CODE OF
FEDERAL REGULATIONS
TITLE 1--GENERAL
PROVISIONS
CHAPTER
III--ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED
STATES
PART
305--RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE
CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES
1 C.F.R. s 305.78-4
s 305.78-4 Federal agency
interaction with private standard-setting
organizations in health and safety regulation
(recommendation No. 78-4).
(a) Many federal agencies
have authority to issue mandatory health or safety
regulations relating to products, materials,
processes, practices or services that may be the
subjects of voluntary standards prepared by
non-governmental organizations. Non-governmental
standards, though not legally enforceable, have in
fact gained wide acceptance and a high degree of
observance. Many voluntary standards are developed,
reviewed, and periodically revised by technical
committees of such non-governmental organizations
that follow open and regular procedures, including
a process for considering and attempting to resolve
negative comments. Membership on technical
committees may be broadly based and "balanced" in
an effort to assure representation of varying
points of view and avoidance of domination by a
single interest. Some standards- developing
organizations provide a review mechanism to assure
compliance with prescribed procedures and an
appropriately balanced membership. Standards
developed by private organizations that generally
observe such procedures, or under the Department of
Commerce voluntary standards program, are
frequently referred to as "voluntary consensus
standards," and are the subject of this
recommendation. This recommendation is directed
toward the manner in which agencies should interact
with non-governmental organizations that develop
voluntary consensus standards and the manner in
which agencies should utilize such standards for
health and safety regulation.
(b) Not all voluntary
standards are developed through the consensus
process just outlined. Other kinds of voluntary
standards--for example, those developed by trade
associations or other organizations through
nonconsensus procedures--may be valuable for
regulatory use by federal agencies, but are not
treated by this recommendation. Also, the
recommendation does not address the development of
international standards.
(c) Members of technical
committees that develop voluntary consensus
standards often have a wealth of technical
knowledge and expertise that agency staffs do not
possess. Agency participation in or cooperation
with those technical committees may result in the
development of standards that adequately address
considerations of health or safety more efficiently
and effectively than if the agency seeks
independently to formulate standards. The fact that
a standard has been developed by an organization
that uses consensus processes, however, does not of
itself assure that it is appropriate for regulatory
use. For example, some standards were developed at
a time when less open procedures were followed, or
when the state of relevant knowledge was less
advanced, than at present. Some standards were
developed without relevant accident and injury
information. Some organizations and committees
preparing voluntary consensus standards may not
always have an adequate representation of varying
interests; in particular, there are problems in
obtaining effective representation of and
participation by certain significant interests,
especially consumers, employees, small business,
and certain noneconomic interests that agencies may
be charged with protecting. [FN1] Moreover,
the process of seeking consensus followed by some
standards-developing organizations often may create
standards that are acceptable for business
interests but may not be suitable for regulatory
use.
[FN1] The
Conference is aware that the concept of
representing identified "interests" in private
standards-developing organizations is a complex
one, involving considerations such as what may be
identifiable as an interest, its relevancy, its
internal homogeneity, its capacity to be
represented by knowledgeable spokesmen, and its
political strength.
(d) Consequently, the
appropriateness of particular voluntary consensus
standards for use by an agency in the development
of mandatory health or safety regulations should be
determined on a case-by-case basis. Of course,
before adopting any mandatory standard, the agency
should identify a need for doing so.
(e) Questions have been
raised as to the possible applicability of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act to technical
committees and standards-developing organizations.
The FACA should not apply to the technical
committees and standards-developing organizations
contemplated by this recommendation, which
ordinarily are privately organized and operated
primarily for purposes independent of advising the
federal government. It would be injurious to the
operation of such organizations, and to their
willingness to cooperate with federal agencies, to
apply to them certain provisions of the FACA which
assume federal sponsorship and control of
committees subject to the Act. Examples include the
vesting of authority in federal employees to
approve and terminate meetings and to approve the
agenda of meetings, and of authority in the General
Services Administration to conduct annual reviews
which can result in recommendations to restructure
or even abolish committees. The recommendation
calls upon Congress to amend the FACA to make
explicit that it does not govern the technical
committees and standards-developing organizations
here addressed. Of course, several principles
reflected in the FACA--such as balanced membership
and open decisionmaking--represent important
criteria for agencies to take into account when
considering the use of standards developed by such
organizations (see paragraph 6(c)).
(f) The recommendation
that follows is limited to agency interaction with
standards-developing organizations and use of
voluntary consensus standards in the context of
regulation of health or safety. [FN2] The
recommendation may nevertheless be significant in
relation to setting standards for other purposes:
For example, in conservation of energy and
resources, environmental issues, and formulation of
test methods and definitions. Agencies that use
voluntary consensus standards in contexts other
than health or safety regulation are urged to
consider the recommended measures set forth below
and to follow them to the extent appropriate.
However, the recommendation is not intended to have
application to the use of voluntary standards in
government procurement, as to which less elaborate
procedures may be appropriate in many cases.
[FN2] The concept
of "regulation of health or safety" for purposes of
this recommendation is not intended to encompass
all agency functions aimed at health and safety
concerns. For example, the recommendation does not
deal with requirements relating directly to the
qualifications or conduct of individuals engaged in
the performance of professional services in areas
of health or safety, or regulations that impose
preconditions on eligibility for federal funding
programs.
Recommendation
Coordination and
Cooperation with Standards-Developing
Organizations
1. An agency having
authority to issue mandatory health or safety
regulations should draw on the knowledge and
information available in active technical
committees that develop relevant voluntary
consensus standards, and should interact in
accordance with this recommendation with technical
committees that follow procedures that are
substantially in accord with the criteria of
paragraph 6(c).
(a) To the extent that
staff resources permit, the agency should arrange
for an appropriately qualified employee to serve on
each technical committee in which the agency has a
significant interest. An employee so serving should
serve as a representative of the agency rather than
in an individual capacity or as a representative of
some other designated "interest." [FN3]
Where separate representatives of several agencies
may result in an imbalance on the committee, the
agencies should seek to agree on a common
representative or on the attendance of some agency
personnel as observers. The representative's
function should be to act as liaison to the
committee, to monitor and participate in its
standards-writing activities, and to provide
information and communicate the views of the agency
relative to the standards being developed and the
procedures followed by the technical committee. The
representative should have no authority to vote or
to bind the agency to any specific proposal. An
agency employee who has participated in a technical
committee's development of a standard may
thereafter participate in the agency's
decisionmaking process by providing information and
advice, but should not otherwise participate in
making the agency's decision on whether to adopt or
to revise that standard unless the agency has no
other personnel with the requisite knowledge and
expertise.
[FN3] This
paragraph should not be construed as indicating
disapproval of the common present practice of
permitting agency employees serving with the
consent of their agencies on technical committees
in their individual capacities or as
representatives of some other designated "interest"
rather than as agency representatives.
(b) When considering
whether to modify an existing mandatory health or
safety standard or to develop a new mandatory
standard, the agency should normally ask an
appropriate technical committee, if an active one
exists, to consider the matter and the data bearing
on the possible need for a modification or a new
standard. This should be done before the agency
independently publishes a modification or new
standard as a proposed regulation. The agency
should announce the referral in an advance notice
of proposed rulemaking which describes the
interaction between the agency and the technical
committee and explains how the views of the
interested public may be communicated to the
committee. If the technical committee promptly
takes steps to develop an appropriate new voluntary
consensus standard or to modify a relevant
voluntary consensus standard in a manner acceptable
to the agency, or presents an appropriate existing
standard, the agency may incorporate the standard
into its regulations, or may determine that
governmental action is not needed (see paragraph
7). If, however, the committee does not respond
promptly or adequately and the agency determines
that regulatory action is needed, the agency should
proceed independently to develop a mandatory
standard. In determining whether to request the
assistance of a technical committee or to defer
development of a regulation pending action by a
technical committee, the agency should take into
account the need for prompt development of the
standard and whether committee consideration may be
obtained promptly.
(c) The relationship
between the agency and the technical committee
should be a cooperative one, and the agency should
not seek to dominate the committee.
(d) In their published
rulemaking notices relating to voluntary consensus
standards, agencies should describe their
interactions with the technical committees
involved.
(e) Congress should amend
the Federal Advisory Committee Act to state
explicitly that the technical committees and
standards-developing organizations of the sort
addressed by this recommendation, which are
privately organized and operated primarily for
purposes independent of advising federal agencies,
are not within the definition of "advisory
committee" for purposes of that Act.
2. In appropriate cases
the agency should provide its available technical
information, data on health or safety concerns, and
other relevant material and information to the
technical committee. The agency may also provide
financial and other support for the committee when
such action is legally permissible and is in
furtherance of the agency's mission and
responsibility.
3. If an active relevant
technical committee exists, an agency undertaking
to develop standards "in-house" should coordinate
its efforts with the committee as outlined in
paragraphs 1 and 2, unless the agency has strong
reasons to believe the committee can make no useful
or timely contribution to the development of an
adequate standard.
4. Each agency should, as
a matter of general policy, regularly review
standards or revisions proposed by technical
committees active in the areas of regulatory
concern of the agency, and should advise such
committees on a regular and informal basis whether
the proposed standards and revisions appear to be
consonant with the agency's regulatory
responsibilities.
5. Agencies should adopt
and publish regulations or policy statements
implementing the procedures outlined in paragraphs
1 through 4 and describing the manner in which
agency representatives are to be designated and the
authority they are to possess.
Use of Existing
Voluntary Consensus Standards in Regulation
6. Agencies with authority
to issue health or safety regulations should
consider the use of existing relevant voluntary
consensus standards in developing mandatory
standards. Voluntary consensus standards should be
considered with due caution and on a case-by-case
basis. Ordinarily, standards which embody
judgmental factors should receive greater scrutiny
when being considered by agencies for adoption into
regulations than standards which specify
nomenclature, basic reference units, or methods of
measurement or testing, and which are primarily
empirical in their formulation. In evaluating a
voluntary consensus standard each agency should
consider the following factors:
(a) The apparent
suitability of the voluntary consensus standard for
use as a mandatory standard, including:
(i) The problems addressed
by the standard and changes in the state of
knowledge since the standard was prepared or last
revised;
(ii) The extent to which
the standard has been complied with, and the
reasons for any noncompliance;
(iii) The extent of
injury, accident, or illness known to have resulted
from products, materials, processes, practices or
services that have conformed with the standard;
(iv) The clarity and
detail of the standard's language;
[FN4]
[FN4] The wording
of a standard may contain too much detail as well
as too little.
(v) The extent to which
the standard establishes performance rather than
design criteria, where feasible;
(vi) The extent to which a
newly developed standard, under which little
experience exists, appears adequately to address
the hazards considered by the developers of the
standard or known to the agency; and
(vii) The enforceability
of the standard.
(b) The nature of the
agency's statutory mandate to develop health or
safety regulations and the consistency of the
provisions of the voluntary consensus standard with
that mandate.
(c) The adequacy of the
procedures followed by the organization preparing
the standard to assure that:
(i) The membership of the
technical committee represents a broadly based and
balanced array of relevant interests, including,
where appropriate, representatives of consumers,
labor, small business, and other affected groups,
and no single interest has a dominating influence
on the committee;
(ii) Reasonable notice
that a proposed standard is being considered is
given to interested persons and groups;
(iii) Interested persons
and groups have an opportunity to participate in
the deliberations and discussions relating to the
standard;
(iv) Prompt and careful
consideration is given to minority points of view
and objections to the standard;
(v) Standards are approved
by considerably more than a simple majority vote of
the technical committee, although unanimity is not
necessarily required;
(vi) An adequate
opportunity for review is afforded to assure that
fairness is protected and that dissenting views are
given full consideration;
(vii) Adequate records are
maintained to document that the established
procedures were actually followed and that the
views presented were duly considered in accordance
with those procedures; and
(viii) The entire process
is open to public scrutiny and review.
(d) The availability of
documentation adequately describing the costs and
benefits, the rationale for and method of arriving
at the critical requirements of the standard, and
other factors actually considered by the technical
committee in developing or revising the voluntary
consensus standard.
(e) The number of negative
voters and the interests they represent.
(f) Possible
anti-competitive effects that may arise from the
use of the voluntary consensus standard.
7. Subject to the
procedural requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 or other
relevant statutes, a voluntary consensus standard
that appears to be partially or wholly suitable for
use as a regulation may be adapted by an agency in
various ways:
(a) If the voluntary
consensus standard adequately addresses the
questions of health or safety and is being
substantially complied with by the affected
industry, the agency may decide to take no further
regulatory steps, or, alternatively, to adopt the
standard into its regulations (see paragraph (f)
below), and direct its primary regulatory efforts
elsewhere. If, under these circumstances, the
agency decides to take no further regulatory steps,
it should publish that decision and the reasons
therefor in the Federal Register. The agency should
thereafter review periodically the continued
adequacy of the standard and the extent of
compliance with it by the affected industry.
(b) If the voluntary
consensus standard adequately addresses the
questions of health or safety, but there has not
been substantial compliance with the standard by
the affected industry, or if the industry is so
scattered and diffuse that it is difficult to
ascertain compliance, then the agency should adopt
the standard into its regulations. Where the
standard is new, the agency may defer a decision
for a reasonable period to observe the effects of
the standard.
(c) If the voluntary
consensus standard adequately addresses the
questions of health or safety but the language of
the standard lacks the clarity or detail
appropriate for a regulatory standard, then the
agency should accept the substantive provisions of
the voluntary consensus standard and seek to
develop the needed clarity or detail by working
with the technical committee. Only if this is
unsuccessful or impractical should the agency alone
reformulate the standard. In evaluating whether a
voluntary consensus standard is appropriately
detailed, the agency should consider the extent to
which other regulatory authorities have adopted the
standard and have then succeeded in enforcing
it.
(d) If the voluntary
consensus standard does not adequately address the
pertinent questions of health or safety, the agency
should seek to develop an adequate standard with
the assistance of the relevant technical committee
by following the procedures described in paragraph
1(b).
(e) Agencies should
consider the "regulatory guide" approach as a means
of effectively making use of voluntary consensus
standards. A "regulatory guide" is a formal
declaration by the agency that compliance with
designated portions, or all, or a voluntary
consensus standard will be considered an acceptable
method of compliance with a general mandatory
standard appearing in either the governing statute
or the agency's regulations. When taking this
approach, the agency should suitably publicize its
decision and reasons therefor.
(f) The agency may adopt a
voluntary standard into its regulations either by
placing the text of the standard in the
regulations, or, preferably, by incorporating the
standard by reference pursuant to 1 CFR part
51.
8. Each regulatory agency
must take special care to avoid needless
inconsistencies between voluntary and mandatory
standards, as well as to remain abreast of
technological change. An agency that has adopted a
voluntary consensus standard into its regulations
must therefore be aware of and must promptly review
all later revisions initiated by the technical
committees. If a revision is consistent with the
agency's regulatory responsibilities, the agency
should promptly proceed under its rulemaking
authority to amend its prior standard by adopting
the latest revision. Such procedures should provide
for coordinated consideration by all agencies that
have adopted the standard.
Revisions of
Standards That Have Been Incorporated by Reference
by More Than
One Agency
9. Where a voluntary
consensus standard has been incorporated by
reference by two or more agencies, the Office of
the Federal Register should develop, and implement
in the form of a regulation, a procedure by which
such agencies may elect in advance to have all
proposed changes in such voluntary consensus
standard reviewed pursuant to the following
procedure:
(a) A notice of proposed
rulemaking, prepared by or under the direction of
the Office of the Federal Register, should be
published under the name of each electing agency in
accordance with the notice and comment requirements
of 5 U.S.C. 553, so that each agency's standard can
be revised promptly in accord with revisions
subsequently approved by the promulgating
organizations. The notice should also direct that
all comments on the proposed revision be sent to
each electing agency as well as to the promulgating
organization. The Office of the Federal Register
should coordinate the distribution of comments if
the number of electing agencies is large.
(b) Each electing agency
should promptly review each proposed revision to
the referenced standard in the light of the
comments received, and should then determine
whether or not to adopt the revision when it has
been finally approved by the promulgating
organization. Adoption of the revised standard
should be formally announced and should be
officially published, without further public
opportunity to comment.
10. In order to implement
paragraph 9, the Office of the Federal Register
should promptly ascertain all incorporations by
reference of voluntary standards that have been
made in the Code of Federal Regulations and are
currently in effect.
[44 FR 1357, Jan. 5,
1979]
Authority: 5 U.S.C.
591-596.
SOURCE: 38 FR 19782, July
23, 1973; 57 FR 61760, 61768, Dec. 29, 1992, unless
otherwise noted.
[Previous
Part] [Next
Part]
|