretation from the source language.

20. Translation. The replacement of written text from one language (source language)

into an equivalent written text in another language (target language). The source of the text being 

converted is always a written language.

21. Trial. A proceeding (commonly referred to as a “hearing”) conducted under the Act 

that is presided over by a judge, where evidence is presented, such as documents and testimony, 

that serves as the basis for the Judge’s final decision in the case before the Court.

22. Vital document. Paper or electronic written material that contains information that is 

critical for accessing or participating in Commission proceedings, usually presided over by a 

Commission Judge.

Implementation and Administration of the Commission’s PS/LAP 

1. Responsibilities and Roles 12

a. Assistant Language Access Coordinators (“ALAC”) for the OCALJ.13 ALACs shall: 1) 

assist the Language Access Coordinator (“LAC”) for the OCALJ and PS/LAP Administrator in 

administering the PS/LAP; 2) coordinate the issuance of contracts and/or purchase orders for LEP 

services under the PS/LAP with the agency contracting officer (“CO”); 3) serve as the Contracting 

Officer’s Technical Representative (“COTR”) when designated by the agency’s CO on all contracts 

or purchase orders issued by the Agency for LEP services in cases being handled by Judges 

11 See Ch. 10, Model Court Interpreter Act in Court Interpretation: Model Guides for Policy and Practice in the State 

Courts (National Center for State Courts, 1995) (“Model Interpreter Act”) for a discussion of the Model Interpreter 

Act’s intention to provide for certification, appointment, and use of interpreters to help secure any rights of non-English 

speaking persons in state legal and administrative proceedings. See also the National Association of Judiciary 

Interpreters and Translators, Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility.

12 Agency stakeholders were consulted and input from stakeholders was considered in the drafting of this PS/LAP.

13 Assistant LACs shall continue to be supervised by on-site management personnel.
7

assigned to their office, with the authority to direct the day-to-day performance of any interpreter 

or translator while working at the direction of a Judge who ordered the LEP services; and 4) prepare 

the Notice of, or Request to Arrange for Approved, LEP Services form at Appendix 2 and submit 

the completed form to the LAC for the OCALJ and CO, when appropriate. ALACs shall continue 

to be supervised by on-site management personnel.

b. CALJ. The CALJ shall designate the LAC for the OCALJ from within the Agency’s 

national office. All Judges’ legal assistants, excluding the LAC for the OCALJ, serving in the 

Agency’s national, Denver, and Atlanta offices are designated ALACs. 

c. Contracting Officer. Upon receipt of notice of a need for LEP services from a Judge, office 

head, LAC or ALAC, the CO shall promptly 1) negotiate, enter into, administer modify and/or 

terminate contracts and/or purchase orders for LEP services under the PS/:AP, consistent with 

available Language Access Services funding and in consultation with the Executive Director, and 

taking into consideration specific needs and/or statement of work of the judge or office head who 

approved the LEP services; and appoint 2) appoint LACs and/or ALACs to act as COTRs for any 

such contracts and/or purchase orders. The Commission shall maintain a contract with a company 

that provides interpretation services at Commission expense for telephone conference calls 

conducted by Judges where an LEP person participates. 14

d. COTR. When acting as a COTR, ALACs do not have the authority to: 1) cause an increase 

or decrease in the price; or 2) otherwise change any provision(s), of any contract or purchase order.

e. Executive Director. The Office of the Executive Director (“OEXD”) shall: 1) manage 

funding allotted to implement and administer the PS/LAP; 2) at the start of each fiscal year or 

funding cycle in the event of congressional continuing resolutions, promptly inform the PS/LAP 

Administrator of the amount of Agency funds that are available and allotted to the PS/LAP 

Administrator for that fiscal year or funding cycle to provide the LEP services called for by the 

PS/LAP; 3) keep the PS/LAP Administrator apprised of the amount of funds remaining and provide 

notification when funds have been exhausted; and4) designate the LAC for the Commission staff.

f. Executive Secretary. The Office of Executive Secretary (“OEXS”) shall: 1) generally 

handle LEP matters that arise in cases that have not yet been docketed by the Commission or are 

pending before the Commission where a review has been directed; 2) promptly inform the LAC for 

the Commission staff of the circumstances of any instances where the Executive Secretary has 

provided LEP services; and 3) arrange for LEP services that require specific funding through the 

LAC for the Commission staff.

g. General Counsel. The Office of General Counsel (“OGC”) shall: 1) handle LEP matters 

concerning Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) requests in cases; 2) promptly inform the LAC 

for the Commission staff of the circumstances of any instances where the OGC has provided LEP 

services; and 3) arrange for LEP services that require specific funding through the LAC for the 

Commission staff. In instances where a Judge is handling a case that relates to a FOIA request, the 

OGC shall coordinate the production of any LEP materials related to the case with the assigned 

Judge, as appropriate.

14 To access these interpretation services, Agency personnel need to call (800) 481-3293 and enter the OSHRC account 

and PIN numbers, which may be obtained from the LAC. These services are also available for use throughout the 

agency.
8

h. Hiring Officials at the Commission. All Commission hiring officials shall assess the extent 

to which non-English language proficiency would be necessary for particular positions or to fulfill 

the Commission’s mission when considering hiring criteria for Agency personnel. There is no 

requirement for the provision of any LEP services to LEP individuals where English is a necessary 

qualification for an Agency job.

i. Judge. The Judge assigned to the case shall be responsible for the handling of all matters 

relating to interpretation and/or translation services during the course of a proceeding pending 

before the Court and, in so doing, should consider EO 13166, the AG Memo, and all applicable 

authority.15 The Judge shall decide any issue regarding the competency of an interpreter or 

translator in matters pending before the Court. A non- binding example of a script for a Judge to 

consider using at a trial where an interpreter is being used for witness testimony is attached as 

Appendix 1. Judges should consider making inquiries to the parties no later than the conduct of a 

final pre-hearing conference concerning any need for interpreters at a trial.

j. LAC for the Commission staff. The LAC for the Commission staff shall: 1) coordinate with 

the PS/LAP Administrator in LEP matters and assist the PS/LAP Administrator and the LAWG in 

fulfilling their PS/LAP responsibilities; 2) coordinate the issuance of contracts and/or purchase 

orders for LEP services under the PS/LAP with the agency CO and serve as the COTR when 

designated by the agency’s CO on all contracts or purchase orders issued by the Agency for LEP 

services for matters being handled by the OEXS or the OGC, with the authority to direct the dayto-day performance of any interpreter or translator while working at the direction of the office head 

who ordered the LEP services; and 3) collect data on the nature and frequency of the need for LEP 

services being provided by the Commission staff; including the identification of: a) the languages 

most frequently encountered; b) the primary channels of contact with LEP persons (e.g., whether 

telephonic, in person, or by correspondence); c) the type of language assistance services provided; 

and d) the cost to the Agency for the provision of language assistance services.

k. LAC for the OCALJ. The LAC for the OCALJ shall: 1) operate under the technical direction 

of the PS/LAP Administrator in LEP matters and assist the PS/LAP Administrator and the LAWG 

in fulfilling their PS/LAP responsibilities; 2) coordinate the issuance of contracts and/or purchase 

orders for LEP services under the PS/LAP with the agency CO and serve as the COTR when 

designated by the agency’s CO on contracts or purchase orders issued by the Agency for LEP 

services for cases, with the authority to direct the day-to-day performance of any interpreter or 

translator while working at the direction of the Judge who ordered the LEP services; and 3) collect 

data on the nature and frequency of the need for LEP services for cases; including the identification 

of: a) the languages most frequently encountered; b) the primary channels of contact with LEP 

persons (e.g., whether telephonic, in person, or by correspondence); c) the type of language 

assistance services provided; and d) the cost to the Agency for the provision of language assistance 

services.

15 In making determinations about whether an individual’s request for LEP services should be paid for by the 

Commission or apportioned among the parties, a Judge will consider the intent of Executive Order 13166 to provide 

meaningful access. Additionally, a Judge will be guided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure applicable to such 

requests. Determinations are at the sound discretion of the Judge and services paid for by the Commission are limited 

by available funds. See Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 1341(a), 1342, and 1572 (prohibition against incurring 

Agency obligation to pay for services when Agency funds not legally available).
9

l. LAWG. A LAWG, chaired by the PS/LAP Administrator and comprised of the General 

Counsel, Executive Director, Executive Secretary, CALJ, First Judges, and the PS/LAP 

Administrator, shall be responsible for: 1) advising the PS/LAP Administrator on the 

implementation of EO 13166 and the AG Memo consistent with applicable authority, as well as 

this document, within the Agency and without limiting a Judge’s discretion to adjudicate all issues 

in a pending proceeding; and 2) conducting an evaluation of the PS/LAP, policies, and protocols, 

as well as LEP services, and recommending the updating of any of these as necessary every two 

years. When conducting its evaluation, the LAWG shall: 1) review agency data regarding LEP 

services; 2) identify any critical insufficiencies; 3) recommend to the PS/LAP Administrator the 

need to seek any additional LEP funding; and 4) evaluate and prioritize any suggested 

improvements. Improvements found to be of merit by the PS/LAP Administrator shall be 

incorporated into updates of this PS/LAP.

m. PS/LAP Administrator. The PS/LAP Administrator shall: 1) be responsible for 

implementing and administering the PS/LAP; and 2) promptly advise Judges, OEXS, and OGC 

whenever no funds are available to administer the PS/LAP.

n. U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Solicitor (“DOL”). Generally, Judges should 

operate with the understanding that the provision of interpreters for government witnesses 

providing testimony at Commission proceedings and the translation of documentary materials 

being used by the Secretary of Labor’s representatives during Commission proceedings are 

litigation expenses that have historically been borne by DOL.16

2. Identification of LEP Contract Situations

The Commission is unique among Federal agencies in that it provides independent administrative 

trial and appellate review of citations or penalties resulting from OSHA inspections of American 

work places. The Commission’s primary contact with the public is with: 1) individuals or persons 

representing their business or their employer’s business after having contested an OSHA citation, 

thus initiating a Commission proceeding; 2) other parties to a Commission proceeding including 

an employer, authorized employee representative, or affected employee(s) that may, or may not, be 

represented by legal counsel; and 3) individual non-party employees who may be witnesses in 

Commission proceedings. In sum, the Commission serves two major groups of individuals that may 

require language assistance; parties and non-party witnesses.

The LEP population served by the Commission is generally comprised of employers and 

employees. Overall, the number of LEP individuals served by the Commission is limited. However, 

potential employee witnesses and, occasionally, small business owners, may have LEP, particularly 

in certain industries and geographic regions. Judges have the most contact with LEP individuals 

through the cases over which they preside. 17 The frequency of contact varies among ALJs. Several 

16 See 28 U.S.C. § 1827(c)(2), Interpreters in Courts of the United States (effective October 19, 1996) (the court is 

responsible for securing the services of certified interpreters for proceedings initiated by the United States, “except that 

the United States attorney is responsible for securing the services of such interpreters for governmental witnesses”). 

This statute is not applicable to OSHRC proceedings initiated by the United States, but it may be useful as a guide as 

to how federal district courts handle securing interpreters at trials. The selection of any interpreters or translators 

secured by DOL for use at trial shall be subject to the Court’s approval.

17 The Commission has rarely conducted an oral argument when reviewing a case on appeal. Only two oral 

arguments before the Commission have occurred in the last sixteen years. Witnesses do not testify when the 

Commission hears oral arguments from counsel.
10

judges have never presided over a case involving an LEP individual. On average, ALJs have cases 

that involve LEP individuals less than twice a year.

All LEP matters concerning a docketed case pending before the Agency prior to any review 

directed by the Commission shall be referred by Agency staff to and handled by the Commission 

Judge with cognizance of the case.18 LEP matters concerning a case that has been docketed at the 

Commission but has not yet been assigned to a Judge shall be referred to the CALJ for consideration 

and disposition. LEP matters shall generally be referred to the OEXS for consideration and 

disposition for cases that have not yet been docketed by the Commission or that are pending before 

the Commission where a review has been directed.19

Agency personnel shall promptly submit to the appropriate LAC a Notice of, or Request for 

LAC to Arrange for Approved, LEP Services Form attached at Appendix 2 to report the provision 

of any LEP services and/or to request for the appropriate LAC to arrange for approved LEP 

services.20

The predominant language spoken by the Commission’s LEP contacts is reported as Spanish.

3. Translation of any Vital Documents

a. Vital Documents in a proceeding pending before a Judge. In the event an individual with 

LEP raises before the Court in a pending matter a need for vital documents to be translated at the 

expense of another, the Judge shall decide what, if any, documents need to be translated and at 

whose expense and how. Examples of case-related documents that a Judge may consider “vital” 

include:

1) Pleadings

2) Settlement agreements

3) Orders to Show Cause

4) Dispositive motions and related orders

5) Scheduling Orders; Notices of Prehearing Conference Call

6) Trial Exhibits

7) Decisions21

b. Agency-wide translations of Vital Documents for the General Public. The LAWG 

shall identify any agency-wide vital documents that are not case-specific that should be translated, 

and the PS/LAP Administrator shall arrange for their translation by the Commission. The 

translation of any such document for official Agency-wide use will be subjected to a two-tier 

process of initial translation and independent review. Translated documents will be subject to the 

18 The Commission’s OGC and OEXS have traditionally fielded very few phone calls from LEP persons.

19 The Commission has no further obligation to provide case-related LEP services once it has issued its final order in 

a case.

20 Completed forms may be submitted to languageaccess@oshrc.gov.

21 Under most circumstances, materials primarily directed to incorporated entities, attorneys, advocates, architects, 

police, or other professionals will not be considered “vital” under this Plan. When documents related to litigation 

matters are translated, Judges may wish to consider options for ensuring that the English- language version of the 

document controls the obligations of the parties.
11

quality control measures of ASTM F2575-06, Standard Guide for Quality Assurance in 

Translation.22The LAWG will classify an agency-wide document as “vital” based on the 

importance of the information or service involved, and the consequences to LEP persons if the 

information in question is not provided accurately or in a timely manner. Agency-wide vital 

documents are documents primarily geared towards the general public and are not case-specific. 

Examples of public documents that may be considered “vital” include:

1) Forms or written material related to individual rights

2) Procedural guides

Subject to the availability of resources, the Commission will take reasonable steps to 

translate additional public website content and electronic documents that contain vital information 

about Agency programs and language assistance services.23 Translation of web content may include 

web pages that contain important information intended for the general public, such as information 

about the Commission’s mission, information about how to contact Judges, and the Office of the 

Executive Secretary, and information designed to educate individuals about their rights under the 

law. 24 Since written translations intended for mass distribution concerning the Commission are 

specific to the Commission there is no reason to collaborate with other federal agencies.

3) Outreach and Notice to Agency Personnel and General Public

A copy of the Notice of Policy Statement and Language Access Plan at Appendix 4 will be posted 

in prominent locations throughout the Agency and made available to all Commission personnel 

through the Agency’s intranet site and to the general public via the Commission’s internet site.

4. Language Access Guide and Training

a. Judges.The PS/LAP shall be a topic of discussion at all Annual Judges’ Conferences.25

22 ASTM International, formerly known as the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), is an 

organization that develops international voluntary consensus standards. The ASTM F2575-06 Standard Guide for

Quality Assurance in Translation isthe American translation-servicesstandard. It provides a framework for customers

and translation-service providers to develop the specific requirements of a translation project. It does not provide 

specific criteria for translation or project quality, as these requirements may be highly individual, but states parameters 

that should be considered before beginning a translation project. As the document's name suggests, it is a guideline, 

informing stakeholders about what basic quality requirements are in need of compliance, rather than a prescriptive 

set of detailed instructions for the translator.

23 See ¶9B (Maintain Accessibility): Office of Management and Budget; Executive Office of the President, 

Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Policies for Federal Agency Public Website 

(Dec. 17, 2004), available at www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-04.pdf; Appendix 3. The Agency 

shall also consider using the National Virtual Translation Center to translate documents in instances where any such

translation is not expected to cause a need for the translator to testify at a trial. A complete list of Agency documents 

and that are translated into Spanish is also available at www.oshrc.gov/publications/spanish/.

24 Decisions regarding the translation of the website and electronic documents will consider the General Services 

Administration’s guidance on multilingual websites available at www.HowTo.gov [Web Content, Multilingual 

Websites].

25 In the event a judges’ conference is not held, the PS/LAP Administrator will conduct a conference call with all of 

the judges.
12

b. Agency Staff Training on Language Assistance. Agency staff personnel whose duties 

include significant contact with members of the public or who provide administrative support to 

Judges will be provided information and training annually on the implementation of the PS/LAP, 

the scope of available language assistance services, and the procedures through which such 

language services resources may be accessed.

IV. Approval

This directive sets forth the policies and procedures for the implementation and administration of 

the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission’s Language Access Policy 

Directive.

OFFICIAL SEAL:

COVETTEROONEY CHIEF 

JUDGE
13

V. Appendices

Appendix 1 - Sample Trial Script when using an interpreter.

Appendix 2 - Sample Notice of, or Request to Arrange for Approve LEP Services Form.

Appendix 3 - List of Translated Agency Documents.

Appendix 4 - Notice of Policy Statement and Language Access Plan.
14

Appendix 1 - Sample Trial Script When Using an Interpreter and Oath

[JUDGE] We have an interpreter to assist us in these proceedings. At thistime, I 

will administer an oath to the interpreter.

In accordance with Rule 604, Federal Rules of Evidence, do you solemnly swear that 

you will make a true and impartial translation in this proceeding using your best skills and

judgment in accordance with the standards and ethics of the interpreter profession?

[Interpreter response]

Do you also agree that you will not disclose to the public any confidential testimony

or material that you become aware of during the course of performing your duties as an

interpreter in this case that are ordered sealed by the judge, or that are the subject of a 

judge's protective order, unless otherwise ordered by the Court?

[Interpreter response]

Mr./Ms. X, please state your name and business address. [Interpreter 

response]

Please state your qualifications and experience to serve as an interpreter. [Interpreter 

response]

I will now provide each side with an opportunity to voir dire the interpreter asto 

his/her qualifications and neutrality.

[Voir Dire of Interpreter by counsel]

Any objection to using Mr./Ms. X as an interpreter in this case?

[Counsel response]

Without objection, the Court finds Mr./Ms. X qualified to serve as an interpreter in this case.

[After witness is seated]:
15

We have an interpreter to assist us through your testimony in these proceedings and you 

should be aware of what the interpreter can and cannot do. The interpreter is here to help us 

communicate during your testimony. He/she is not a party in the case, has no interest in the case, 

and will be completely neutral. The interpreter is not working for either party, his/her sole 

responsibility is to enable us to communicate with each other.

The interpreter is not an attorney, a social worker, or an advocate; his/her only job is to 

interpret what is said during your testimony. If you do not understand the interpreter at any time, 

please let me know.
16

Appendix 2 - Notice of, or Request to Arrange for Approved LEP Services F (Internal Use Only)

Date of [Notice of] or [Request for Approved] LEP Services: NAME/DOCKET NUMBER OF 

CASE:

Name of Judge or Office Head Approving LEP Services:

LEP Individual’s Primary Language:

LEP Services [Provided] or [Required]:

Time, Place, and Duration of Services [provided] or [required]:

Special Accommodation Requirements (if any) [provided] or [required]:

Notice/Request Submitted on behalf of : Judge OEXS OGC Other Proceeding Type: 

Trial Settlement Conference Other

Notifier’s or Requestor’s Name, telephone number and email address:

Signature of Notifier or Requestor

Click to Save & Email 
17

(Internal Use Only) Form to be completed and submitted to LAC and/or Contracting Officer only 

by OSHRC personnel. Appendix 2, PS/LAP

Date Notice/Request Received by LAC or Contracting Officer: Action Taken by LAC or 

Contracting Officer:
18

Appendix 3 - List of Translated Agency Documents

The following documents are translated into Spanish and available electronically at:

https://www.oshrc.gov/publications/publications-spanish/.

1. Rules of Procedure

2. Guide to Review Commission Procedures

3. Employee Guide to Review Commission Procedures: Supplement to the Guide to Review 

Commission Procedures

4. Guide to Simplified Procedures

5. OSHRC Instructions for Electronic Filing

6. OSHRC Language Access Plan

FOIA information is available at: https://www.oshrc.gov/foia/submit-foia-request.

1. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request Form Instructions 

2. FOIA Request Form

Electronic fillable subpoenas are available at: 

https://oshrc.sharepoint.com/sites/judges/SitePages/Home.aspx (for internal access and use only).
19

Appendix 4 - Notice of Policy Statement and Language Access Plan

The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (Commission or Agency) is 

responsible for the adjudication of workplace safety and health disputes under the Occupational 

Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the Act). Executive Order 13166, 65 Fed. Reg. 50, 119 (Aug. 16, 

2000), directs all Federal agencies to "examine the services it provides and develop and implement 

a system by which persons with limited English proficiency (LEP) can meaningfully access those 

services consistent with, and without unduly burdening the fundamental mission of the agency." 

On February 17, 2011, the United States Attorney General issued a Memorandum For Heads of 

Federal Agencies, among others, subject: Federal Government's Renewed Commitment to 

Language Access Obligations Under Executive Order 13166 (AG Memo). The AG Memo 

requested each agency join the Department of Justice in recommitting to the implementation of 

Executive Order 13166 by: I) establishing a Language Access Working Group to be responsible 

for implementing the executive order; 2) evaluating and/or updating its Language Access Plan; 3) 

establishing a schedule to periodically evaluate and update its LEP services, policies, plans and 

protocols; 4) ensuring agency staff can competently identify LEP contact situations and take the 

necessary steps to provide meaningful access; 5) notify the public of its LEP policies, plans, and

procedures; 6) assess non-English language proficiency when considering hiring criteria; 7) 

collaborating with other agencies for written translations intended for mass distribution; and 8) 

including a statement that it does not provide federal financial assistance when transmitting its 

language access plan (together "Eight Steps").

The Commission, which serves as an administrative court at the trial and appellate levels, 

acknowledges English proficiency is required for meaningful participation in Agency proceedings 

due to the use of legal terms, principles and procedures involved in adjudicating the rights and 

responsibilities of employers and the rights of employees under the Act. The Commission's goal is 

to ameliorate LEP as a barrier to accessing its programs or activities; consequently, the Agency is 

committed to taking reasonable steps through which LEP persons can meaningfully access its 

services consistent with, and without unduly burdening, its fundamental mission and existing law. 

In accordance with Executive Order 13166 and the AG Memo, the Commission will satisfy the 

Eight Steps identified above by which LEP persons can meaningfully access its programs and 

activities to the extent that Agency resources are available and will permit, and without precluding 

a judge from exercising independent judgment in a pending proceeding as it relates to LEP matters 

in accordance with the Act, Administrative Procedure Act, Commission Rules of Procedure, 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, Executive Order 13166, and the AG 

Memo.

Responsibility for implementing and administering the Agency's Policy Statement and 

Language Access Plan (PS/LAP) has been delegated to the Office of Chief Administrative Law 

Judge (OCALJ); specifically to the PS/LAP Administrator, since the largest number of interactions 

with LEP persons and the Commission occur in the context of a proceeding conducted by one of 

the Commission's judges. A copy of the PS/LAP is to be posted in all Commission offices and made 

available to Agency personnel via the intranet and the general public via the internet.

Questions concerning language access for cases pending before a judge should be directed to Tia 

Dillard, OCALJ Language Access Coordinator (LAC), at (202) 606-5405, or via email at 

languageaccess@oshrc.gov. Questions concerning language access for other matters should be 
20

directed to Executive Director, Debra A. Hall, LAC for the Commission staff at (202) 606-5397, 

or via email at languageaccess@oshrc.gov.

PS/LAP Administrator: Judge Keith E. Bell August 28, 2014

Appendix 4 to PS/LAP