[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13549-13550]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5681]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

15 CFR Chapter IX

50 CFR Chapters II, III, IV, and VI

RIN 0648-XA282


Reducing Regulatory Burden; Retrospective Review Under E.O. 13563

AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 
Commerce.

ACTION: Request for information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is 
preparing a preliminary plan to review its existing significant 
regulations in response to the President's Executive Order 13563 on 
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. The purpose of NOAA's 
review is to make the agency's regulatory program more effective and 
less burdensome in achieving its regulatory objectives by identifying 
those regulations that should be modified, streamlined, expanded or 
repealed. NOAA is asking for ideas and information from the public in 
preparing its preliminary plan explaining how it will conduct such a 
review.

DATES: You must submit any comments on or before April 4, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0648-XA282, by 
any one of the following methods:
    <bullet> Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov.
    <bullet> Fax: 301-713-0596, Attn: William Chappell.
    <bullet> Mail: 1315 East-West Highway, SSMC3, SF5, Room 13142, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910.
    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 
and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without 
change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, 
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly 
accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or 
otherwise sensitive or protected information. NOAA will accept 
anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required fields, if you wish to 
remain anonymous). You may submit attachments to electronic comments in 
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Chappell, 301-713-2337, x169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration is a Federal agency that is part of the U.S. Department 
of Commerce. NOAA's mission is to understand and predict changes in the 
Earth's environment and conserve and manage coastal and marine 
resources to meet our Nation's economic, social, and environmental 
needs. NOAA administers a broad range of statutes, including, but not 
limited to the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.; 
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 
1801, et seq.; Marine Mammal Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 1361, et seq, 
National Marine Sanctuaries Act, 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.; Coastal Zone 
Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1415, et seq.; and Land Remote Sensing Policy 
Act, 15 U.S.C. 5601, et seq.
    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. Among other things, the 
Executive Order directed agencies to develop and submit a preliminary 
plan within 120 days that will explain how they will periodically 
review existing significant regulations to identify any regulations 
that can be made more effective or less burdensome in achieving 
regulatory objectives.
    To implement the Executive Order, NOAA is taking several immediate 
steps to launch its retrospective review of existing regulatory 
requirements. Consistent with its commitment to public participation, 
NOAA is soliciting views from the public on how best to conduct its 
analysis of existing NOAA rules and how best to identify those rules 
that might be modified, streamlined, expanded or repealed. NOAA 
promulgates rules in accordance with applicable laws and based on best 
available scientific information, analyses of different alternatives 
for

[[Page 13550]]

agency action, and public participation and input. However, important 
information as to the consequences of a rule, including its costs and 
benefits, comes from practical, real-world experience (both on the part 
of the public and on the part of the agency) after rules have been 
implemented. Regulated entities and members of the public affected by 
or interested in NOAA's regulations are likely to have useful 
information and perspectives on the benefits and burdens of existing 
requirements beyond what was available at the time regulations were 
issued. Interested parties may also be well-positioned to identify 
those rules that are most in need of review; NOAA would find such input 
helpful as it considers how to prioritize and properly tailor its 
retrospective review process for significant regulations. In short, 
engaging the public in an open, transparent process is a crucial step 
in NOAA's review of its existing regulations.
    NOAA recognizes that the public comment period set forth in this 
Request for Information (RFI) is shorter than the 30-60 day (or longer) 
comment periods that may be used for proposed rules. That is because of 
consideration of the timing requirements under the Executive Order, and 
because NOAA is not asking for detailed comments on the substance of 
specific regulation, only comments pertaining to the retrospective 
review plan which is under development.

Questions for the Public

    Comments will be most helpful if they provide examples and a 
detailed explanation of how the suggestion will support NOAA's mission 
in a way that is more efficient and less burdensome. In providing 
comments, please keep these key considerations in mind:
    <bullet> Retrospective review does not allow NOAA to contravene 
requirements of its various statutory mandates. In addition, where 
NOAA's discretion has been limited by law, as is the case with fishery 
management plans and regulations developed by Regional Fishery 
Management Councils under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 304, 
NOAA's ability to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal regulations is 
similarly constrained.
    <bullet> NOAA currently conducts periodic review of existing 
regulations pursuant to statutory mandates. For instance, NOAA's Office 
of National Marine Sanctuaries is required by the National Marine 
Sanctuaries Act, 16 U.S.C. 1434(e), to periodically review sanctuary 
management plans to ensure that sanctuary management continues to best 
conserve, protect, and enhance the nationally significant living and 
cultural resources at each site. Such review provides sanctuary 
management with an ongoing opportunity to review existing regulations, 
amend existing regulations (as deemed necessary), and generally outline 
future regulatory goals in the management plans. Similarly, pursuant to 
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, NOAA's 
National Marine Fisheries Service (as delegated from the Secretary of 
Commerce) is required to review at routine intervals that may not 
exceed two years any fishery management plans, plan amendments, or 
regulations for fisheries that are experiencing overfishing or in need 
of rebuilding. 16 U.S.C. 1854(e)(7). For many fisheries, revisions to 
plans and regulations occur with even greater frequency, as National 
Standard 2 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that conservation and 
management measures be based on the best scientific information 
available. Id. Sec.  1851(a)(2). We seek your input on developing a 
review plan that is integrated with those existing requirements.
    <bullet> Our plan will be tailored to reflect our resources, 
rulemaking history, and the volume of significant regulations at issue.
    NOAA intends the questions below to elicit useful information as 
the agency develops a preliminary plan for possible review of its 
significant regulations. These questions are not intended to be 
exhaustive. You may raise other issues or make suggestions unrelated to 
these questions that you believe would help the agency develop better 
regulations.
    (1) How can NOAA review its existing significant rules in a way 
that will identify rules that can and should be changed, streamlined, 
consolidated, or removed? NOAA encourages those submitting comments to 
include a proposed process under which such a review could be regularly 
undertaken.
    (2) How can NOAA reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and choice 
for the public in a way that will promote and achieve its mission?
    (3) Does NOAA have rules or guidance that are duplicative or that 
have conflicting requirements among its components or with other 
agencies? If so, please specifically identify the rules or guidance and 
suggest ways NOAA can streamline, consolidate, or make these 
regulations work better.
    (4) Are there better ways to encourage public participation and an 
open exchange of views when NOAA engages in rulemaking?
    (5) Are there rules or guidance that is working well that could be 
used as models for improving other regulations? If so, please 
specifically identify the rule or guidance.
    (6) Are NOAA regulations and guidance written in language that is 
clear and easy to understand, consistent with statutory requirements? 
Please identify specific regulations and guidance that are good 
candidates for a plain language re-write and also identify regulations 
that are written clearly that could be used as models.
    (7) What are some suggestions that NOAA can use to assure that its 
regulations promote and achieve its mission in ways that are efficient 
and less burdensome?
    (8) Which significant regulations have proven to be excessively 
burdensome? What data support this? What suggestions do you have for 
reducing the burden and maintaining and achieving NOAA's mission?
    (9) Which significant regulations could be made more flexible 
within the existing legal framework? What data support this?
    (10) Are there regulations that have become ineffective or been 
overtaken by technological or other change and, if so, what are they? 
How can they be modernized to accomplish the statutory or regulatory 
objective better?
    NOAA will consider public input as we develop a plan to 
periodically review the agency's significant rules.
    NOAA notes that this Request for Information is issued solely for 
information and program-planning purposes. The agency will give careful 
consideration to the responses, and may use them as appropriate during 
the retrospective review, but we do not anticipate providing a response 
to each comment submitted. While responses to this RFI do not bind NOAA 
to any further actions related to the response, all submissions will be 
made publically available on http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: March 7, 2011.
Lois J. Schiffer,
General Counsel, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-5681 Filed 3-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-12-P