Procedural requirements flexibility

The Assistant Secretary has authority to prescribe additional or alternative procedural requirements in any particular proceeding upon reasonable notice to interested persons. This authority is set out in 1911.4, which allows tailoring procedures to the needs of a specific rulemaking or adjudicatory matter.

• The provision applies only to a particular proceeding and is triggered by the Assistant Secretary’s determination.
• Any change requires "reasonable notice to interested persons," so affected parties should be informed before the new procedures take effect.

Reference: 1911.4.

Under 1911.4(a), the Assistant Secretary may prescribe additional or alternative procedural requirements when doing so will expedite the conduct of the proceeding.

• "Expedite" means speeding up the process without denying required legal protections; examples include shortening comment periods, consolidating hearings, or using written submissions instead of live testimony when appropriate.
• Any expedited procedure must still be provided with "reasonable notice to interested persons" as required by 1911.4.

Reference: 1911.4(a).

Under 1911.4(b), the Assistant Secretary may prescribe extra or alternative procedures when it is found necessary or appropriate to provide greater procedural protection to interested persons.

• "Greater procedural protection" can include extended comment periods, additional opportunity to present evidence, or special notice measures to ensure meaningful participation.
• The Assistant Secretary must find such protections are necessary or appropriate for the specific proceeding before imposing them, and must give "reasonable notice to interested persons" as required by 1911.4.

Reference: 1911.4(b).

Under 1911.4(c), "any other good cause" allows the Assistant Secretary to tailor procedures for reasons consistent with applicable laws that are not specifically covered by (a) or (b).

• Examples of good cause could include unforeseen logistical issues, emergency conditions, or the need to coordinate with another federal process, provided the change complies with applicable statutes and is justified in the record.
• Even when asserting "good cause," the Assistant Secretary must give "reasonable notice to interested persons" under 1911.4.

Reference: 1911.4(c).

"Reasonable notice to interested persons" means affected parties must be informed in advance of any additional or alternative procedures so they have a fair chance to participate. This notice requirement is specified in 1911.4.

• Practical steps for a safety manager: publish the procedural change in the Federal Register or on the agency's rulemaking docket, email or mail direct notices to known stakeholders, and provide clear deadlines and instructions.
• What counts as "reasonable" depends on the complexity of the change and the time stakeholders need to respond; short, technical clarifications may require less time than major procedural shifts.

Reference: 1911.4.

No. Additional or alternative procedural requirements under 1911.4 are authorized only "in any particular proceeding," meaning they are case-specific rather than blanket, permanent changes.

• The text limits the Assistant Secretary’s authority to individual proceedings, so a permanent change to general procedures would require separate rulemaking or other authority.
• If a broader permanent change is desired, it must follow the usual notice-and-comment or statute-based processes required by applicable law.

Reference: 1911.4.

No. Any additional or alternative procedures prescribed under 1911.4 must be consistent with applicable laws and cannot lawfully strip parties of rights granted by statute or higher authorities.

• The provision explicitly conditions alternative procedures on being "consistent with the applicable laws," so procedures cannot override statutes, constitutional protections, or other controlling legal requirements.
• If a proposed procedural change appears to conflict with another law, it should be reviewed and likely avoided unless appropriate legal authority exists to modify the conflicting requirement.

Reference: 1911.4.

"Interested persons" generally includes any individuals, organizations, employers, employees, labor representatives, or other stakeholders who have a stake in the particular proceeding and must receive notice. The requirement to notify them appears in 1911.4.

• In practice, this includes parties on the rulemaking or adjudicatory docket, petitioners, commenters, trade associations, unions, and anyone who has previously participated or registered interest.
• Managers should maintain stakeholder lists and check the proceeding docket to identify persons who should receive direct notice.

Reference: 1911.4.

Yes. A party may request additional procedural protections, but the Assistant Secretary must find them necessary or appropriate before imposing them under 1911.4(b).

• To make an effective request, submit a written explanation to the docket describing the specific protections needed and why they are necessary for fair participation.
• The Assistant Secretary will evaluate the request against the proceeding's needs and applicable laws and will provide "reasonable notice to interested persons" if protections are adopted.

Reference: 1911.4(b).

Practical examples of expedited procedures under 1911.4(a) include shortening comment deadlines, using written instead of live testimony, consolidating related dockets, and scheduling rolling deadlines to speed up decision-making.

• Shortened public comment periods: appropriate for straightforward or technical updates where stakeholders can respond quickly.
• Written statements in lieu of hearings: use when factual issues are narrow and can be resolved on paper.
• Consolidated hearings or dockets: combine related matters to avoid duplication and speed resolution.
• Use of electronic submissions and teleconferencing: to accelerate participation and reduce scheduling delays.

All such measures still require "reasonable notice to interested persons" under 1911.4.

Reference: 1911.4(a).

Under 1911.4(b), procedural protections might include extended comment periods, additional rounds of reply comments, extra notice for affected communities, or opportunities to present live evidence to ensure meaningful participation.

• Extended deadlines allow stakeholders more time to gather data or consult affected parties.
• Additional rounds of comments or rebuttals help clarify technical disputes.
• Special outreach and translation services can ensure vulnerable or non-English-speaking stakeholders can participate.
• Formal opportunities for oral testimony or evidentiary hearings provide a fuller record when needed.

These protections must be found necessary or appropriate by the Assistant Secretary and are subject to "reasonable notice to interested persons" under 1911.4.

Reference: 1911.4(b).

An agency should document specific facts and legal reasons showing why the particular proceeding needs different procedures and how those procedures are consistent with applicable law when invoking 1911.4(c).

• The record should explain the factual circumstances (e.g., emergency conditions, coordination needs) that create the good cause.
• It should show why ordinary procedures are insufficient and how the alternative will improve the proceeding while complying with governing statutes.
• Provide "reasonable notice to interested persons" as required by 1911.4.

Reference: 1911.4(c).

Yes, alternative procedures can be applied in emergency situations if doing so is justified under 1911.4(a) to expedite the proceeding and are consistent with applicable laws. The Assistant Secretary must still provide "reasonable notice to interested persons" when feasible under 1911.4.

• In true emergencies, the agency may shorten timelines or use streamlined processes to act quickly, but should document the emergency reason in the record.
• Even in emergencies, the action must comply with statutory limits and any required post-action justification or opportunity for public comment where the law requires it.

Reference: 1911.4(a) and 1911.4.

Stakeholders should promptly submit written objections to the docket explaining the legal inconsistency and provide supporting authorities, since 1911.4 requires procedures be consistent with applicable laws.

• File clear, focused comments describing the specific statutory or regulatory conflict and propose alternatives that preserve legal protections.
• If appropriate, seek prompt clarification from the agency or request a stay of the changed procedure until the legal issue is resolved.
• Maintain records of communications and notices to support any later challenge.

Reference: 1911.4.

1911.4 requires "reasonable notice to interested persons" but does not specify a fixed time period; what is reasonable depends on the nature and complexity of the change and the time stakeholders need to participate. See 1911.4.

• For simple administrative adjustments, a shorter notice (days to a couple of weeks) may be reasonable; for substantive procedural shifts, 30 days or more is often appropriate.
• Agencies should explain in the notice why the chosen timeframe is reasonable and allow extra time where affected parties need to gather technical data or consult representatives.

Reference: 1911.4.

The text of 1911.4 does not prescribe a formal written-finding format, but best practice is to document the rationale and legal basis for any additional or alternative procedures and provide notice to interested persons.

• Include a concise explanation of the need (expedite, greater protection, or good cause), how the change complies with applicable law, and the scope/timeframe of the change.
• A documented rationale helps the agency withstand legal review and informs stakeholders why the change was made.

Reference: 1911.4.