The Role of Procedural Controls in OSHA’s Ergonomics Rulemaking
研究了程序控制在OSHA人体工学规则制定中的影响，发现通知-评论要求对最终规则影响最大，国会预算监督延迟三年最终导致规则失败。
Few, if any, regulations over the past decade have received as much publicity or engendered such controversy as the ergonomics regulation of the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA). Some may see the ergonomics rule as the paradigmatic instance of procedural hurdles holding up and eventually destroying a regulation. This article examines the role that procedure played in the ergonomics rulemaking. Lessons are drawn from an analysis of the four publicly available versions of the regulation and interviews with seven high‐ranking officials at OSHA and the Small Business Administration. Of the procedural hurdles faced by OSHA, the notice‐and‐comment requirement had the largest impact on the final rule. OMB review and requirements to conduct a cost‐benefit analysis served largely as a fire alarm to political overseers, and the required small business panel had largely symbolic effects. The more traditional control of congressional budgetary oversight had the greatest effect by delaying the rule for three years, and thus eventually doomed OSHA’s attempts to regulate.