1919 Subpart B
Any person who is adversely affected by the Assistant Secretary’s or an authorized representative’s action may file either a request for reconsideration or a request for review within the 15‑day period provided. This includes anyone "aggrieved by the action" in denying, granting, suspending, or revoking an accreditation. See 1919.9(a).
You can file either a written request for reconsideration by the same official who made the initial decision or a written request for review by an Assistant Secretary or authorized representative who did not take part in the original action, and you must file either request within 15 days after the action. See 1919.9(a).
You must show there is additional evidence that could materially affect the decision and explain why there were reasonable grounds for not presenting that evidence in the original proceedings. See 1919.9(b).
If the Assistant Secretary or authorized representative denies your request for reconsideration, you have 15 days from that denial to file a written request for review with the Assistant Secretary or his authorized representative. See 1919.9(c).
You must file a written request for review with the Assistant Secretary within 15 days after the Assistant Secretary’s or authorized representative’s reconsidered determination. See 1919.9(d).
Your request for review must set forth reasonable grounds for why the Assistant Secretary should review the decision; if reasonable grounds are described, the request shall be granted. See 1919.9(e).
If your request for reconsideration or review is granted, all interested persons will be given an opportunity to present their views before a final decision is made. See 1919.9(f).
No. Anyone seeking reconsideration or review under this section is prohibited from performing any cargo gear certification functions until the final decision is issued. See 1919.9(g).
A request for review must be decided by the Assistant Secretary or an authorized representative of the Assistant Secretary who did not take part in the action being reviewed—so the reviewer must be someone who was not involved in the original decision. See 1919.9(a).
Additional evidence that may materially affect the decision includes new test or inspection reports, corrected factual records (e.g., identity or dates), new affidavits or witness statements, or previously unavailable documentation showing compliance. You must also explain why the evidence was not presented earlier. See 1919.9(b).
You should clearly identify the Assistant Secretary’s action you are challenging, state whether you request reconsideration or review, explain the specific grounds (for reconsideration, identify the additional evidence and why it wasn’t available earlier; for review, set forth reasonable grounds), and include copies of any supporting documents. The standards require the showing described in 1919.9(b) and 1919.9(e).
Yes. Under 1919.9(a) you may file either a request for reconsideration by the original decisionmaker or a request for review by a different authorized representative within 15 days after the action; you do not have to seek reconsideration first. However, if you do seek reconsideration and it is denied, 1919.9(c) provides a 15‑day window to file for review after that denial.
Yes. The regulation uses the phrase "any person aggrieved by the action," so third parties who can show they are adversely affected by the accreditation decision may file for reconsideration or review within the applicable 15‑day periods. See 1919.9(a).
No specific decision deadline for the Assistant Secretary is set in this section; the regulation only prescribes the 15‑day filing windows for requests. The timing for resolving a granted reconsideration or review is not specified in 1919.9 and therefore depends on the Agency’s procedures once the request is granted. See 1919.9(a).
Yes. The regulation allows a written request for reconsideration to be filed with the Assistant Secretary or the authorized representative who made the original decision, per 1919.9(a).
It means that when a request for reconsideration or review is granted, the Agency must provide interested persons a chance to submit arguments and evidence—this can be in writing and may include oral presentations if the Agency so determines. The rule does not prescribe a single format, but requires that all interested parties be given that opportunity. See 1919.9(f).
The 1977 interpretation explains that accreditation and competency recognition involve employer assignments and Department of Labor accreditation procedures—so documentation that supports competency or accreditation decisions (for example, testing, certification records, or procedural compliance) can be relevant evidence to include in a reconsideration or review request under 1919.9. See the letter on competent person accreditation procedures at https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1977-04-26 for further context.
Actions that can be challenged include denial, grant, suspension, or revocation of an accreditation under the part—those are the agency actions listed in 1919.9(a).
Act quickly: note the date you received the decision, prepare a written request identifying whether you seek reconsideration or review, gather any additional evidence or documentation (and explain why it wasn’t presented earlier if seeking reconsideration), and file the written request within 15 days. Base the contents on the standards in 1919.9(b) and 1919.9(e).
Yes. When a request for reconsideration or review is granted, all interested persons are afforded an opportunity to present their views, which can include evidence or reports from external experts. Ensure those materials are submitted in the format and time frame the Agency sets. See 1919.9(f).