Whistleblower Closing Conference Pilot

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: CPL 09-00-002
SUBJECT: Whistleblower Closing Conference Pilot
DIRECTORATE/REGION: Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs
SIGNATURE DATE: 6/12/2026 EFFECTIVE DATE: 8/3/2026
ABSTRACT
Purpose: The purpose of this Notice is to establish a year-long, nationwide
Whistleblower Protection Programs pilot in which holding a closing
conference will be optional. The use of particular Secretary’s Findings
templates in cases in which a closing conference is not conducted will also
be required. The purpose of this pilot is to test the efficiency of removing
the closing conference from the investigation process.
Scope: This Notice applies to all participating Regions.
References: CPL 02-03-011, Whistleblower Investigations Manual (April 29, 2022);
CPL 02-03-010, Whistleblower Protection Program Pilot Procedures
Directive (July 20, 2020).
Cancellation: None.
State Impact: None.
Action Offices: All participating Regions
Originating Office: Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs (DWPP)
Contact: Director
Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs
200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room N-3622
Washington, DC 20210
Tel.: (202) 691-2199
By and Under the Authority of
David Keeling
Assistant Secretary

2

Executive Summary

The Whistleblower Investigations Manual (WIM) currently requires the investigator to conduct a
closing conference with a party before the investigator recommends that OSHA issue Secretary’s
Findings against the party (i.e., the complainant in cases in which OSHA anticipates issuing non-
merit findings, or the respondent(s) in Administrative Law Judge (ALJ)- statute cases in which
OSHA anticipates issuing merit findings). The purpose of the closing conference is for the
investigator to provide the party a brief verbal summary of their recommended disposition of the
case, the basis for the recommendation, and a last opportunity for the party to provide evidence
supporting their case, as well as to inform the party of their right to appeal/request review if the
recommendation is accepted as OSHA’s final determination.
This Notice establishes a year-long, nationwide Whistleblower Protection Programs pilot in
which conducting a closing conference will not be required. I n cases where a closing conference
is not conducted, the use of the appropriate Secretary’s Findings template provided with this
Notice (see Appendices A-D) is required. This pilot tests whether forgoing closing conferences
and using the enclosed templates would effectively streamline the case disposition process.

I. Subject: This Notice implements a Nationwide Pilot to implement an alternative case
closure process for docketed complaints.

II. Purpose: The purpose of this pilot is to test the adequacy and efficiency of alternative
closure procedures for any case pending dismissal as well as for ALJ-statute cases
pending merit.

III. Scope: This Notice applies to all regions participating in the pilot.

IV. References: CPL 02-03-011, Whistleblower Investigations Manual (WIM) (April 29,
2022); CPL 02-03-010, Whistleblower Protection Program Pilot Procedures Directive
(Pilot Procedures Directive) (July 20, 2020).

V. Expiration: This Notice expires one year following its effective date.

VI. Action: OSHA personnel in participating Regions must follow the procedures contained
in this notice.

VII. Background
WIM Chapter 4.XVII states, “Upon completion of the field investigation and after
discussion of the case with the supervisor, the investigator will conduct a closing
conference with Complainant (in cases in which OSHA anticipates issuing non-merit
findings) or Respondent (in administrative cases in which OSHA anticipates issuing
merit findings).” The purpose of the closing conference is to provide a brief verbal
summary of the investigator’s recommendation for OSHA’s disposition of the case, the
basis for the recommendation, and a last opportunity for the party to provide evidence
supporting their case, as well as to inform the party of their right to appeal/request

3

review. In the past, OSHA has found that well-conducted closing conferences reduce the
appeal rate. However, the requirement for investigators to attempt to hold a closing
conference during each field investigation has put great strain on OSHA’s investigative
resources, particularly where the party is nonresponsive, uncooperative, and/or
combative. As with well-conducted closing conferences, OSHA believes that detailed
Secretary’s Findings letters can ensure that parties understand how OSHA arrived at its
determination and thereby reduce the volume of appeals and requests for review of
OSHA’s determinations.
In order to make more efficient use of their limited resources while providing strong
customer service, Regions that elect to participate in this pilot will enact two changes:
• Closing conferences will be optional;
• When a closing conference is not conducted, use of the attached templates will be
required. Supervisors must ensure that the final letter provides sufficient detail to
fully explain OSHA’s reasoning for the determination.
As a national pilot, this alternative procedure is available to all Regions who choose to
participate.
This procedure applies only as an alternative to the “closing conference” requirement
imposed by WIM Chapter 4.XVII. It does not affect, for example, the procedure to
provide respondents a “due process” notification and an opportunity to meet with the
investigator in response to it in cases involving a potential order of preliminary
reinstatement. See WIM Chapter 5.VII.A.1.b-d.

VIII. Procedure

1. Upon completion of the investigation and after discussion of the case with the
supervisor, the following processes will be used depending on whether the closing
conference is conducted:
a. If a closing conference is conducted, the investigator will conduct the
conference in accordance with WIM, Ch. 4, sec. XVII and follow the Case
Disposition procedures in WIM Ch. 5.

b. If a closing conference is not held, the investigator will follow the Case
Disposition procedures in WIM Ch. 5 except the investigator must draft the
Secretary’s Findings using the appropriate template in Appendix A, B, C, or D
of this Notice. Supervisors must ensure that the Secretary’s Findings contain
details sufficient for a reasonable person to understand the particulars of the
allegation and how OSHA came to its conclusion based on the evidence (or
lack thereof) provided by the parties.

4

IX. Evaluation
In accordance with the Pilot Procedures Directive, at the halfway point (6 months) and
again at the conclusion of the pilot (12 months), the DWPP Pilot Program Lead will, after
consultation with and input from participating Regions, submit an evaluation report to the
DWPP Director, that will include the following:
A. An analysis of the data for the 6-month and 12-month period of this pilot compared to
a 12-month period prior to this pilot.
o Each region’s overall Request for Review (RFR), ALJ appeal, and
settlement rate.
o A comparison of the reason(s) the party provides for why they are
requesting review/filing the appeal and what is stated in the Findings.
o A breakdown of RFR results (determination upheld, case returned to
region, etc.).
o To the extent available during the evaluation period, a breakdown of
ALJ-appeal results.
B. An audit of whether Findings issued during this pilot were created using, as
appropriate, the templates provided and, if so, contained sufficiently detailed
information.
C. Any relevant comments, feedback, or anecdotes submitted by WPP staff (including
RFR reviewers) or found in the complainants’ requests for review/appeal filings.
D. An analysis of the above to determine:
a. Whether the pilot affected RFR/appeal rates.
b. Whether the pilot reduced the resource burden of the case disposition process.
c. Whether investigators’ experiences and impressions of the pilot were positive
or negative.
d. Any positive or negative impact on customer service or complainants’
effectuation of their rights.
E. A recommendation as to whether the pilot program should be implemented as
national policy, renewed, revised, or canceled.

X. List of Appendices
Appendix A: Section 11(c), ISCA, AHERA Non-Merit Secretary’s Findings Template
Appendix B: ALJ Non-Merit Secretary’s Findings Template
Appendix C: Mixed Statute (Section 11(c), ISCA, AHERA/ ALJ) Non-Merit Secretary’s
Findings Template
Appendix D: ALJ Merit Secretary’s Findings Template

5

Appendix A
Section 11(c), ISCA, AHERA Non-Merit Secretary’s Findings Template
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Whistleblower Protection Program

Date

Name (Complainant)
c/o Designated Representative (if applicable)
Street Address
City, State ZIP
Email address (if applicable)

Re: Respondent/Complainant/Case Number

Dear First and Last Name:

This is to advise you that we have completed our investigation of the above-referenced
complaint filed by you/your client (Complainant) against Respondent (Respondent) on date,
under Statute and Citation. In brief, Complainant alleged [describe allegation].

Following an investigation by a duly authorized investigator, the Secretary of Labor, acting
through his/her agent, the Regional Administrator for the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Choose an item. Region, finds that there is no reasonable cause to
believe that Respondent violated Statute and issues the following findings:

Secretary’s Findings

Respondent is/is not covered under the Statute. [Explain Respondent’s business and, if
applicable, explain why Respondent is not covered by the applicable Act]

Complainant is/is not covered under the Statute. [Explain Complainant’s job title and duties
and, if applicable, explain why Complainant is not covered by the applicable Act]

{If there is no coverage of either the Complainant or the Respondent, skip the material below
until the sentence that begins “Based on the discussion above, OSHA dismisses this complaint
because....”]

The investigative records reflect that on date, Respondent [describe adverse action]. On date,
Complainant filed a complaint with OSHA. Because this complaint was/was not filed within

6

Choose an item. days of the alleged adverse action, it is deemed timely/untimely [explain
tolling, if applicable]. [If untimely, skip the material below until the sentence that begins
“Based on the discussion above, OSHA dismisses this complaint because....”].

[Include a narrative containing a brief description of Complainant’s allegation(s), a brief
description of Respondent’s defense(s), and a brief explanation of the events relevant to the
determination, including facts and dates related to any protected activity and adverse action.

Following the narrative, provide a brief summary of OSHA’s analysis on each element and/or
issue relevant to the determination and OSHA’s conclusion that there has been no violation of
the statute(s).]

Based on the discussion above, OSHA dismisses this complaint because [choose one]:
• Complainant or Respondent [or both] is/are not covered under Statute because
[insert reason that there is no coverage];
• Complainant did not file the complaint within the Choose an item. days allowed by
Statute and there is no basis for tolling the filing period;
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant engaged in protected
activity under Statute because [state reason that there is no protected activity];
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant suffered an adverse
action because [insert reason for OSHA’s conclusion]; or
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that but for Complainant’s protected
activity the adverse action would not have been taken against Complainant because
[insert brief explanation for OSHA’s conclusion that there is no nexus between the
protected activity and the adverse action].

This case will be closed unless you send a request for review in writing to:

Primary method: via email to RFR@dol.gov

Secondary method: (if unable to send via email) – via hard copy submission to:
Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs
Attn: Request for Review
U.S. Department of Labor-OSHA
200 Constitution Ave. NW Room N-3622
Washington, D.C. 20210

With a copy to:
Regional Administrator
Contact Information

7

To be considered, a request for review must be sent within 15 calendar days of receipt of this
letter. (If regular mail is used, the date of filing is the date of the postmark.) If you request a
review, the Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs (DWPP) will review the case file
to ascertain whether the investigation adequately dealt with all factual issues and the
investigation was conducted fairly and in accordance with applicable policies and laws. The
outcome of this review will be one of the following: return of the case to the Regional
Administrator for further investigation, a recommendation to the Regional Solicitor’s Office for
litigation, or denial of the request for review. If DWPP upholds the dismissal, the case is closed.

Sincerely,

Supervisor’s Name
Supervisor’s Title

Cc: Complainant (as necessary, if represented)
Respondent
Respondent’s counsel

8

Appendix B
ALJ Non-Merit Secretary’s Findings Template
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Whistleblower Protection Program

Date

Name (Complainant)
c/o Designated Representative (if applicable)
Street Address
City, State ZIP
Email address (if applicable)

Re: Respondent/Complainant/Case Number

Dear First and Last Name:

This is to advise you that we have completed our investigation of the above-referenced
complaint filed by you/your client (Complainant) against Respondent (Respondent) on date,
under Statute and Citation. In brief, Complainant alleged [describe allegation].

Following an investigation by a duly authorized investigator, the Secretary of Labor, acting
through his/her agent, the Regional Administrator for the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Choose an item. Region, finds that there is no reasonable cause to
believe that Respondent violated Choose Statute Acronym and issues the following findings:

Secretary’s Findings

Respondent is/is not covered under Choose Statute Acronym.
[Explain Respondent’s business and, if applicable, explain why Respondent is not covered by the
Act.]

Complainant is/is not covered under Choose Statute Acronym. [Explain Complainant’s job title
and duties, and, if applicable, explain why Complainant is not covered by the Act.]

[If there is no coverage of either Complainant or Respondent, skip the material below until the
sentence that begins “Based on the discussion above, OSHA dismisses this complaint
because....”]

9

The investigative records reflect that on date, Respondent [describe adverse action]. On date,
Complainant filed a complaint with OSHA. Because this complaint was/was not filed within
Choose an item. days of the alleged adverse action, it is deemed timely/untimely [explain
tolling, if necessary]. [If untimely, skip the material below until the sentence that begins “Based
on the discussion above, OSHA dismisses this complaint because....”].

[Include a narrative containing a brief description of Complainant’s allegation(s), a brief
description of Respondent’s defense(s), and a brief explanation of the events relevant to the
determination, including facts and dates related to any protected activity and adverse action.

Following the narrative, provide a brief summary of OSHA’s analysis on each element and/or
issue relevant to the determination and OSHA’s conclusion that there has been no violation of
the relevant statute(s).]

Based on the discussion above, OSHA dismisses this complaint because [choose one]:
• Complainant or Respondent [or both] is/are not covered under Choose Statute
Acronym because [insert reason that there is no coverage];
• Complainant did not file the complaint within the Choose an item. days allowed by
Choose Statute Acronym and there is no basis for tolling the filing period;
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant engaged in protected
activity under Choose Statute Acronym because [state reason that there is no
protected activity];
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant suffered an adverse
action because [insert reason for OSHA’s conclusion];
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant’s protected activity was
a Choose an item. factor in Respondent’s adverse action against Complainant
because [insert brief explanation for OSHA’s conclusion that there is no nexus
between the protected activity and the adverse action]; or
• There is reasonable cause to believe that Complainant’s protected activity was a
Choose an item. factor in Respondent’s adverse action against Complainant because
[insert brief explanation for OSHA’s conclusion that there is a nexus between the
protected activity and the adverse action]. However, Respondent has shown by
Choose an item. evidence that it would have taken the same action absent the
protected activity. [Insert brief explanation for OSHA’s conclusion that the
affirmative defense was met.]

Any party may object to these Findings and request a hearing before an Administrative Law
Judge (ALJ). Objections must be submitted in writing within 30 days/60 days [PSIA] of receipt of
these Findings. If no objections are filed, these Findings will become final and not subject to
court review. Objections must be sent to:

Primary method: via email to OALJ-Filings@dol.gov

10

Secondary method: (if unable to send via email) – via hard copy submission to:
Chief Administrative Law Judge
Office of Administrative Law Judges
United States Department of Labor
200 Constitution Ave NW
Room S-4325
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: (202) 693-7500
Fax: (202) 693-7365

With a copy to:
Regional Administrator
Contact Information

With a copy to:
Respondent
Respondent’s Contact Information

In addition, please be advised that the U.S. Department of Labor does not represent any party
in the hearing; rather, each party presents his or her own case. The hearing is an adversarial
proceeding before an ALJ in which the parties are allowed an opportunity to present their
evidence for the record. The ALJ who conducts the hearing will issue a decision based on the
evidence and arguments presented by the parties. Review of the ALJ’s decision may be sought
from the Administrative Review Board (ARB), and the Secretary of Labor may review ARB
decisions at the Secretary’s discretion. A copy of this letter has been sent to the Chief ALJ along
with a copy of your complaint.

Sincerely,

Supervisor’s Name
Supervisor’s Title

Cc: Complainant (as necessary, if represented)
Respondent
Respondent’s counsel
U.S. DOL Chief Administrative Law Judge

11

Appendix C
Mixed Statute (Section 11(c), ISCA, AHERA/ ALJ) Non-Merit Secretary’s Findings Template
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Whistleblower Protection Program

Date

Name (Complainant)
c/o Designated Representative (if applicable)
Street Address
City, State ZIP
Email address (if applicable)

Re: Respondent/Complainant/Case Number

Dear First and Last Name:

This is to advise you that we have completed our investigation of the above-referenced
complaint filed by you/your client (Complainant) against Respondent (Respondent) on date,
under Statute and Citation and Statute and Citation. In brief, Complainant alleged [describe
allegation].

Following an investigation by a duly authorized investigator, the Secretary of Labor, acting
through his/her agent, the Regional Administrator for the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Choose an item. Region, finds that there is no reasonable cause to
believe that Respondent violated Choose Statute Acronym or Choose Statute Acronym and
issues the following findings:

Secretary’s Findings

Respondent is/is not covered under Choose Statute Acronym . [Explain Respondent’s business
and, if applicable, explain why Respondent is not covered by the applicable Act]

Complainant is/is not covered under Choose Statute Acronym [Explain Complainant’s job title
and duties and, if applicable, explain why Complainant is not covered by the applicable Act]

Respondent is/is not covered under Choose Statute Acronym . [Explain Respondent’s business
and, if applicable, explain why Respondent is not covered by the applicable Act]

12

Complainant is/is not covered under Choose Statute Acronym [Explain Complainant’s job title
and duties and, if applicable, explain why Complainant is not covered by the applicable Act]

{If there is no coverage of either the Complainant or the Respondent, skip the material below
until the sentence that begins “Based on the discussion above, OSHA dismisses this complaint
because....”]

The investigative records reflect that on date, Respondent [describe adverse action]. On date,
Complainant filed a complaint with OSHA. Because this Choose Statute Acronym complaint
was/was not filed within Choose an item. days of the alleged adverse action, it is deemed
timely/untimely [explain tolling, if applicable].

Because this Choose Statute Acronym complaint was/was not filed within Choose an item. days
of the alleged adverse action, it is deemed timely/untimely [explain tolling, if applicable]. [If
untimely, skip the material below until the sentence that begins “Based on the discussion
above, OSHA dismisses this complaint because....”].

[Include a narrative containing a brief description of Complainant’s allegation(s), a brief
description of Respondent’s defense(s), and a brief explanation of the events relevant to the
determination, including facts and dates related to any protected activity and adverse action.

Following the narrative, provide a brief summary of OSHA’s analysis on each element and/or
issue relevant to the determination and OSHA’s conclusion that there has been no violation of
the statutes.]

Based on the discussion above, OSHA dismisses this complaint filed under Statute because
[choose one]:
• Complainant or Respondent [or both] is/are not covered under Statute because
[insert reason that there is no coverage];
• Complainant did not file the complaint within the Choose an item. days allowed by
Statute and there is no basis for tolling the filing period;
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant engaged in protected
activity under Statute because [state reason that there is no protected activity];
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant suffered an adverse
action because [insert reason for OSHA’s conclusion]; or
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that but for Complainant’s protected
activity the adverse action would not have been taken against Complainant because
[insert brief explanation for OSHA’s conclusion that there is no nexus between the
protected activity and the adverse action].

In addition, OSHA dismisses this complaint filed under Choose Statute Acronym because
[choose one]:

13

• Complainant or Respondent [or both] is/are not covered under Choose Statute
Acronym because [insert reason that there is no coverage];
• Complainant did not file the complaint within the Choose an item. days allowed by
Choose Statute Acronym and there is no basis for tolling the filing period;
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant engaged in protected
activity under Choose Statute Acronym because [state reason that there is no
protected activity];
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant suffered an adverse
action because [insert reason for OSHA’s conclusion];
• OSHA has no reasonable cause to believe that Complainant’s protected activity was
a Choose an item. factor in Respondent’s adverse action against Complainant
because [insert brief explanation for OSHA’s conclusion that there is no nexus
between the protected activity and the adverse action]; or
• There is reasonable cause to believe that Complainant’s protected activity was a
Choose an item. factor in Respondent’s adverse action against Complainant because
[insert brief explanation for OSHA’s conclusion that there is a nexus between the
protected activity and the adverse action]. However, Respondent has shown by
Choose an item. evidence that it would have taken the same action absent the
protected activity. [Insert brief explanation for OSHA’s conclusion that the
affirmative defense was met.]

The claim filed under Statute will be closed unless you send a request for review in writing to:

Primary method: via email to RFR@dol.gov

Secondary method: (if unable to send via email) – via hard copy submission to:
Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs
Attn: Request for Review
U.S. Department of Labor-OSHA
200 Constitution Ave. NW Room N-3622
Washington, D.C. 20210

With a copy to:
Regional Administrator
Contact Information

To be considered, a request for review must be sent within 15 calendar days of receipt of this
letter. (If regular mail is used, the date of filing is the date of the postmark.) If you request a
review, the Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs (DWPP) will review the case file
to ascertain whether the investigation adequately dealt with all factual issues and the
investigation was conducted fairly and in accordance with applicable policies and laws. The
outcome of this review will be one of the following: return of the case to the Regional

14

Administrator for further investigation, a recommendation to the Regional Solicitor’s Office for
litigation, or denial of the request for review. If DWPP upholds the dismissal, the case is closed.

Any party may object to these Findings for complaints filed under Choose Statute Acronym and
request a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Objections must be submitted in
writing within Choose an item. of receipt of these Findings. If no objections are filed, these
Findings will become final and not subject to court review. Objections must be sent to:

Primary method: via email to OALJ-Filings@dol.gov

Secondary method: (if unable to send via email) – via hard copy submission to:
Chief Administrative Law Judge
Office of Administrative Law Judges
United States Department of Labor
200 Constitution Ave NW
Room S-4325
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: (202) 693-7500
Fax: (202) 693-7365

With a copy to:
Regional Administrator
Contact Information

With a copy to:
Respondent
Respondent’s Contact Information

In addition, please be advised that the U.S. Department of Labor does not represent any party
in the hearing; rather, each party presents his or her own case. The hearing is an adversarial
proceeding before an ALJ in which the parties are allowed an opportunity to present their
evidence for the record. The ALJ who conducts the hearing will issue a decision based on the
evidence and arguments presented by the parties. Review of the ALJ’s decision may be sought
from the Administrative Review Board (ARB), and the Secretary of Labor may review ARB
decisions at the Secretary’s discretion. A copy of this letter has been sent to the Chief ALJ along
with a copy of your complaint.

Sincerely,

Supervisor’s Name
Supervisor’s Title

15

Cc: Complainant (as necessary, if represented)
Respondent
Respondent’s counsel
U.S. DOL Chief Administrative Law Judge

16

Appendix D
ALJ Merit Secretary’s Findings Template
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Whistleblower Protection Program

Date

Name (Respondent)
c/o Designated Representative (if applicable)
Street Address
City, State ZIP
Email address (if applicable)

Re: Respondent/Complainant/Case Number

Dear First and Last Name:

This is to advise you that we have completed our investigation of the above-referenced
complaint filed by Complainant (Complainant) against Respondent (Respondent) on date, under
Statute and Citation. In brief, Complainant alleged [describe allegation].

Following an investigation by a duly authorized investigator, the Secretary of Labor, acting
through his/her agent, the Regional Administrator for the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Choose an item. Region, pursuant to Statute and Citation, finds that
there is reasonable cause to believe that Respondent violated Choose Statute Acronym and
issues the following findings:

Secretary’s Findings

Complainant and Respondent are covered under Choose Statute Acronym. [Explain
Respondent’s business and Complainant’s job title and duties. If Respondent disputed coverage
during the investigation, briefly explain why OSHA found that Complainant and/or Respondent
were covered despite Respondent’s argument(s) to the contrary.]

The investigative records reflect that on date, Respondent [describe adverse action]. On date,
Complainant filed a complaint with OSHA. Because this complaint was filed within Choose an
item. days of the alleged adverse action, it is deemed timely [explain tolling, if necessary].

17

[Include a narrative containing a brief description of Complainant’s allegation(s), a brief
description of Respondent’s defense(s), and a brief explanation of the events relevant to the
determination, including facts and dates related to any protected activity and adverse action.

Following the narrative, provide a brief summary of OSHA’s analysis of each element and/or
issue relevant to the determination and OSHA’s conclusion that there has been a violation of
the relevant statute(s), including protected activity, Respondent knowledge, adverse action(s),
and nexus (motivating or contributing).]

On the basis of the findings above, OSHA has reasonable cause to believe that Respondent
violated Choose Statute Acronym in that Complainant’s protected activity was a Choose an
item. factor in the adverse action taken against Complainant and Respondent has not shown
by Choose an item. evidence that it would have taken the same action absent the protected
activity. [Insert brief explanation of analysis of each element, and, if compensatory and/or
punitive damage are awarded, include brief explanation for why the damages awarded are
appropriate in the case.]

Order/Preliminary Order

Upon receipt of this Secretary’s Finding and Order/Preliminary Order, Respondent shall [list all
remedies being awarded, such as reinstatement, back pay, medical expenses, punitive,
emotional, and/or compensatory damages (see WIM, p. 85, for instructions)].

Any party may object to these Findings and request a hearing before an Administrative Law
Judge (ALJ). Objections must be submitted in writing within 30 days/60 days [PSIA] from the
receipt of these Findings. If no objections are filed, these Findings will become final and not
subject to court review. Objections must be sent to:

Primary method: via email to OALJ-Filings@dol.gov

Secondary method: (if unable to send via email) – via hard copy submission to:
Chief Administrative Law Judge
Office of Administrative Law Judges
United States Department of Labor
200 Constitution Ave NW
Room S-4325
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202-693-7500
Fax: 202-693-7365

With a copy to:
Regional Administrator

18

Contact Information

With a copy to:
All parties to this complaint
Complainant’s Contact Information
Respondent’s Contact Information

In addition, please be advised that the U.S. Department of Labor does not represent any party
in the hearing; rather, each party presents his or her own case. The hearing is an adversarial
proceeding before an ALJ in which the parties are allowed an opportunity to present their
evidence for the record. The ALJ who conducts the hearing will issue a decision based on the
evidence and arguments presented by the parties. Review of the ALJ’s decision may be sought
from the Administrative Review Board (ARB), and the Secretary of Labor may review ARB
decisions at the Secretary’s discretion. A copy of this letter has been sent to the Chief ALJ along
with a copy of the complaint.

Sincerely,

Supervisor’s Name
Supervisor’s Title

Cc: Respondent (as necessary, if represented)
Complainant
Complainant’s counsel
U.S. DOL Chief Administrative Law Judge