Review of Regulatory Analysis Requirements
Project Stages:1. Gather ideas - Completed
2. Select ideas - Completed
3. Council approval - Completed
4. Picking a researcher - Completed
5. Committee consideration - Completed
6. Back to the council - Completed
7. Consideration by the full conference - Completed
8. Implementation - Current
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. § 553, agencies are subject to numerous analysis requirements imposed by other statutes or by executive order. For example, in appropriate cases, agencies must prepare a cost-benefit analysis, see Executive Orders 12,866, 13,563; a regulatory flexibility analysis, see 5 U.S.C. § 603; a federalism impact statement, see Executive Order 13,132; analyses required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, see 2 U.S.C. §§ 1532, 1535; an environmental impact statement, see 42 U.S.C. § 4332; and an evaluation of the rule’s environmental health, and safety effects on children, see Executive Order 13,045. The Conference has undertaken to study this array of regulatory analysis requirements.
Research Methodology: The Conference’s consultant, Curtis Copeland, examined whether there is any duplication in the required analyses that could be eliminated in a way that would produce cost savings and whether or not the requirements could otherwise be rationalized or streamlined while continuing to serve their valuable goals. He considered the costs and benefits of the required analyses and assessed whether the required analyses are performed accurately. In connection with his research, Mr. Copeland reviewed the scholarly literature, conducted a series of structured interviews with agency officials, and engaged in a detailed examination of selected regulatory analyses.
Additional Information: The Regulatory Analysis project was initially assigned to the Committee on Rulemaking, which held a meeting on November 14, 2011 to discuss the scope of the project (the documents from that meeting are posted below). The project was thereafter re-assigned to the Committee on Regulation, which conducted two meetings in connection with the Regulatory Analysis project. At the first meeting, which occurred on Wednesday, April 4, 2012, the Committee on Regulation considered Mr. Copeland’s report and a set of draft recommendations based thereon. At the second meeting, which took place on Thursday, May 3, 2012, the Committee on Regulation approved a draft recommendation. The Council approved the draft recommendation with certain revisions, and the full Assembly of the Conference voted to approve the recommendation at its Plenary Session on June 14, 2012. All relevant documents connected with the Plenary Session and committee meetings are posted below.