Background Information: Though independent regulatory agencies are not subject to the benefit-cost analysis requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, several such agencies undertake benefit-cost analysis in connection with their regulatory activities. For instance, the Federal Communications Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission regularly conduct benefit-cost analysis in their rulemakings.
This proposed statement highlights potential mechanisms for reducing the backlog of rules under review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), including promoting enhanced coordination between OIRA and agencies prior to the submission of rules, encouraging the return of rules that require additional analysis, and ensuring that OIRA has adequate staffing to complete reviews in a timely manner.
In 1991, ACUS issued Recommendation 91-1, which provided guidance for all U.S. regulatory agencies on working with their international counterparts. In April 2011, ACUS co-sponsored a workshop with the U.S.
At its Plenary Session on December 9-10, 2010, the Administrative Conference of the United States adopted Recommendation 2010-1, regarding agency procedures for determining whether to preempt state law. This recommendation is the result of the public, consensus-driven work of the Committee on Regulation of the Assembly of the Conference.
Background: Agencies wishing to promulgate regulations face an array of procedural requirements. In addition to the basic notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, see 5 U.S.C.
Agencies conduct most rulemaking proceedings via the process of “notice and comment.” Under this process, an agency publishes notice of a proposed rule in the Federal Register, gives the public a period of time in which to comment, and then issues a final rule after considering the comments received. See 5 U.S.C. § 553.