Sanger Rock & Sand (ALJ decision, December 27, 1989)

Plain-English summary

Sanger Rock & Sand asked to file interrogatories after the evidence had closed in two civil penalty proceedings. Judge John J. Morris explained that the Commission's discovery rules are designed to begin discovery early and generally complete it before the evidentiary hearing. He denied the request because it was untimely and the interrogatories could no longer assist the respondent in preparing and presenting its case.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): 29 C.F.R. § 2700.55
• Outcome: The request for leave to file interrogatories after the hearing was denied.
• Key point: Discovery is intended to support preparation for the hearing, so a request made after the evidence closed was too late.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. SANGER ROCK & SAND
DDATE:
19891227
TTEXT:

Page 2

~2640
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.) Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. WEST 88-275-M
PETITIONER
A.C. No. 04-01937-05505

v. Docket No. WEST 89-71-M
A.C. No. 04-01937-05506
SANGER ROCK & SAND,
RESPONDENT
Sanger Pit and Mill

ORDER

At the close of the evidence in the above cases on December 13, 1989, respondent requested leave to file inter-rogatories.

Petitioner objected to respondent's request.

Discussion

Commission Rule 55, 29 C.F.R. 2700.55 encompasses discovery in general and Rule 56, 29 C.F.R. 2700.55 addresses the use of interrogatories. These rules indicate discovery is to be initiated early in the proceedings. In fact, Rule 55 states discovery shall be initiated within 20 days after a notice of contest. Further, discovery is to be completed within 60 days after a notice of contest. For good cause shown, the judge may permit the time for discovery to be extended. However, the purpose of interrogatories is to assist a party to prepare and present its case at the evidentiary hearing.

In the instant case respondent requested leave to file interrogatories after the evidentiary hearing had been closed.

It is apparent respondent's motion for leave to file inter-rogatories addressed to the Secretary was not timely filed and it is denied.

John J. Morris
Administrative Law Judge