Accreditation suspension or revocation

The Assistant Secretary may suspend or revoke an accreditation. This authority is stated directly in 1919.8.

• See the full rule at Part 1919 — Gear Certification, 1919.8 for the exact regulatory language.

Yes — except for willful violations or when the public interest requires immediate action, the person must be told in writing of the facts or conduct that may lead to suspension or revocation. 1919.8 requires that such facts be called to the person's attention in writing and that the person be given an opportunity to demonstrate or achieve compliance.

• The rule does not set a specific number of days for the notice; the written notice and the opportunity to comply are the required procedural protections.

It means the person must be given a chance to correct the problems or show they meet the accreditation requirements before suspension or revocation, except in cases of willfulness or immediate public‑interest needs. 1919.8 requires written notice and an opportunity to achieve or demonstrate compliance.

• Practical steps to demonstrate compliance often include documenting corrective actions, providing training or retraining records, and showing test reports or inspection logs.
• For related guidance on certifying employee training or demonstrating competence, see OSHA's interpretation on qualified employee training requirements at https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1996-03-26-3.

Yes — immediate suspension or revocation can occur without the usual written notice and opportunity to comply if the action is based on willfulness or when the public interest requires otherwise. 1919.8 makes this exception explicit.

• Examples of "public interest" situations might include imminent danger to workers or the public from defective certifications; the standard does not list examples, so cases are decided on their facts.

The regulation uses the phrase "for cause" but does not list an exhaustive set of causes; generally, cause can include conduct or facts showing the person no longer meets accreditation requirements (for example, fraud, repeated incompetence, failure to follow required procedures, or falsified records). 1919.8 sets the general standard that cause must exist to take action.

• Because the rule is brief, employers and accredited persons should expect OSHA to consider the particular facts of each situation before acting.
• For context on accreditation and who may be accredited under Part 1919, see Part 1919.

The Assistant Secretary (or the agency acting under that authority) makes the determination about willfulness or whether the public interest requires immediate action. That decision is part of the authority to suspend or revoke under 1919.8.

• Those determinations are fact‑driven; the standard itself does not list precise criteria, so OSHA will weigh the evidence in each case.

Yes — 1919.8 requires that the facts or conduct that may warrant suspension or revocation be called to the person's attention in writing. The notice should identify what issues or conduct are at issue so the person can respond or correct them.

• If you receive such a written notice, document your corrective actions and keep records showing what you changed or fixed.

Not necessarily — once accreditation is actually suspended or revoked, the person should not perform the accredited duties; however, before suspension (after receiving written notice) the regulation simply requires an opportunity to demonstrate compliance. 1919.8 does not authorize continued use of accreditation after formal suspension or revocation.

• If you receive notice, confirm in writing with the issuing agency what activities you may or may not continue to perform while you correct the cited issues.

An accredited person can demonstrate compliance by correcting the identified deficiencies, producing supporting records (inspection logs, test reports, training certificates), and showing competency through retraining or supervised evaluations. 1919.8 requires that the person be afforded an opportunity to achieve or demonstrate appropriate compliance.

• For demonstrating training and proficiency, OSHA has said employers may certify on‑the‑job training and demonstrations of proficiency where appropriate (see https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1996-03-26-3).
• Keep clear, dated records of corrective actions and who performed them.

No — 1919.8 requires written notice and an opportunity to achieve or demonstrate compliance except for willfulness or public‑interest cases, but it does not expressly require a formal hearing. The procedural protection required is written notice and a chance to correct or demonstrate compliance.

• Depending on the situation, other procedures (e.g., administrative hearings) may be available under broader agency rules, but those are not specified in 1919.8 itself.

Respond promptly: investigate the allegations, correct any deficiencies, document your corrective actions, and communicate your demonstration of compliance to the issuing agency. 1919.8 requires that the facts be called to your attention in writing and that you be given an opportunity to achieve or demonstrate compliance.

• Keep copies of all correspondence and records of corrective actions.
• Use documented training, inspection, and testing records to show you meet accreditation requirements; OSHA has said on‑the‑job demonstration of proficiency can be acceptable evidence in related contexts (see https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1996-03-26-3).

Yes — accreditation can be restored if the person achieves or demonstrates the appropriate compliance that led to the suspension. 1919.8 requires giving the person an opportunity to achieve or demonstrate compliance before suspension or revocation except in specified exceptions.

• Documented corrective actions, retraining, and independent verification (where applicable) will help support reinstatement.

Employers assign or approve a "competent person" for workplace tasks; some OSHA standards and maritime rules reference Part 1919 accreditation for certification of equipment and persons. The 1977 interpretation explains that the employer assigns competent persons and that maritime standards may require certification in accordance with Part 1919. See the 1977 Letter of Interpretation at https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1977-04-26 and Part 1919.

• If a maritime or other standard requires certification by an accredited person, suspension under 1919.8 could affect the ability to meet those certification requirements.

No — employer obligations to provide a safe workplace remain in effect regardless of an individual's accreditation status. OSHA's general duty obligations are discussed in guidance such as the 1991 interpretation explaining applicability of OSHA standards and employers' duty under Section 5(a)(1); see https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1991-02-19 and Part 1919.

• If an accredited person's status changes, employers must ensure competent, accredited alternatives are in place or take other measures to maintain safety and compliance.

Yes — falsifying records or certifications would typically constitute cause for suspension or revocation because it calls into question the person's ability or honesty in meeting accreditation requirements. 1919.8 authorizes action "for cause," and falsification is a common ground for such action in accreditation contexts.

• If you are accused of falsification, you should gather documentation to rebut or correct the record and demonstrate remediation promptly.

Yes — situations posing imminent danger to workers or the public (for example, certifications that allowed unsafe gear or vessels to be used) can justify immediate action without prior notice under 1919.8. The regulation provides this exception where the public interest requires otherwise.

• These determinations are case‑specific; if immediate suspension is imposed, you should document and correct the hazard as quickly as possible and be prepared to show evidence of remediation.

Helpful records include written corrective‑action plans, dated completion reports, inspection and test results, training and retraining certificates, supervisor sign‑offs, and independent verification or re‑testing results. 1919.8 expects the person to be given an opportunity to demonstrate compliance, and these records are the typical evidence used.

• OSHA has also accepted on‑the‑job demonstrations and employer certification of proficiency as valid evidence of training or competence in related contexts (see https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1996-03-26-3).

If a maritime standard or other rule requires certification by a person accredited under Part 1919, suspension or revocation of that person's accreditation may invalidate future certifications they would perform. 1919.8 allows suspension or revocation, and the 1977 interpretation explains that some maritime standards require certification in accordance with Part 1919 (see https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1977-04-26 and Part 1919).

• Employers should have backup accredited personnel or procedures to avoid gaps in required certifications if an accredited person's status changes.

The procedural text is in 1919.8 of Part 1919, which states the Assistant Secretary may suspend or revoke accreditation and explains the written‑notice and opportunity‑to‑comply requirement (except for willfulness or public‑interest cases). See Part 1919 for related provisions under the Gear Certification part.

• If you need further explanation about how the rule is applied, the 1977 Letter of Interpretation discussing competent person accreditation procedures (https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1977-04-26) provides helpful historical context about how Part 1919 accreditation interacts with workplace certification requirements.