Definitions for State plan changes

OSHA means the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health or any authorized representative who carries out the functions in this part. For State plan change matters, rely on the definition in 1953.2(a).

• This definition tells you that communications and decisions about plan changes can come from OSHA headquarters or from an OSHA official delegated authority.
• When a State receives directions or requests about plan changes, verify the sender is acting under the authority described in 1953.2(a).

Reference: 1953.2(a).

Under 1953.2(b), "State" means the authorized representative of the agency designated to administer a State plan under the Federal rules. See the definition at 1953.2(b) and the designation requirements in 1902.3(b).

• This means the legal entity acting on behalf of the State is the party responsible for submitting and implementing plan changes.
• Verify the agency representative is designated according to 1902.3(b) when dealing with approvals or correspondence.

References: 1953.2(b), 1902.3(b).

A "plan change" is any modification a State makes to its approved safety and health State plan that affects the plan's effectiveness. See the definition in 1953.2(c).

• Consider a plan change any time a proposed or actual modification could make the program more or less effective at protecting workers.
• If the change has no impact on effectiveness (purely editorial or administrative without substantive effect), it likely is not a "plan change," but document your reasoning.

Reference: 1953.2(c).

A plan supplement must include all documents needed to describe and evaluate the effectiveness of the State change, including the full text of the State provision, identification of differences, and an explanation of how each provision is at least as effective as the Federal counterpart. See 1953.2(d).

• Include a copy of the complete State legislation, regulation, policy, or procedure.
• Provide a clear point-by-point identification of each difference compared to the Federal version.
• Explain how each differing provision achieves an outcome that is at least as protective as the Federal requirement.
• Include any supporting data or analysis used to evaluate effectiveness.

Reference: 1953.2(d).

An "identical plan change" updates program provisions to match the Federal program except for unavoidable state-specific adjustments like titles or numbering; anything else is a "different plan change." See 1953.2(e).

• Identical changes: same substantive text and effect as Federal provisions, with only tweaks for State organizational structure, titles, or internal numbering.
• Different changes: any change that alters substance, scope, enforcement, duties, or protections compared to the Federal provision.
• When in doubt, treat the change as "different" and prepare a plan supplement explaining equivalence or superiority in protection.

Reference: 1953.2(e).

A "developmental change" documents completion of a program component that was not fully developed when the plan was first approved. See 1953.2(g).

• Use this category when the original plan approval included components planned but not finished (for example, an enforcement program or training curriculum) and the State now completes them.
• The submission should show how the completed component operates and demonstrate it meets the original approval conditions.

Reference: 1953.2(g).

A "Federal program change" is triggered when OSHA changes the Federal program in a way that could make a State program less effective unless the State modifies its plan similarly. See 1953.2(h).

• When OSHA alters a Federal standard, policy, or procedure, review your State plan to determine if the Federal change affects your program's relative effectiveness.
• If the change could reduce effectiveness, the State should submit corresponding plan modifications (often as a plan change) to maintain parity.

Reference: 1953.2(h), and consult general State plan requirements at 1902.

An "evaluation change" is required when program evaluations show a substantive part of the State plan adversely affects implementation and needs revision. See 1953.2(i).

• Include in the submission the evaluation findings that identify the adverse impact, the proposed revisions, and evidence that the revisions will correct the problem.
• Provide metrics or data showing how the change will improve program implementation and worker protection.

Reference: 1953.2(i).

A "State-initiated change" is any revision a State voluntarily makes to its plan that is not required by Federal action. See 1953.2(j).

• Choose this route when the State wants to improve, modernize, or tailor its program beyond Federal requirements for local needs.
• Even though voluntary, the State must still follow submission and documentation requirements so OSHA can review whether the change maintains at least equivalent protection.

Reference: 1953.2(j).

When proposing a "different plan change," a State must provide the full text of the new State provision, identify each difference from the Federal provision, and explain how each difference is at least as effective as the Federal counterpart. See 1953.2(d) and the definition of different changes in 1953.2(e).

• Use a side-by-side comparison or a redline to clearly show every substantive divergence.
• For each divergence, provide rationale, supporting data, or legal analysis that demonstrates equal or greater worker protection.
• Include implementation details that show how you will enforce and evaluate the new provision.

References: 1953.2(d), 1953.2(e).

The designation process in 1902.3 determines which State agency or official is authorized to administer the State plan and therefore submit plan changes; see also the "State" definition in 1953.2(b).

• Only the agency or representative formally designated under 1902.3 may act as the State party to submit plan changes.
• Before submitting a change, confirm the designation is current and that the person signing has authority under the State's designation.

References: 1902.3, 1953.2(b).

The explanation is required to demonstrate that the State’s alternative protects workers to the same degree (or better) as the Federal requirement. See 1953.2(d).

• OSHA must confirm equivalence in outcomes, not just similar wording; your analysis should connect the difference to practical protective results.
• Include data, enforcement plans, performance measures, or legal mechanisms showing equal or greater effectiveness.

Reference: 1953.2(d).

Yes. A single submission can document completion of a previously undeveloped component (a "developmental change") and also revise program aspects found deficient by evaluation (an "evaluation change") if both situations apply. See 1953.2(g) and 1953.2(i).

• If both apply, clearly state which parts of the submission address development completion and which address corrective revisions identified by evaluation.
• Provide appropriate evidence for each: documentation of completed elements for developmental items, and evaluation findings plus corrective actions for evaluation items.

References: 1953.2(g), 1953.2(i).

After a Federal program change that could affect State effectiveness, the State should review the Federal change, assess impacts on its plan, and submit any necessary modifications to maintain equivalent effectiveness. See 1953.2(h).

• Conduct a comparison between the new Federal provision and your State provision.
• If differences could reduce worker protection, prepare a plan supplement or other appropriate submission explaining proposed State modifications and how they preserve or improve effectiveness.
• Coordinate with OSHA as needed to confirm acceptability.

Reference: 1953.2(h).

Not always; small editorial changes that preserve substantive meaning and are only to reflect State organizational titles or numbering are classified as "identical plan changes," but editorial changes that alter meaning or effect are "different plan changes." See 1953.2(e) and the plan supplement requirements in 1953.2(d).

• If the change is purely a cosmetic or administrative adaptation that does not change duties, rights, or protections, it is "identical."
• If the wording change could affect how the provision is applied or enforced, treat it as a "different" change and provide the documentation required by 1953.2(d).

References: 1953.2(e), 1953.2(d).

A State should keep full copies of adopted legislation/regulations, comparison analyses to Federal text, explanations of how provisions are at least as effective, and evaluation evidence showing performance or deficiencies. See 1953.2(d) and related definitions in 1953.2.

• Retain the complete text of the State provision and the Federal counterpart.
• Keep side-by-side comparisons, legal analyses, enforcement plans, and data used to show effectiveness.
• Maintain records of internal evaluations and corrective actions in case an evaluation change is later required.

Reference: 1953.2(d).