use only uploaded materials
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
1
Other legal concerns about rulemaking
Most basic question: Can agencies make decisions that affect private interests without due process protection?
Bimetallic Investment (1915) v. Londoner v. City of Denver (1908):
Local governments have power to make general policy changes without due process – broad tax reform: Bimetallic
but when a small number are individually and specifically affected, due process of notice and hearing are required: essentially adjudication
- specific few property fees Londoner
Bimetallic is important precedent for keeping due process considerations out of rulemaking
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
2
Other legal concerns about rulemaking
Courts generally view it as legislative process:
Ex parte communications generally allowed before rulemaking process formally starts and in general, particularly if put into records.
Legally challengeable if there are contending parties and if there are few specific affected parties
Leading statements by administrators do not disqualify their participation, unless “clear and convincing evidence demonstrates they have an “unalterably closed mind”.
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
3
Other legal concerns about rulemaking
Political pressure:
Presidents and their appointees can discuss rulemaking with administrators as part of executive powers.
Cannot push agencies to disregard or counter legislative mandates.
Legislative pressure may be invalid if: 1) it introduces irrelevant considerations into decision-making; and 2) if it determines final rule content
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
4
Oregon’s rulemaking system
- generally requires oral hearings
- temporary rules can be used
- public can petition for rule to be made
- negotiated rulemaking common practice
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
Oregon Rulemaking
Negotiated rulemaking examples:
Sick leave: Oregon Agency worked with advisory committee containing: employers, labor organizations, legislators, agricultural representatives and family policy advocates
Multiple hearings to evaluate proposed rules produced by advisory group
Edible marijuana: Rules advisory committee worked with Oregon Health Authority to develop guidelines for edible marijuana products
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
5
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
6
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
KEY ISSUE IN RULEMAKING:
Some legislation cuts across normal legislative boundaries:
National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) gave the Council on Environmental Quality some oversight on many regulatory processes
An Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) is required unless there is a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the environment for major federal initiatives
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
7
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
KEY ISSUE IN RULEMAKING:
Regulatory Analysis and Executive Preclearance: Imposition of presidential priorities in process
- Overseen by OMB Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
8
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
Regulatory Analysis and Executive Preclearance: Historical Background
Executive Order 12291 (1981): OMB reviews proposed rules for:
- adequate justification of government action
- impact on national economy and particular industry
Social benefits verse costs
- sort-of like an “economic impact statement”
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
9
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
Regulatory Analysis and Executive Preclearance:
EO 12498 (1986) OMB reviews draft regulatory programs for consistency with administration goals
EO 12866(1993):Replaced EO 12498 and 12291 and also introduced review for envir and health risk assessment: economic kicks in at $100 m
Other orders concerned federalism, the family, private property, small businesses, paperwork
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
10
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
Recent evolution: Congressional Review:
APA amended in 1996: “report and wait” provisions
1. Agencies must file cost-benefit analysis and other regulatory impact report
2. GAO reviews, if major rule then 60 days waiting
3. Congress may pass joint resolution blocking the rule
- Used in March 2001 by Congress and president to overturn ergonomic regulations; many times in 2017
Essentially a blanket legislative veto
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
11
12
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
Recent evolution:
Interim Final Rules: announce implementation of rule prior to final adoption. Processes may or may not be completed
- Helps agencies avoid formal process
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
13
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
Recent evolution:
Contracting: may appear as a reduction of rules, contracting makes government policy based on negotiation between specific parties
Explicitly excepted from APA requirements
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
14
SECTION II - THE APA AND RULE-MAKING
Recent evolution
Contracting:
Problem of balancing public control, consistency, flexibility, and accountability remains unsolved
Eliminating rules and rulemaking does not eliminate need for, and utility of regulations
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
15
Rulemaking Through Adjudication
Analogous to case law.
SEC v. Chenery (1947): agency can decide if adjudication is proper way to resolve a problem where either rule-making or adjudication is possible
Insider trading was illegal despite no rule against it since SEC found it prevented a “fair and equitable” reorganization
- Court identifies virtues of ad hoc gradual elaboration of application of law
Excelsior (1966) did not bind Excelsior Underwear but stated that publication of union member lists would be required in future: Reversed by NLRB v Wyman Gordon (1969)
NLRB v. Wyman Gordon (1969): court rules that policy cannot be based solely on Excelsior adjudication, but agency decisions could be considered in making determinations
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
16
480, Henkels, Section III: "Adjudication"
16
Adjudication’s impact on future agency decisions
NLRB v. Bell Aerospace (1974) affirms that agency may develop details of policy in adjudication
- “buyers” are managers for purpose of NLRA, but variation in such situations justifies use of adjudication
- Involved matter of determining who was supervisor and who can collectively bargain.
Trump De-Regulatory Actions are Unprecedented
Took executive orders to a new level when he mandated
Executive Order 13771: agencies must offset new significant regulation (or guidance) with at least two deregulatory actions
- Also established a regulatory budgeting system under which the OMB caps “incremental costs” that will be allowed for the fiscal year and requires report of savings
2019: 150 deregulatory actions and 35 regulatory actions produced $13.5 billion in regulatory cost savings in 2019 present value terms. These numbers are challenged
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
17
Trump De-Regulatory Actions are Unprecedented
Check out the Brooking Website that tracks the administration’s rulemaking efforts.
https://www.brookings.edu/interactives/tracking-deregulation-in-the-trump-era/
“This tracker helps you monitor a selection of delayed, repealed, and new rules, notable guidance and policy revocations, and important court battles across eight major categories, including environmental, health, labor, and more. …. Whether you support or oppose ongoing regulatory changes, Americans have the right to participate in the regulatory process and to comment on these proposed rules.”
This site provides information on how to submit the most effective comments on proposed regulations.
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
18
Some examples of Trump Administration actions
Temporary COVID-19 Suspension of EPA Enforcement: EPA
In Effect
3/30/2020
Announcement from the EPA
A temporary policy suspending enforcement of environmental regulations in response to COVID-19.
On Thursday, March 26 2020, the Environmental Protection Agency announced a temporary enforcement policy relaxing the legal enforcement of environmental rules. This allows companies to determine for themselves if the pandemic renders them unable to comply with regulations such as routine compliance monitoring, integrity testing, sampling, laboratory analysis, training, and reporting or certification. To be eligible for the enforcement policy, companies need to document why they were unable to comply with the regulation as a result of the pandemic. This policy does not apply to any criminal violations or imports and is effective retroactively starting March 13, 2020 until further notice.
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
19
Some examples of Trump Administration actions
Tip Credit Rule: Partial Rescission, Department of Labor, 4/3/2018
Nullified by the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 (Rules cannot violate statutes!!)
Partial rescission of a rule restricting the pool of employees eligible for tip sharing.
The federal minimum wage for service workers who receive most of their earnings from tips is $2.13 per hour, while all other employees must receive the standard minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, an employer of tipped employees can satisfy its obligation to pay those employees the federal minimum wage by paying a lower direct cash wage and counting a limited amount of the tips received by its employees as a partial credit (known as a "tip credit"). A 1974 statute stipulates that employers can only take a tip credit if its tipped employees retained all tips. However, the statute does not preclude an employer that takes a tip credit from implementing a tip pool, but requires that only employees who "customarily and regularly receive tips" can participate in the pool. In 2011, the Department of Labor (DoL) updated its regulations to clarify that tipped employees must retain all tips, regardless of whether the employer takes a tip credit. On December 5, 2017, the DoL proposed to expand tip sharing to include employees who do not regularly receive tips, such as restaurant cooks and dishwashers. While the proposed rule ostensibly is meant to close the pay disparity between tipped servers and hourly back-of-the-house employees, critics claim that the proposed rule goes too far by allowing employers to control all tips and distribute them to anyone, including salaried workers or the owners themselves. On March 23, 2018, President trumpbegrudgingly signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 to fund the government through fiscal year 2018. Tucked into the omnibus spending bill is a provision (Sec. 1201) that invalidates the DoL's proposed revision to the Tip Credit Rule; the law explicitily states, "An employer may not keep tips received by its employees for any purposes."
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
20
Some examples of Trump Administration actions
Proclamations are an unusual power for the president. They can declare an area a “national monument” (not a “national park”) and the land gets a different set of protective rules. In this case, Trump is reversing an action by Obama using the same power. This is the first time such a land designation has been reversed.
Utah Federal Lands. Department of Interior, In Effect, 2/12/2020
Proclamation by President Trump
A plan that permits mining, drilling, and grazing on previously protected national monuments in Utah.
In December 2017, President Trump shrank two national monuments in Utah, the Bear Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase Escalante, by 85 percent and 46 percent respectively. These monuments were of historical and cultural significance to many communities, especially Native American nations and scientists. Simultaneously, they also harbored valuable coal, oil, gas, and grazing lands. According to New York Times, together, these moves were the largest rollback of public lands protection in U.S. history. On 6th February 2020, the Department of Interior published blueprints that finalized plans to allow mining, drilling, and grazing on these previously protected lands.
Henkels, 2020, Section 2B
21
The Reg Map Informal Rulemaking
Administrative Procedure Act Provisions
Under the Administrative Procedure Act provisions that are included as part of the Freedom of Information Act at 5 U.S.C. 552, agencies are required to publish in the Federal Register:
• Substantive rules of general applicability
• Interpretive rules • Statements of general policy • Rules of procedure • Information about forms • Information concerning
agency organization and methods of operation
Proposed Rule
A notice of proposed rulemaking proposes to add, change, or delete regulatory text and contains a request for public comments.
OMB Review Under Executive Order 12866
OMB reviews only those rulemaking actions determined to be “significant.”
Independent agencies are exempt from OMB review.
Administrative Procedure Act Provisions
The Administrative Procedure Act provisions at 5 U.S.C. 553 require proposed rules to be published in the Federal Register.
Final Rule
A final rule adds, changes, deletes, or affirms regulatory text.
OMB Review Under Executive Order 12866
OMB reviews only those rulemaking actions determined to be “significant.”
Independent agencies are exempt from OMB review.
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808)
An agency must submit most final rules, interim final rules, and direct final rules, along with supporting information, to both houses of Congress and the General Accounting Office before they can take effect.
Major rules are subject to a delayed effective date (with certain exceptions).
Action by Congress and the President could have an impact on the rule.
Determination Whether a Rule
Is Needed
Step Two Preparation of Proposed Rule
Step Three OMB Review of Proposed Rule
Step Four Publication of Proposed Rule
Step Five Public Comments
Step Six Preparation of
Final Rule, Interim Final
Rule, or Direct Final Rule
Step Seven OMB Review of Final Rule, Interim Final
Rule, or Direct Final Rule
Step Eight Publication of
Final Rule, Interim Final
Rule, or Direct Final Rule
Step Nine
Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866)
Would the rule have a $100 million annual impact, raise novel issues, and/or have other significant impacts? ➔ If yes Prepare economic impact analysis.
Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866)
Rulemaking documents must comply with the specified regulatory phi- losophy and principles of regulation.
Drafting Requirements
for Rulemaking Documents
Unified Regulatory Agenda
The Unified Regulatory Agenda provides information concerning agency rules under development or review.
The Unified Regulatory Agenda is published in the Federal Register in the spring and fall of each year.
Agendas for Rules Under
Development or Review
Experts in drafting rulemaking documents and preparing supporting analyses
Visit us at www.regsupport.com. Also, check out www.CommentWorks.com for a faster, cheaper, and better way to respond to public comments on proposed rules.
Copyright ©2003 by ICF Incorporated.
All rights reserved. This document may not be reproduced in any form without permission.
Specific Analyses for Steps Three and Seven
Agency Initiatives
Agency initiatives for rulemaking originate from such things as:
• Agency priorities and plans • New scientific data • New technologies • Accidents
Initiating Events
Step One
Required Reviews
Statutory Mandates
Recommendations from Other Agencies/External Groups/States/Federal Advisory Committees
Lawsuits
Petitions
OMB Prompt Letters
Optional Supplementary Procedures to Help
Prepare a Proposed Rule
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking An advance notice of proposed rulemaking requests information needed for developing a proposed rule.
Negotiated Rulemaking Negotiated rulemaking is a mechanism under the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (5 U.S.C. 561-570) for bringing together representa- tives of an agency and the various interests to negotiate the text of a proposed rule.
Administrative Procedure Act Provisions
Under the Administrative Procedure Act provisions at 5 U.S.C. 553, rules may be established only after proposed rulemaking procedures (steps three through six) have been followed, unless an exemption applies. The following are exempted:
• Rules concerning military or foreign affairs functions
• Rules concerning agency management or personnel
• Rules concerning public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts
• Interpretive rules • General statements of policy • Rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice • Nonsignificant rules for which
the agency determines that public input is not warranted
• Rules published on an emergency basis
Note: Even if an exemption applies under the Administrative Procedure Act provisions, other statutory authority or agency policy may require that proposed rulemaking procedures be followed.
Special Types of Final Rules
Interim Final Rule An interim final rule adds, changes, or deletes regulatory text and contains a request for comments. The subsequent final rule may make changes to the text of the interim final rule.
Direct Final Rule A direct final rule adds, changes, or deletes regulatory text at a specified future time, with a duty to withdraw the rule if the agency receives adverse comments within the period specified by the agency.
Administrative Procedure Act Provisions
Under the Administrative Procedure Act provisions that are included as part of the Freedom of Information Act at 5 U.S.C. 552, agencies are required to publish final rules, inter- im final rules, and direct final rules in the Federal Register.
Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. 1501-1511)
The Federal Register Act at 44 U.S.C. 1510 (implemented at 1 CFR 8.1) requires rules that have general applicability and legal effect to be published in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520)
Does the rule contain a “collection of information” (reporting, disclosure, or recordkeeping)? ➔ If yes Prepare information collection clearance
package for OMB review and approval, and prepare request for public comments.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. Chs. 17A, 25)
Does the rulemaking process include a proposed rule? ➔ If yes Does the rule include any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure (direct costs minus direct savings) by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million in any one year ➔ and yes Prepare unfunded mandates analysis (adjusted annually)? (unless an exclusion applies).
Federalism (E.O. 13132)
Is the rule a discretionary rule that has federalism impli- cations and imposes substantial unreimbursed direct compliance costs on State and local governments? ➔ If yes Prepare federalism summary impact statement. Does the rule have federalism implications and preempt State law? ➔ If yes Prepare federalism summary impact statement.
Indian Tribal Governments (E.O. 13175)
Is the rule a discretionary rule that has tribal implications and imposes substantial unreimbursed direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments? ➔ If yes Prepare tribal summary impact statement. Does the rule have tribal implications and preempt tribal law? ➔ If yes Prepare tribal summary impact statement.
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
Does the rule contain provisions for which the use of voluntary standards is applicable? ➔ If yes Adopt voluntary consensus standards or
explain why not.
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights (E.O. 12630)
Does the rule regulate private property use for the protection of public health or safety? ➔ If yes Prepare takings analysis. Is the rulemaking a proposed regulatory action that has takings implications (other than regulating private property for the protection of public health and safety)? ➔ If yes Prepare takings analysis.
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (E.O. 13045)
Is the rulemaking a “covered regulatory action”? ➔ If yes Prepare analysis of the environmental health or safety effects on children.
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (E.O. 13211)
Is the rulemaking action a “significant energy action”? ➔ If yes Prepare statement of energy effects.
Federal Register Publications
Rulemaking documents must comply with the Federal Register regulations (1 CFR). Additional guidance and requirements are contained in the Federal Register’s Document Drafting Handbook.
Presidential Memorandum on Plain Language
(63 FR 31885)
Rulemaking documents must comply with plain language principles.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
Rulemaking documents must be written in clear language designed to help reduce litigation.
Regulatory Plan
The Regulatory Plan provides information concerning the most important significant regulatory actions that the agency is planning to take.
The Regulatory Plan is published in the Unified Regulatory Agenda in the fall of each year.
Regulatory Flexibility Agenda
The Regulatory Flexibility Agenda provides information concerning any rule that an agency expects to prepare or promulgate that is likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Agency regulatory flexibility agendas are published as part of the Unified Regulatory Agenda in the spring and fall of each year.
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321–4347)
Is the rule categorically excluded from review? ➔ If no Does the rule constitute a major Federal action that could significantly affect the quality of the human environment? ➔ and yes Prepare environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement, as appropriate.
Comments
Under the Administrative Procedure Act provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, an agency must provide the public the opportunity to submit written comments for consideration by the agency.
As required by Public Law No. 107-347, agencies must provide for submission of comments by electronic means and must make available online the comments and other materials included in the rulemaking docket under 5 U.S.C. 553 (c).
Executive Order 12866 established 60 days as the standard for the comment period.
The holding of a public hearing is discretionary unless required by statute or agency policy.
Using The Reg Map The Reg Map is based on general requirements. In some cases, more stringent or less stringent requirements are imposed by statutory provisions that are agency specific or subject matter specific. Also, in some cases more stringent requirements are imposed by agency policy.
In a typical case, a rulemaking action would proceed from step one through step nine with a proposed rule and a final rule.
However, if a rulemaking action is exempt from the proposed rulemaking procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act provisions (explained under step three) or under other statutory authority, an agency may:
• promulgate a final rule omitting steps three through six, or
• promulgate an interim final rule omitting steps three through six, but providing a comment period and a final rule after step nine.
Also, if an agency determines that a rule likely would not generate adverse comment, the agency may promulgate a direct final rule, omitting steps three through six, but with a duty to withdraw the rule if the agency receives adverse comments within the period specified by the agency.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612)
Is a notice of proposed rulemaking required by law? ➔ If yes Would the rule “have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities”? ➔ and yes Prepare regulatory flexibility analysis. Note: Under limited circumstances analyses also are required for certain interpretive rules
involving internal revenue laws (5 U.S.C. 603, 604).