Presiding officer powers

The presiding officer can control how the hearing is run to make sure it is fair and efficient. This includes setting the order of witnesses, scheduling testimony, setting time limits, and deciding how evidence is presented under the authority in 1911.16(a).

• The goal is a fair, full hearing that focuses on the issues at hand.
• Parties should expect the officer to make rulings that keep the hearing moving and prevent unnecessary delays.

Yes. The presiding officer may dispose of procedural requests, objections, and similar matters during the hearing. This follows the authority given in 1911.16(b).

• Rulings on objections (e.g., relevance, form of questions) are made to keep the record clear.
• If a party disagrees with a ruling, they should note the objection on the record and follow any procedures for review or appeal specified in the rules.

Yes. The presiding officer may confine presentations to the issues stated in the notice of hearing or, if no issues were specified, to matters relevant to the proposed rule as allowed by 1911.16(c).

• This keeps the hearing focused on legally relevant topics.
• Parties should prepare to show how their testimony directly relates to the notice or the proposed rule.

The presiding officer may regulate the conduct of those present at the hearing by appropriate means to ensure order and fairness, per 1911.16(d).

• This can include warnings, removing disruptive attendees, and setting rules for decorum.
• Enforcement must be reasonable and aimed at preserving a fair hearing for all participants.

No. Cross-examination is allowed only at the presiding officer's discretion; it is not automatically granted, as stated in 1911.16(e).

• If cross-examination is permitted, the officer may set reasonable limits on its scope and duration.
• Parties who want cross-examination should request it and explain why it is needed to test the evidence or credibility of a witness.

The presiding officer may acknowledge certain facts as true without formal evidence but must give parties a fair chance to contest them, as authorized by 1911.16(f).

• If the officer takes official notice, parties must be allowed, on timely request, to present contrary evidence.
• This tool is used for commonly known or easily verifiable facts (e.g., public laws or widely accepted scientific facts) to avoid unnecessary proof.

Yes. The presiding officer may, in his discretion, keep the record open for a reasonable, stated time to receive written recommendations, reasons, and additional data from hearing participants, as provided in 1911.16(g).

• Any extension should be announced with a clear deadline.
• Parties should use that time to submit focused, relevant material tied to issues raised during the oral proceeding.

The presiding officer uses his powers to run an efficient hearing while protecting parties' rights to a fair process, as described across 1911.16.

• Efficiency measures (time limits, focusing issues) are balanced against the need for parties to present relevant evidence.
• If a party believes a ruling denied fair process, they should preserve the issue on the record for possible review.

If testimony falls outside the issues in the notice, the presiding officer may exclude it, so a party should either show how the testimony is relevant or request permission to expand the issues under 1911.16(c).

• Provide a brief explanation linking the testimony to the proposed rule or notice.
• If the officer denies expansion, preserve the argument on the record for review.

Yes. The presiding officer may use appropriate means, including sanctions, to regulate conduct in the hearing room under 1911.16(d).

• Sanctions should be proportionate and aimed at maintaining order and fairness.
• Typical measures include warnings, removal from the hearing, or barring further participation if behavior continues to disrupt the process.

Yes. When the presiding officer permits cross-examination, he may limit its scope and duration to what is reasonable and relevant under 1911.16(e).

• Limits help keep the hearing focused and prevent undue delay.
• If a party believes limits are unreasonable, they should note that on the record for possible review.

If a party disputes a fact officially noticed by the presiding officer, they should promptly request the opportunity to present contrary evidence as allowed by 1911.16(f).

• Make the request timely and state what evidence or argument you will provide.
• The officer must provide a fair chance to rebut the noticed fact before relying on it in a decision.

A "reasonable" time depends on the complexity of the issues and must be clearly stated by the presiding officer, consistent with the discretion granted in 1911.16(g).

• Simple matters might justify a few days; complex rule issues might require weeks.
• The presiding officer should set a specific deadline so all participants know the cut-off.

Yes. The presiding officer may promptly dispose of procedural requests and objections to avoid unnecessary delays, as allowed by 1911.16(a) and 1911.16(b).

• Quick procedural rulings help keep the hearing on schedule while protecting parties' rights.
• Parties should state procedural requests clearly and be ready to proceed if the officer rules against them.

Yes. The presiding officer may confine presentations to the issues and choose how best to receive them, which can include requiring written summaries, under 1911.16(c).

• Requiring written material can make the record clearer and save time.
• If you are asked to submit a summary, focus on the key points and relevant evidence.

To avoid regulation or removal, behave respectfully, follow hearing rules, and avoid interruptions or abusive language, per the conduct authority in 1911.16(d).

• Listen when others speak, address the presiding officer, and raise objections in the prescribed manner.
• If you disagree with a ruling, preserve the record rather than creating a scene.

Yes. The presiding officer should take official notice only of facts that are not reasonably in dispute or are commonly known, and must allow parties to contest them as required by 1911.16(f).

• Examples include public laws, widely accepted scientific facts, or matters of general knowledge.
• Avoid relying on officially noticed facts without giving parties a chance to rebut them.

Anyone who participated in the oral proceeding may submit written recommendations, reasons, data, views, and arguments during the stated time the presiding officer keeps the record open, as described in 1911.16(g).

• Non-participants generally do not get this opportunity unless the presiding officer allows broader submissions.
• Submissions should be directly related to issues discussed at the hearing.

Yes. The presiding officer can set procedures for presenting evidence and require parties to follow reasonable rules or routines to ensure a fair and orderly hearing, consistent with the general powers in 1911.16.

• Such rules may include order of witnesses, exhibit numbering, and time limits.
• Parties should ask for clarifications early to avoid procedural surprises.