Response to petitions

Any interested person may submit information in writing to the Secretary. The rule in 1990.122 begins by saying "any interested person" can provide written information about inclusion or omission from the Candidate List.

• "Interested person" is broad: it can include workers, employers, scientists, trade groups, public-interest organizations, or members of the public.
• Submit the information in writing and include contact details so the Secretary can respond, as required by 1990.122.

OSHA will briefly review the submitted information and any other available data, then send the results and a short statement of reasons to the petitioner and make that response public upon request. That is the process set out in 1990.122.

• The review is meant to be a preliminary screening, not necessarily a full rulemaking.
• The Secretary must transmit the review results and reasons to the person who submitted the information and must make the response available to the public on request.

The rule requires a preliminary or limited review rather than a full, formal rulemaking record; however, it does not set a specific deadline or detailed review steps. 1990.122 says the Secretary shall "briefly review" the information and any other available data.

• Because the phrase is not time-specific, expect a short screening to determine whether the submission raises issues that warrant further action.
• For what counts as "other available data," see the definition in 1990.121(a).

The Secretary will send the petitioner the results of the review together with a short statement of the Secretary's reasons. That requirement is explicitly stated in 1990.122.

• The response should say whether the information affected the Candidate List review and explain the Secretary's reasoning.
• The response is not guaranteed to include a full technical analysis, since the rule calls for a brief review.

Yes — the Secretary's review and the short statement of reasons will be made public upon request. 1990.122 requires that the results be transmitted to the petitioner and made public on request.

• To obtain the response, request it from OSHA under the procedures available at the agency (the rule itself notes public availability upon request).
• This helps maintain transparency about how submissions are considered.

No — the provision requires a brief review and a written response but does not by itself add or remove substances from the Candidate List. 1990.122 describes the review and notification process rather than an automatic change in listing.

• Changes to the Candidate List would require the Secretary to follow the substantive criteria and any applicable procedures beyond this preliminary review.
• For background on the part and criteria used to identify substances, see part 1990.

The phrase "any other available data" refers to information the Secretary may reasonably consider, and the rule points to the definition in 1990.121(a). 1990.122 requires review of submitted information together with that other available data.

• Examples of useful data include peer-reviewed studies, exposure measurements, epidemiological findings, and authoritative summaries.
• Refer to 1990.121(a) for how the part frames the kinds of data considered when evaluating substances.

No — 1990.122 requires only a brief review and a written response; it does not itself create a requirement for a public hearing or formal notice-and-comment period. The text of 1990.122 describes a limited review and notification process.

• Separate procedures (rulemaking, notices, or statutory requirements) would be needed to trigger formal hearings or comment periods.
• Petitioners who want formal rulemaking should provide thorough evidence and indicate why broader action is needed; see part 1990 for context on the program.

Provide a clear, written submission that includes the key evidence, data sources, and your specific request so the Secretary can promptly review and respond. That approach aligns with the requirement in 1990.122 to "briefly review" written information and any "other available data."

• Include concise summaries of key studies, exposure measurements, health effects, dates, and study references.
• Point to or attach supporting documents and reliable data sources described in 1990.121(a).
• Provide your contact information and state clearly whether you request public disclosure of the Secretary's response.

The Effective Date Note records that 1990.122 was stayed in 1983 for administrative reasons, but the operative text of the rule still describes the Secretary's duty to review petitions and respond; petitioners should rely on the current codified regulation in 1990.122.

• The note documents historical administrative action (a stay) intended to allow reconsideration of list publication and criteria.
• For present-day practice, follow the procedures in 1990.122 and the broader part at part 1990.

OSHA must briefly review the information submitted and any other available data, but the statute does not say the Secretary may refuse to review submissions that lack scientific data; instead, the quality and completeness of the evidence will affect the outcome. 1990.122 requires a brief review of what is submitted.

• Submissions with limited evidence may lead to a limited or negative response explaining the reasons.
• Providing credible, relevant data as described in 1990.121(a) strengthens the petitioner's case.

You will receive the results of the Secretary's brief review and a short statement of reasons, but any actual change to the Candidate List would follow whatever additional procedures the Secretary uses beyond this review. 1990.122 requires notification of the review results to the petitioner.

• If the Secretary decides to pursue regulatory steps that would alter the Candidate List, you should be notified as part of the agency's follow-on actions.
• For context on the Candidate List and how substances are identified, see part 1990.