[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 23 (Thursday, February 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6123-6124]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-2368]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Reducing Regulatory Burden
AGENCY: Office of the General Counsel, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: As part of its implementation of Executive Order 13563,
``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' issued by the President
on January 18, 2011, the Department of Energy (DOE) is seeking comments
and information from interested parties to assist DOE in reviewing its
existing regulations to determine whether any such regulations should
be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed. The purpose of DOE's
review is to make the agency's regulatory program more effective and
less burdensome in achieving its regulatory objectives.
DATES: Written comments and information are requested on or before
March 21, 2011. Reply comments are requested on or before April 4,
2011.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments,
identified by ``Regulatory Burden RFI,'' by any of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected]. Include ``Regulatory Burden
RFI'' in the subject line of the message.
Mail: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 6A245, Washington, DC 20585.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents, or
comments received, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Cohen, Assistant General
Counsel for Legislation, Regulation, and Energy Efficiency, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. E-mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 18, 2011, the President issued
Executive Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,''
to ensure that Federal regulations seek more affordable, less intrusive
means to achieve policy goals, and that agencies give careful
consideration to the benefits and costs of those regulations. To that
end, the Executive Order requires, among other things, that:
Agencies propose or adopt a regulation only upon a
reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs; and that
agencies tailor regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining the regulatory objectives, taking into
account, among other things, and to the extent practicable, the costs
of cumulative regulations; and that agencies select, in choosing among
alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net
benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health
and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity).
The regulatory process encourages public participation and
an open exchange of views, with an opportunity for the public to
comment.
Agencies coordinate, simplify, and harmonize regulations
to reduce costs and promote certainty for businesses and the public.
Agencies consider low-cost approaches that reduce burdens
and maintain flexibility.
Regulations be guided by objective scientific evidence.
Additionally, the Executive Order directs agencies to consider how best
to promote retrospective analyses of existing rules. Specifically,
Agencies must develop a preliminary plan under which the agency will
periodically review existing regulations to determine which should be
maintained, modified, strengthened, or repealed to increase the
effectiveness and decrease the burdens of the agency's regulatory
program.
To implement the Executive Order, the Department is taking two
immediate steps to launch its retrospective review of existing
regulatory and reporting requirements. First, as described further
below, the Department issues this Request for Information (RFI) seeking
public comment on how best to review
[[Page 6124]]
its existing regulations and to identify whether any of its existing
regulations should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed.
Second, the Department has created a link on the Web page of DOE's
Office of the General Counsel to an e-mail in-box at
[email protected], which interested parties can use to
identify to DOE--on a continuing basis--regulations that may be in need
of review in the future. It may also be used to provide thoughts in
this proceeding outside of the traditional initial comment and reply
comment filings (all such comments will be made public). Together,
these steps will help the Department ensure that its regulations remain
necessary, properly tailored, up-to-date requirements that effectively
achieve regulatory objectives without imposing unwarranted costs.
Request for Information
Pursuant to the Executive Order, the Department is developing a
preliminary plan for the periodic review of its existing regulations
and reporting obligations. The Department's goal is to create a
systematic method for identifying those significant rules that are
obsolete, unnecessary, unjustified, or simply no longer make sense.
While this review will focus on the elimination of rules that are no
longer warranted, DOE will also consider strengthening, complementing,
or modernizing rules where necessary or appropriate--including, as
relevant, undertaking new rulemakings.
Consistent with the Department's commitment to public participation
in the rulemaking process, the Department is beginning this process by
soliciting views from the public on how best to conduct its analysis of
existing DOE rules and how best to identify those rules that might be
modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed. It is also seeking views
from the public on specific rules or Department imposed obligations
that should be altered or eliminated. While the Department promulgates
rules in accordance with the law and to the best of its analytic
capability, it is difficult to be certain of the consequences of a
rule, including its costs and benefits, until it has been tested.
Because knowledge about the full effects of a rule is widely dispersed
in society, members of the public are likely to have useful information
and perspectives on the benefits and burdens of existing requirements
and how regulatory obligations may be updated, streamlined, revised, or
repealed to better achieve regulatory objectives, while minimizing
regulatory burdens. Interested parties may also be well-positioned to
identify those rules that are most in need of review and, thus, assist
the Department in prioritizing and properly tailoring its retrospective
review process. In short, engaging the public in an open, transparent
process is a crucial first step in DOE's review of its existing
regulations.
List of Questions for Commenters
The following list of questions represents a preliminary attempt to
identify issues raised by the Department's efforts to develop a
preliminary plan for the retrospective analysis of its regulations and
to identify rules/obligations on which it should immediately focus.
This non-exhaustive list is meant to assist in the formulation of
comments and is not intended to restrict the issues that may be
addressed. In addressing these questions or others, DOE requests that
commenters identify with specificity the regulation or reporting
requirement at issue, providing legal citation where available. The
Department also requests that the submitter provide, in as much detail
as possible, an explanation why a regulation or reporting requirement
should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed, as well as
specific suggestions of ways the Department can better achieve its
regulatory objectives.
(1) How can the Department best promote meaningful periodic reviews
of its existing rules and how can it best identify those rules that
might be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed?
(2) What factors should the agency consider in selecting and
prioritizing rules and reporting requirements for review?
(3) Are there regulations that simply make no sense or have become
unnecessary, ineffective, or ill advised and, if so, what are they? Are
there rules that can simply be repealed without impairing the
Department's regulatory programs and, if so, what are they?
(4) Are there rules or reporting requirements that have become
outdated and, if so, how can they be modernized to accomplish their
regulatory objectives better?
(5) Are there rules that are still necessary, but have not operated
as well as expected such that a modified, stronger, or slightly
different approach is justified?
(6) Does the Department currently collect information that it does
not need or use effectively to achieve regulatory objectives?
(7) Are there regulations, reporting requirements, or regulatory
processes that are unnecessarily complicated or could be streamlined to
achieve regulatory objectives in more efficient ways?
(8) Are there rules or reporting requirements that have been
overtaken by technological developments? Can new technologies be
leveraged to modify, streamline, or do away with existing regulatory or
reporting requirements?
(9) Are there any of the Department's regulations that fail to make
a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs; or that
are not tailored to impose the least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining the regulatory objectives, taking into account, among other
things, and to the extent practicable, the costs of cumulative
regulations; or that fail to select, in choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity)?
(10) How can the Department best obtain and consider accurate,
objective information and data about the costs, burdens, and benefits
of existing regulations? Are there existing sources of data the
Department can use to evaluate the post-promulgation effects of
regulations over time? We invite interested parties to provide data
that may be in their possession that documents the costs, burdens, and
benefits of existing requirements.
(11) Are there regulations that are working well that can be
expanded or used as a model to fill gaps in other DOE regulatory
programs?
The Department notes that this RFI is issued solely for information
and program-planning purposes. While responses to this RFI do not bind
DOE to any further actions related to the response, all submissions
will be made publically available on http://www.regulations.gov.
Issued in Washington, DC on January 28, 2011.
Scott Blake Harris,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011-2368 Filed 2-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P