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 305.90-6
s 305.90-6 Use of
Simplified Proceedings in Enforcement Actions
Before the Occupational Safety and Health Review
Commission (Recommendation 90-6).
The Occupational Safety
and Health Commission (OSHRC) is an independent
agency charged with adjudicating contested
citations and penalties brought against employers
by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration of the Department of Labor (Labor).
Labor is responsible for promulgating substantive
safety and health standards, conducting workplace
inspections and investigations, and prosecuting
contested cases before administrative law judges
(ALJs) at OSHRC. If an inspection discloses alleged
violations, a citation describing the violation is
issued along with a notice of proposed penalties.
An employer who disagrees with a citation or
proposed penalty can file, within 15 days of
receipt, a simple notice of contest. Ordinarily,
Department of Labor lawyers must respond to the
notice of contest with a relatively detailed
complaint, and employers must set forth allegations
of facts which serve as the basis for affirmative
defenses. The case is then handled through a
litigation process that provides for discovery,
motion practice, formal hearings governed by the
Federal Rules of Evidence, [FN1] and
written opinions.
[FN1] 29 CFR
2200.71 (1989).
OSHRC also offers parties
another path, that of "simplified proceedings"
which modify significantly the litigation process.
[FN2] There are no pleadings; pre-hearing
discovery and motion practice are expressly
discouraged; and interlocutory appeals of an ALJ's
ruling are not permitted. In lieu of pre- hearing
discovery, the parties are required to engage in
discussions with a goal of addressing settlement,
narrowing issues in dispute, and developing an
agreed statement of issues and facts. These
unstructured discussions are supposed to occur
within a reasonable time before a
"conference/hearing," a hybrid procedure divided
into two phases--a conference that can often
operate as a dispute resolution tool and then an
informal hearing that normally takes place on the
same day. Under current OSHRC rules, any other
party may request a simplified proceeding (subject
to certain subject-matter limits) within 10 days
after a notice of docketing is received, and any
other party may veto use of the device. The vast
majority of requests for simplified proceedings
come from pro se respondents, with the Department
of Labor historically vetoing most of these
requests. Evidence suggests that where the
simplified proceedings are agreed to--5% or less of
OSHRC's national caseload--settlements are
common.
[FN2] 29 CFR
2200.202-.211 (1989). In addition, OSHRC's
regulations provide for use of settlement judge
procedures, 29 CFR 2200.101 et seq. A recent study
for the Conference also examined OSHRC's use of
this technique and concluded that OSHRC's
procedures in this regard were consistent with
Conference Recommendation 88-5, Agency Use of
Settlement Judges, 1 CFR 305.88-5 (1990). Nothing
contained herein is intended to detract from that
recommendation.
While the basic concept of
simplified proceedings is hardly controversial,
putting it into practice has been. Several
commentators have expressed concerns about the
"underutilization" of these proceedings, and called
for vesting in respondents or ALJs final authority
for deciding whether to use them. Others caution
that agreeing to use simplified proceedings could
involve surrender of meaningful procedural rights
at a point early in the case when one or more
parties may be unaware of all the issues or
evidence likely to be implicated. Some maintain
that simplified proceedings are redundant since, in
practice, they are not so different from the
procedures that knowledgeable parties before OSHRC
sometimes work out informally.
The Conference does not
now take a position on these issues, or on the
effectiveness of current OSHRC procedures.
[FN3] Major shifts in the structure of
OSHRC simplified proceedings would themselves give
rise to new uncertainties and difficulties of
implementation. They should be undertaken only
after careful analysis of the procedural, legal,
policy, and practical implications. In the
meantime, the Conference urges the Department of
Labor and OSHRC to take steps to expand the use and
effectiveness of simplified proceedings, especially
those involving pro se respondents, as stated in
the following recommendation.
[FN3] The
aforementioned study focused only on operation of
settlement judge and simplified proceedings in
certain cases before OSHRC. Further study may be
useful to explore the operation of OSHRC's current
adjudication procedures, including relevant
structural and policy issues.
Recommendation
1. The Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHRC) and the
Department of Labor should develop rule or policies
tailored to handling cases involving pro se parties
of limited means in simple cases involving few
alleged violations and low penalties. The
Department of Labor should experiment selectively
with the OSHRC has characterized as "simplified
proceedings" in order to gain a broader base of
experience and to obtain a clearer picture of the
kinds of cases suitable for those proceedings.
Department of Labor attorneys should adopt a policy
of promptly initiating discussions with pro se
parties in an effort to narrow issues or resolve
disputed matters. The Department should develop a
set of criteria to assist its attorneys in deciding
whether to request, or agree to requests seeking,
use of simplified proceedings. OSHRC and the
Department should also develop simplified
paperwork, special pro se form answers and other
documents, and other procedures to inform pro se
parties more fully and thus enhance use of
simplified proceedings.
2. OSHRC should modify its
simplified proceedings to encourage parties to make
greater use of them. For example, OSHRC should
facilitate exchanges of information via short-form
or oral pleadings and limited discovery in some
cases. OSHRC should also take steps to ensure that
its administrative law judges (ALJs) regularly
enforce its rule [FN4] requiring parties in
simplified proceedings to discuss simplification
and settlement.
[FN4] 29 CFR
2200.206 (1989).
3. OSHRC should continue
the simplification of its procedures after study of
the relevant issues and consultation with
representatives of all affected interests,
including the Department of Labor, employer
associations, relevant bar committees, and unions.
The objective should be greater use of the pre-
hearing conference through involvement of the
presiding judge in the case. Pre-hearing
conferences could result in settlement of all
matters in controversy or an identification of
those issues still requiring a hearing. If a
hearing is found necessary, it should follow
immediately and should be held before the ALJ who
has identified in issues in controversy.
[55 FR 53271, Dec. 28,
1990]
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]
|