{
  "id": "R42104",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R42104",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 410598,
      "date": "2012-03-23",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T00:11:46.077210",
      "title": "An Overview and Analysis of H.R. 3010, the Regulatory Accountability Act of 2011",
      "summary": "In the fall of 2011, a group of Members from the House and the Senate introduced the Regulatory Accountability Act of 2011 (RAA, H.R. 3010 and S. 1606). The RAA would make the most significant legislative changes to the rulemaking process since the enactment of the Administrative Procedure Act in 1946. The RAA would modify and enact into law numerous new general procedures for rulemaking that appear in narrower form in existing law, executive orders, and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) documents. The House of Representatives passed H.R. 3010 on December 2, 2011. The Obama Administration has issued a Statement of Administration Policy against H.R. 3010. Some of the most significant changes the bill would make are listed here. H.R. 3010 would:\nRequire agencies to adopt the \u201cleast costly\u201d rule that meets \u201crelevant statutory objectives\u201d unless the benefits justify additional costs.\nProvide for judicial review of certain requirements and determinations, for which judicial review is not presently available or for which there is a question as to whether judicial review is available.\nOverhaul the current notice-and-comment (informal) rulemaking process by codifying and modifying existing requirements and instituting many procedural and substantive additions to informal rulemaking.\nRaise questions regarding how the RAA would interact with existing statutory requirements for cost-benefit analysis and statutory prohibitions on cost considerations.\nImpose new requirements on independent regulatory agencies, including cost-benefit analysis and regulatory review by OMB\u2019s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).\nImpact existing case law on judicial deference to agency interpretations of rules and agency guidance.\nProvide that interim rules shall cease to have the effect of law if such rules are not finalized or rescinded in accordance with the RAA\u2019s requirements within 270 days of publication of the interim rule or 18 months if the rule is a major or high-impact rule. \nCreate a new category of rules, \u201chigh-impact\u201d rules, and mandate trial-like formal rulemaking procedures for such rules.\nRequire advance notices of proposed rulemaking for certain rules.\nMandate the identification of costs and benefits, and assure that such benefits justify the cost, in major guidance documents and guidance that involves a novel legal or policy issue arising out of statutory mandates.\nEstablish minimum time periods for comment in rulemakings.\nGrant the OIRA Administrator, in statute, increased powers and responsibilities.\nEnable Information Quality Act (IQA) petitions to determine if an agency\u2019s proposed rule does not comply with the IQA.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42104",
          "sha1": "d5142d4caa4867725f94042307dd7961efee96be",
          "filename": "files/20120323_R42104_d5142d4caa4867725f94042307dd7961efee96be.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42104",
          "sha1": "dbd7f478a4558abf8d0ab12f26950d5e33e7d69d",
          "filename": "files/20120323_R42104_dbd7f478a4558abf8d0ab12f26950d5e33e7d69d.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "American Law",
    "Constitutional Questions",
    "Foreign Affairs"
  ]
}