Retrospective Regulatory Review in the States: Arkansas

From: Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Scrap more than 800 rules, state agencies advise

Many regulations obsolete

State agencies want to repeal 830 of their rules, about a quarter of those in existence.

The agencies started with 3,380 rules that are under review by virtue of a 2017 state law that triggered the accounting.

Read Complete Article

Crossing the Regulatory Divide to Enhance Societal Well-Being

From: The Regulatory Review

Requiring EPA cost-benefit analysis could ensure that regulations do more good than harm.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently has taken a historic step to advance the “cost-benefit state,” the paradigm in which “government regulation is increasingly assessed by asking whether the benefits of regulation justify the costs of regulation.”

EPA issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking soliciting public comment on whether and how EPA should create rules for weighing costs and benefits when implementing statutes. EPA also requested comment on specific analytic approaches to quantifying costs and benefits.

The Trump administration might be deregulating more than you know (or could know)

From: The Washington Post | Monkey Cage

By Simon F. Haeder, Susan Webb Yackee

Since President Trump took office last year, his administration has been working to undo many Obama-era regulations affecting clean waternational parksenergy production and more. Most recently, President Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency has proposed weakening Obama-era regulations on coal-fired power plants.

But there could be still more deregulating underway than most government watchers realize. Trump — like many presidents of both parties — is using the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to change regulations before they are issued. And while these changes can be significant, the public has little or no ability to learn about them.

OIRA Sends a Smoke Signal on Independent Agencies

Editor’s Note: See A Blueprint for OMB Review of Independent Agency Regulations (2002).

From: Notice & Comment | A Blog from the Yale Journal on Regulation and the ABA Section of Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice

by Bridget C.E. Dooling

One of the most intriguing, unanswered questions about this Administration’s approach to regulatory policy is whether they’ll pull independent agencies in for some form of review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). Although this issue has been kicked around for decades, President Trump’s appointment of Neomi Rao to the post of OIRA Administrator suggested it was going to be a key issue because of her scholarship as a law professor. A recent OIRA memo demonstrates ongoing appetite to rein in independents.

When Interagency Conflict Is a Good Thing

From: Government Executive

By John Kamensky

***

A thought-provoking 2017 California Law Review article by Daniel Farber and Anne Joseph O’Connell documents various types of adversarial relationships that exist between agencies as well as the various mechanisms of conflict resolution.

***

Their article reminded me of an interesting interagency regulatory conflict that I observed back in the early 1980s while working at the Government Accountability Office. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Food and Drug Administration independently imposed conflicting regulatory requirements on chocolate manufacturers. OSHA insisted the manufacturers install sound baffling to reduce ear-damaging noise from machinery, while FDA insisted on stainless steel machinery to ensure the chocolates were not contaminated with foreign material. Eventually, the newly-created Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the White House Office of Management and Budget was brought in to referee the conflict.

Three Federal Agency Proposals Exemplify Revived Commitment To Quantifying Costs And Benefits

From: Forbes

As part of the White House’s strategy to reform the administrative state, several federal agencies have proposed measures to improve the efficiency and transparency of the regulatory process. In recent months, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) have requested comments on cost-benefit analysis standards, while the Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) have proposed an economically significant rule that would require cost-benefit analysis.

Two Months To Go: Regulatory Budget Progress

Editor’s Note: See CRE’s website dedicated to the history of regulatory budgeting and current implementation of a regulatory budget here

From: American Action Forum

Dan Bosch

The most noteworthy component of the Trump Administration’s regulatory reform efforts is the establishment of a regulatory budget — a cap on the amount of costs an agency’s new rules can impose each year.  With the fiscal year (FY) ending on September 30, this analysis provides an update on where agencies stand relative to their savings target with two months to go.

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Tax Regulations: A Case Study

From: Notice & Comment | A Blog from the Yale Journal on Regulation and the ABA Section of Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice

by Daniel Hemel, Jennifer Nou and David Weisbach

***

Updating the Federal Administrative Procedure Sourcebook

From: Administrative Conference of the United States

Submitted by Frank Massaro

This post is part of the ACUS Intern Blog SeriesThis article was authored by Victoria Barnard, a 2L at the George Washington University Law School. The views expressed below are those of the author and do not represent the views of ACUS or the Federal Government.

The first edition of ACUS’s Federal Administrative Procedure Sourcebook, published in 1985, filled gaps in the public’s understanding of the regulatory processes by which federal government agencies operate. It also served as an invaluable resource for agency officials, by centralizing publication of analysis, legislative history, related regulations, and other references for 18 procedural statutes, including the Administrative Procedure Act, the Freedom of Information Act, and the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Regulatory lobbying has increased under the Trump administration, but the groups doing the lobbying may surprise you

From: Brookings

Rachel Augustine Potter

While talk of whether Trump is or is not “draining the swamp” of lobbyists continues in Washington (and on Twitter), one form of lobbying—lobbying the White House about regulations—has quietly flown under the radar. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)—the tiny White House office that serves as a clearinghouse for agency rules—regularly holds private meetings with stakeholders about regulations that are under development. These meetings are referred to by the anodyne-sounding term “12866 meetings” (in reference to Executive Order 12866, which governs regulatory review), but make no mistake about it—these meetings are regulatory lobbying pure and simple.