1 / 6

ACUS Workshop on Retrospective Reviews of Existing Regulations Implementing the Review Process

ACUS Workshop on Retrospective Reviews of Existing Regulations Implementing the Review Process. Neil Eisner Assistant General Counsel Department of Transportation March 10, 2011. EO 13563 Retrospective Review. May 18: Preliminary plan … To periodically review …

peers
Download Presentation

ACUS Workshop on Retrospective Reviews of Existing Regulations Implementing the Review Process

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ACUS Workshop on Retrospective Reviews of Existing Regulations Implementing the Review Process Neil Eisner Assistant General Counsel Department of Transportation March 10, 2011

  2. EO 13563 Retrospective Review • May 18: Preliminary plan … • To periodically review … • Existing significant regulations • April 28: Draft preliminary Plan • Other retrospective review requirements (e.g., RFA) • New Presidential memoranda on reducing – • Paperwork burdens • Requirements on State, local and tribal governments

  3. Basic Elements of Effective Retrospective Review • Senior-level involvement/support • Process for identifying problems and priorities • Public and agency staff (e.g., inspectors) participation • Ask questions (e.g., has rule been difficult to enforce, have there been numerous requests for interpretation or exemption, does it require paper submissions) • Base for measuring success of rule • Sources for information on effectiveness, changes in technology, etc.

  4. Other Possible Elements • Special (independent) office for review • Agency contact point/Ombudsman • Rolling, established schedule for review

  5. Possible Categories for Reviews • Rule-by-rule • Clean-up (obsolete, redundant, etc.) • Harmonization (with other agencies/governments) • General, broad categories (e.g., all training rules or paperwork burdens) • Affected interests (e.g., small entities, State and local governments, or particular industry)

  6. Conclusion

More Related