279
HR 2586 RDS
after notice and opportunity for public comment, and after
consultation with representatives of appropriate State,
local, and tribal governments, and such other departments
and agencies, offices, organizations, or persons as may be
advisable.
‘‘(d) REVIEW.—The President shall review and,
where appropriate, revise the guidelines published under
this section at least every 4 years.
‘‘§ 638. Research and training in risk assessment
‘‘(a) EVALUATION.—The head of each covered agency
shall regularly and systematically evaluate risk assessment
research and training needs of the agency, including,
where relevant and appropriate, the following:
‘‘(1) Research to reduce generic data gaps, to
address modelling needs (including improved model
sensitivity), and to validate default options, particu-
larly those common to multiple risk assessments.
‘‘(2) Research leading to improvement of meth-
ods to quantify and communicate uncertainty and
variability among individuals, species, populations,
and, in the case of ecological risk assessment, eco-
logical communities.
‘‘(3) Emerging and future areas of research, in-
cluding research on comparative risk analysis, expo-
sure to multiple chemicals and other stressors,
280
HR 2586 RDS
noncancer endpoints, biological markers of exposure
and effect, mechanisms of action in both mammalian
and nonmammalian species, dynamics and prob-
abilities of physiological and ecosystem exposures,
and prediction of ecosystem-level responses.
‘‘(4) Long-term needs to adequately train indi-
viduals in risk assessment and risk assessment appli-
cation. Evaluations under this paragraph shall in-
clude an estimate of the resources needed to provide
necessary training.
‘‘(b) STRATEGY AND ACTIONS TO MEET IDENTIFIED
NEEDS.—The head of each covered agency shall develop
a strategy and schedule for carrying out research and
training to meet the needs identified in subsection (a).
‘‘(c) REPORT.—Not later than 6 months after the
date of the enactment of this subchapter, the head of each
covered agency shall submit to the Congress a report on
the evaluations conducted under subsection ‘‘(a) and the
strategy and schedule developed under subsection ‘‘(b).
The head of each covered agency shall report to the Con-
gress periodically on the evaluations, strategy, and sched-
ule.
‘‘§ 639. Study of comparative risk analysis
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—(1) The Director of the Office
of Management and Budget, in consultation with the Of-
281
HR 2586 RDS
fice of Science and Technology Policy, shall conduct, or
provide for the conduct of, a study using comparative risk
analysis to rank health, safety, and environmental risks
and to provide a common basis for evaluating strategies
for reducing or preventing those risks. The goal of the
study shall be to improve methods of comparative risk
analysis.
‘‘(2) Not later than 90 days after the date of the en-
actment of this subchapter, the Director, in collaboration
with the heads of appropriate Federal agencies, shall enter
into a contract with the National Research Council to pro-
vide technical guidance on approaches to using compara-
tive risk analysis and other considerations in setting
health, safety, and environmental risk reduction priorities.
‘‘(b) SCOPE OF STUDY.—The study shall have suffi-
cient scope and breadth to evaluate comparative risk anal-
ysis and to test approaches for improving comparative risk
analysis and its use in setting priorities for health, safety,
and environmental risk reduction. The study shall com-
pare and evaluate a range of diverse health, safety, and
environmental risks.
‘‘(c) STUDY
PARTICIPANTS.—In conducting the
study, the Director shall provide for the participation of
a range of individuals with varying backgrounds and ex-
282
HR 2586 RDS
pertise, both technical and nontechnical, comprising broad
representation of the public and private sectors.
‘‘(d) DURATION.—The study shall begin within 180
days after the date of the enactment of this subchapter
and terminate within 2 years after the date on which it
began.
‘‘(e) RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING COMPARA-
TIVE RISK ANALYSIS AND ITS USE.—Not later than 90
days after the termination of the study, the Director shall
submit to the Congress the report of the National Re-
search Council with recommendations regarding the use
of comparative risk analysis and ways to improve the use
of comparative risk analysis for decision-making in appro-
priate Federal agencies.
‘‘§ 639a. Definitions
‘‘For purposes of this subchapter:
‘‘(1) RISK ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT.—The term
‘risk assessment document’ means a document con-
taining the explanation of how hazards associated
with a substance, activity, or condition have been
identified, quantified, and assessed. The term also
includes a written statement accepting the findings
of any such document.
‘‘(2) RISK
CHARACTERIZATION
DOCUMENT.—
The term ‘risk characterization document’ means a
283
HR 2586 RDS
document quantifying or describing the degree of
toxicity, exposure, or other risk posed by hazards as-
sociated with a substance, activity, or condition to
which individuals, populations, or resources are ex-
posed. The term also includes a written statement
accepting the findings of any such document.
‘‘(3) BEST
ESTIMATE.—The term ‘best esti-
mate’ means a scientifically appropriate estimate
which is based, to the extent feasible, on one of the
following:
‘‘(A) Central estimates of risk using the
most plausible assumptions.
‘‘(B) An approach which combines multiple
estimates based on different scenarios and
weighs the probability of each scenario.
‘‘(C) Any other methodology designed to
provide the most unbiased representation of the
most plausible level of risk, given the current
scientific information available to the Federal
agency concerned.
‘‘(4) SUBSTITUTION RISK.—The term ‘substi-
tution risk’ means a potential risk to human health,
safety, or the environment from a regulatory alter-
native designed to decrease other risks.
284
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(5) COVERED FEDERAL AGENCY.—The term
‘covered Federal agency’ means each of the follow-
ing:
‘‘(A) The Environmental Protection Agen-
cy.
‘‘(B) The Occupational Safety and Health
Administration.
‘‘(C) The Department of Transportation
(including the National Highway Transpor-
tation Safety Administration).
‘‘(D) The Food and Drug Administration.
‘‘(E) The Department of Energy.
‘‘(F) The Department of the Interior.
‘‘(G) The Department of Agriculture.
‘‘(H) The Consumer Product Safety Com-
mission.
‘‘(I) The National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Administration.
‘‘(J) The United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
‘‘(K) The Mine Safety and Health Admin-
istration.
‘‘(L) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
285
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(M) Any other Federal agency considered
a covered Federal agency pursuant to section
413(b)(2)(E).
‘‘(6) FEDERAL
AGENCY.—The term ‘Federal
agency’ means an executive department, military de-
partment, or independent establishment as defined
in part I of title 5 of the United States Code, except
that such term also includes the Office of Tech-
nology Assessment.
‘‘(7) DOCUMENT.—The term ‘document’ in-
cludes material stored in electronic or digital form.
‘‘§ 639b. Peer review program
‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—For regulatory programs de-
signed to protect human health, safety, or the environ-
ment, the head of each Federal agency shall develop a sys-
tematic program for independent and external peer review
required by subsection (b). Such program shall be applica-
ble across the agency and—
‘‘(1) shall provide for the creation of peer re-
view panels consisting of experts and shall be broad-
ly representative and balanced and to the extent rel-
evant and appropriate, may include representatives
of State, local, and tribal governments, small busi-
nesses, other representatives of industry, univer-
sities, agriculture, labor, consumers, conservation or-
286
HR 2586 RDS
ganizations, or other public interest groups and or-
ganizations;
‘‘(2) may provide for differing levels of peer re-
view and differing numbers of experts on peer review
panels, depending on the significance or the com-
plexity of the problems or the need for expeditious-
ness;
‘‘(3) shall not exclude peer reviewers with sub-
stantial and relevant expertise merely because they
represent entities that may have a potential interest
in the outcome, provided that interest is fully dis-
closed to the agency and in the case of a regulatory
decision affecting a single entity, no peer reviewer
representing such entity may be included on the
panel;
‘‘(4) may provide specific and reasonable dead-
lines for peer review panels to submit reports under
subsection (c); and
‘‘(5) shall provide adequate protections for con-
fidential business information and trade secrets, in-
cluding requiring peer reviewers to enter into con-
fidentiality agreements.
‘‘(b) REQUIREMENT FOR PEER REVIEW.—In connec-
tion with any rule that is likely to result in an annual
increase in costs of $100,000,000 or more (other than any
287
HR 2586 RDS
rule or other action taken by an agency to authorize or
approve any individual substance or product), each Fed-
eral agency shall provide for peer review in accordance
with this section of any risk assessment or cost analysis
which forms the basis for such rule or of any analysis
under section 431(a). In addition, the Director of the Of-
fice of Management and Budget may order that peer re-
view be provided for any major risk assessment or cost
assessment that is likely to have a significant impact on
public policy decisions.
‘‘(c) CONTENTS.—Each peer review under this sec-
tion shall include a report to the Federal agency concerned
with respect to the scientific and economic merit of data
and methods used for the assessments and analyses.
‘‘(d) RESPONSE TO PEER REVIEW.—The head of the
Federal agency shall provide a written response to all sig-
nificant peer review comments.
‘‘(e) AVAILABILITY
TO PUBLIC.—All peer review
comments or conclusions and the agency’s responses shall
be made available to the public and shall be made part
of the administrative record.
‘‘(f) PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED DATA
AND ANALY-
SIS.—No peer review shall be required under this section
for any data or method which has been previously sub-
288
HR 2586 RDS
jected to peer review or for any component of any analysis
or assessment previously subjected to peer review.
‘‘(g) NATIONAL PANELS.—The President shall ap-
point National Peer Review Panels to annually review the
risk assessment and cost assessment practices of each
Federal agency for programs designed to protect human
health, safety, or the environment. The Panel shall submit
a report to the Congress no less frequently than annually
containing the results of such review.
‘‘§ 639c. Petition for review of a major free-standing
risk assessment
‘‘(a) Any interested person may petition an agency
to conduct a scientific review of a risk assessment con-
ducted or adopted by the agency, except for a risk assess-
ment used as the basis for a major rule or a site-specific
risk assessment.
‘‘(b) The agency shall utilize external peer review, as
appropriate, to evaluate the claims and analyses in the pe-
tition, and shall consider such review in making its deter-
mination of whether to grant the petition.
‘‘(c) The agency shall grant the petition if the peti-
tion establishes that there is a reasonable likelihood that—
‘‘(1)(A) the risk assessment that is the subject
of the petition was carried out in a manner substan-
289
HR 2586 RDS
tially inconsistent with the principles in section 633;
or
‘‘(B) the risk assessment that is the subject of
the petition does not take into account material sig-
nificant new scientific data and scientific under-
standing;
‘‘(2) the risk assessment that is the subject of
the petition contains significantly different results
than if it had been properly conducted pursuant to
subchapter III; and
‘‘(3) a revised risk assessment will provide the
basis for reevaluating an agency determination of
risk, and such determination currently has an effect
on the United States economy equivalent to that of
major rule.
‘‘(d) A decision to grant, or final action to deny, a
petition under this subsection shall be made not later than
180 days after the petition is submitted.
‘‘(e) If the agency grants the petition, it shall com-
plete its review of the risk assessment not later than 1
year after its decision to grant the petition. If the agency
revises the risk assessment, in response to its review, it
shall do so in accordance with section 633.
290
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘§ 639d. Risk-based priorities
‘‘(a) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this section are
to—
‘‘(1) encourage Federal agencies engaged in
regulating risks to human health, safety, and the en-
vironment to achieve the greatest risk reduction at
the least cost practical;
‘‘(2) promote the coordination of policies and
programs to reduce risks to human health, safety,
and the environment; and
‘‘(3) promote open communication among Fed-
eral agencies, the public, the President, and Con-
gress regarding environmental, health, and safety
risks, and the prevention and management of those
risks.
‘‘(b) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of this section:
‘‘(1) COMPARATIVE RISK ANALYSIS.—The term
‘comparative risk analysis’ means a process to sys-
tematically estimate, compare, and rank the size and
severity of risks to provide a common basis for eval-
uating strategies for reducing or preventing those
risks.
‘‘(2) COVERED
AGENCY.—The term ‘covered
agency’ means each of the following:
‘‘(A) The Environmental Protection Agen-
cy.
291
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(B) The Department of Labor.
‘‘(C) The Department of Transportation.
‘‘(D) The Food and Drug Administration.
‘‘(E) The Department of Energy.
‘‘(F) The Department of the Interior.
‘‘(G) The Department of Agriculture.
‘‘(H) The Consumer Product Safety Com-
mission.
‘‘(I) The National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Administration.
‘‘(J) The United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
‘‘(K) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
‘‘(3) EFFECT.—The term ‘effect’ means a dele-
terious change in the condition of—
‘‘(A) a human or other living thing (includ-
ing death, cancer, or other chronic illness, de-
creased reproductive capacity, or disfigure-
ment); or
‘‘(B) an inanimate thing important to
human welfare (including destruction, degenera-
tion, the loss of intended function, and in-
creased costs for maintenance).
‘‘(4) 
IRREVERSIBILITY.—The 
term
‘irreversibility’ means the extent to which a return
292
HR 2586 RDS
to conditions before the occurrence of an effect are
either very slow or will never occur.
‘‘(5) 
LIKELIHOOD.—The 
term 
‘likelihood’
means the estimated probability that an effect will
occur.
‘‘(6) 
MAGNITUDE.—The 
term 
‘magnitude’
means the number of individuals or the quantity of
ecological resources or other resources that contrib-
ute to human welfare that are affected by exposure
to a stressor.
‘‘(7) SERIOUSNESS.—The term ‘seriousness’
means the intensity of effect, the likelihood, the
irreversibility, and the magnitude.
‘‘(c) DEPARTMENT AND AGENCY PROGRAM GOALS.—
‘‘(1) SETTING PRIORITIES.—In exercising au-
thority under applicable laws protecting human
health, safety, or the environment, the head of each
covered agency shall set priorities for the use of re-
sources available under those laws to address those
risks to human health, safety, and the environment
that—
‘‘(A) the covered agency determines to be
most serious; and
‘‘(B) can be addressed in a cost-effective
manner, with the goal of achieving the greatest
293
HR 2586 RDS
overall net reduction in risks with the public
and private sector resources expended.
‘‘(2) 
DETERMINING
THE
MOST
SERIOUS
RISKS.—In identifying the greatest risks under para-
graph (1) of this subsection, each covered agency
shall consider, at a minimum—
‘‘(A) the likelihood, irreversibility, and se-
verity of the effect; and
‘‘(B) the number and classes of individuals
potentially affected,
and shall explicitly take into account the results of
the comparative risk analysis conducted under sub-
section (d) of this section.
‘‘(3) OMB REVIEW.—The covered agency’s de-
terminations of the most serious risks for purposes
of setting priorities shall be reviewed and approved
by the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget before submission of the covered agency’s
annual budget requests to Congress.
‘‘(4) INCORPORATING
RISK-BASED
PRIORITIES
INTO BUDGET AND PLANNING.—The head of each
covered agency shall incorporate the priorities identi-
fied under paragraph (1) into the agency budget,
strategic planning, regulatory agenda, enforcement,
and research activities. When submitting its budget
294
HR 2586 RDS
request to Congress and when announcing its regu-
latory agenda in the Federal Register, each covered
agency shall identify the risks that the covered agen-
cy head has determined are the most serious and
can be addressed in a cost-effective manner under
paragraph (1), the basis for that determination, and
explicitly identify how the covered agency’s requested
budget and regulatory agenda reflect those prior-
ities.
‘‘(5) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This subsection shall
take effect 12 months after the date of enactment
of this Act.
‘‘(d) COMPARATIVE RISK ANALYSIS.—
‘‘(1) REQUIREMENT.—
‘‘(A)(i) No later than 6 months after the
effective date of this Act, the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget shall enter
into appropriate arrangements with a nationally
recognized scientific institution or scholarly or-
ganization—
‘‘(I) to conduct a study of the meth-
odologies for using comparative risk to
rank dissimilar human health, safety, and
environmental risks; and
295
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(II) to conduct a comparative risk
analysis.
‘‘(ii) The comparative risk analysis shall
compare and rank, to the extent feasible,
human health, safety, and environmental risks
potentially regulated across the spectrum of
programs administered by all covered agencies.
‘‘(B) The Director shall consult with the
Office of Science and Technology Policy regard-
ing the scope of the study and the conduct of
the comparative risk analysis.
‘‘(C) Nothing in this subsection should be
construed to prevent the Director from entering
into a sole-source arrangement with a nationally
recognized scientific institution or scholarly or-
ganization.
‘‘(2) CRITERIA.—The Director shall ensure that
the arrangement under paragraph (1) provides
that—
‘‘(A) the scope and specificity of the analy-
sis are sufficient to provide the President and
agency heads guidance in allocating resources
across agencies and among programs in agen-
cies to achieve the greatest degree of risk pre-
296
HR 2586 RDS
vention and reduction for the public and private
resources expended;
‘‘(B) the analysis is conducted through an
open process, including opportunities for the
public to submit views, data, and analyses and
to provide public comment on the results before
making them final;
‘‘(C) the analysis is conducted by a bal-
anced group of individuals with relevant exper-
tise, including toxicologists, biologists, engi-
neers, and experts in medicine, industrial hy-
giene, and environmental effects, and the selec-
tion of members for such study shall be at the
sole discretion of the scientific institution or
scholarly organization;
‘‘(D) the analysis is conducted, to the ex-
tent feasible and relevant, consistent with the
risk assessment and risk characterization prin-
ciples in section 633 of this subchapter;
‘‘(E) the methodologies and principal sci-
entific determinations made in the analysis are
subjected to independent peer review consistent
with section 633(g), and the conclusions of the
peer review are made publicly available as part
297
HR 2586 RDS
of the final report required under subsection
(e); and
‘‘(F) the results are presented in a manner
that distinguishes between the scientific conclu-
sions and any policy or value judgments em-
bodied in the comparisons.
‘‘(3) COMPLETION AND REVIEW.—No later than
3 years after the effective date of this Act, the com-
parative risk analysis required under paragraph (1)
shall be completed. The comparative risk analysis
shall be reviewed and revised at least every 5 years
thereafter for a minimum of 15 years following the
release of the first analysis. The Director shall ar-
range for such review and revision by an accredited
scientific body in the same manner as provided
under paragraphs (1) and (2).
‘‘(4) STUDY.—The study of methodologies pro-
vided under paragraph (1) shall be conducted as
part of the first comparative risk analysis and shall
be completed no later than 180 days after the com-
pletion of that analysis. The goal of the study shall
be to develop and rigorously test methods of com-
parative risk analysis. The study shall have suffi-
cient scope and breadth to test approaches for im-
proving comparative risk analysis and its use in set-
298
HR 2586 RDS
ting priorities for human health, safety, and environ-
mental risk prevention and reduction.
‘‘(5) TECHNICAL
GUIDANCE.—No later than
180 days after the effective date of this Act, the Di-
rector, in collaboration with other heads of covered
agencies shall enter into a contract with the Na-
tional Research Council to provide technical guid-
ance to agencies on approaches to using comparative
risk analysis in setting human health, safety, and
environmental priorities to assist agencies in comply-
ing with subsection (c) of this section.
‘‘(e) REPORTS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TO CON-
GRESS AND THE PRESIDENT.—No later than 24 months
after the effective date of this Act, each covered agency
shall submit a report to Congress and the President—
‘‘(1) detailing how the agency has complied
with subsection (c) and describing the reason for
any departure from the requirement to establish pri-
orities to achieve the greatest overall net reduction
in risk;
‘‘(2) recommending—
‘‘(A) modification, repeal, or enactment of
laws to reform, eliminate, or enhance programs
or mandates relating to human health, safety,
or the environment; and
299
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(B) modification or elimination of statu-
tory or judicially mandated deadlines,that would
assist the covered agency to set priorities in ac-
tivities to address the risks to human health,
safety, or the environment in a manner consist-
ent with the requirements of subsection (c)(1);
‘‘(3) evaluating the categories of policy and
value judgment used in risk assessment, risk charac-
terization, or cost-benefit analysis; and
‘‘(4) discussing risk assessment research and
training needs, and the agency’s strategy and sched-
ule for meeting those needs.
‘‘(f) SAVINGS PROVISION AND JUDICIAL REVIEW.—
‘‘(1) IN
GENERAL.—Nothing in this section
shall be construed to modify any statutory standard
or requirement designed to protect human health,
safety, or the environment.
‘‘(2) JUDICIAL
REVIEW.—Compliance or non-
compliance by an agency with the provisions of this
section shall not be subject to judicial review.
‘‘(3) AGENCY
ANALYSIS.—Any analysis pre-
pared under this section shall not be subject to judi-
cial consideration separate or apart from the re-
quirement, rule, program, or law to which it relates.
When an action for judicial review of a covered
300
HR 2586 RDS
agency action is instituted, any analysis for, or relat-
ing to, the action shall constitute part of the whole
record of agency action for the purpose of judicial
review of the action and shall, to the extent relevant,
be considered by a court in determining the legality
of the covered agency action.’’.
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections
appearing at the beginning of chapter 6 of title 5, United
States Code, is amended—
(1) by inserting immediately below the chapter
heading the following:
‘‘SUBCHAPTER I—REGULATORY ANALYSIS’’; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘SUBCHAPTER III—RISK ASSESSMENTS
‘‘631. Short title.
‘‘632. Purposes.
‘‘633. Effective date; applicability; savings provisions.
‘‘634. Principles for risk assessment.
‘‘635. Principles for risk characterization and communication.
‘‘636. Recommendations or classifications by a non-United States-based entity.
‘‘637. Guidelines and report.
‘‘638. Research and training in risk assessment.
‘‘639. Study of comparative risk analysis.
‘‘639a. Definitions.
‘‘639b. Peer review program.
‘‘639c. Petition for review of a major free-standing risk assessment.
‘‘639d. Risk-based priorities.’’.
SEC. 3004. REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—
(1) JUDICIAL REVIEW.—
301
HR 2586 RDS
(A) AMENDMENT.—Section 611 of title 5,
United States Code, is amended to read as fol-
lows:
‘‘§ 611. Judicial review
‘‘(a)(1) Not later than one year, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, after the effective date of a final
rule with respect to which an agency—
‘‘(A) certified, pursuant to section 605(b), that
such rule would not have a significant economic im-
pact on a substantial number of small entities; or
‘‘(B) prepared a final regulatory flexibility anal-
ysis pursuant to section 604,
an affected small entity may petition for the judicial re-
view of such certification or analysis in accordance with
the terms of this subsection. A court having jurisdiction
to review such rule for compliance with the provisions of
section 553 or under any other provision of law shall have
jurisdiction to review such certification or analysis. In the
case where an agency delays the issuance of a final regu-
latory flexibility analysis pursuant to section 608(b), a pe-
tition for judicial review under this subsection shall be
filed not later than one year, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, after the date the analysis is made avail-
able to the public.
302
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘af-
fected small entity’ means a small entity that is or will
be adversely affected by the final rule.
‘‘(3) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to
affect the authority of any court to stay the effective date
of any rule or provision thereof under any other provision
of law.
‘‘(4)(A) In the case where the agency certified that
such rule would not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities, the court may
order the agency to prepare a final regulatory flexibility
analysis pursuant to section 604 if the court determines,
on the basis of the rulemaking record, that the certifi-
cation was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion,
or otherwise not in accordance with law.
‘‘(B) In the case where the agency prepared a final
regulatory flexibility analysis, the court may order the
agency to take corrective action consistent with the re-
quirements of section 604 if the court determines, on the
basis of the rulemaking record, that the final regulatory
flexibility analysis was prepared by the agency without ob-
servance of procedure required by section 604.
‘‘(5) If, by the end of the 90-day period beginning
on the date of the order of the court pursuant to para-
303
HR 2586 RDS
graph (4) (or such longer period as the court may pro-
vide), the agency fails, as appropriate—
‘‘(A) to prepare the analysis required by section
604; or
‘‘(B) to take corrective action consistent with
the requirements of section 604,
the court may stay the rule or grant such other relief as
it deems appropriate.
‘‘(6) In making any determination or granting any
relief authorized by this subsection, the court shall take
due account of the rule of prejudicial error.
‘‘(b) In an action for the judicial review of a rule,
any regulatory flexibility analysis for such rule (including
an analysis prepared or corrected pursuant to subsection
(a)(4)) shall constitute part of the whole record of agency
action in connection with such review.
‘‘(c) Nothing in this section bars judicial review of
any other impact statement or similar analysis required
by any other law if judicial review of such statement or
analysis is otherwise provided by law.’’.
(B) EFFECTIVE
DATE.—The amendment
made by subsection (a) shall apply only to final
agency rules issued after the date of enactment
of this Act.
304
HR 2586 RDS
(2) RULES
COMMENTED
ON
BY
SBA
CHIEF
COUNSEL FOR ADVOCACY.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Section 612 of title 5,
United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following new subsection:
‘‘(d) ACTION BY THE SBA CHIEF COUNSEL FOR AD-
VOCACY.—
‘‘(1) TRANSMITTAL OF PROPOSED RULES AND
INITIAL
REGULATORY
FLEXIBILITY
ANALYSIS
TO
SBA CHIEF COUNSEL FOR ADVOCACY.—On or before
the 30th day preceding the date of publication by an
agency of general notice of proposed rulemaking for
a rule, the agency shall transmit to the Chief Coun-
sel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administra-
tion—
‘‘(A) a copy of the proposed rule; and
‘‘(B)(i) a copy of the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis for the rule if required under
section 603; or
‘‘(ii) a determination by the agency that an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not re-
quired for the proposed rule under section 603
and an explanation for the determination.
‘‘(2) STATEMENT OF EFFECT.—On or before
the 15th day following receipt of a proposed rule and
305
HR 2586 RDS
initial regulatory flexibility analysis from an agency
under paragraph (1), the Chief Counsel for Advo-
cacy may transmit to the agency a written statement
of the effect of the proposed rule on small entities.
‘‘(3) RESPONSE.—If the Chief Counsel for Ad-
vocacy transmits to an agency a statement of effect
on a proposed rule in accordance with paragraph
(2), the agency shall publish the statement, together
with the response of the agency to the statement, in
the Federal Register at the time of publication of
general notice of proposed rulemaking for the rule.
‘‘(4) SPECIAL RULE.—Any proposed rules is-
sued by an appropriate Federal banking agency (as
that term is defined in section 3(q) of the Federal
Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(q)), the Na-
tional Credit Union Administration, or the Office of
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, in connection
with the implementation of monetary policy or to en-
sure the safety and soundness of federally insured
depository institutions, any affiliate of such an insti-
tution, credit unions, or government sponsored hous-
ing enterprises or to protect the Federal deposit in-
surance funds shall not be subject to the require-
ments of this subsection.’’.
306
HR 2586 RDS
(B) CONFORMING
AMENDMENT.—Section
603(a) of title 5, United States Code, is amend-
ed by inserting ‘‘in accordance with section
612(d)’’ before the period at the end of the last
sentence.
(3) SENSE
OF
CONGRESS
REGARDING
SBA
CHIEF COUNSEL FOR ADVOCACY.—It is the sense of
Congress that the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration should be permitted
to appear as amicus curiae in any action or case
brought in a court of the United States for the pur-
pose of reviewing a rule.
(b) SUBCHAPTER HEADING.—Chapter 6 of title 5,
United States Code, is amended by inserting immediately
before section 601, the following subchapter heading:
‘‘SUBCHAPTER I—REGULATORY ANALYSIS’’.
SEC. 3005. GUIDANCE FOR JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 7 of title 5, United
States Code, is amended—
(1) by striking section 706; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new sec-
tions:
‘‘§ 706. Scope of review
‘‘(a) To the extent necessary to reach a decision and
when presented, the reviewing court shall decide all rel-
307
HR 2586 RDS
evant questions of law, interpret constitutional and statu-
tory provisions, and determine the meaning or applicabil-
ity of the terms of an agency action. The reviewing court
shall—
‘‘(1) compel agency action unlawfully withheld
or unreasonably delayed; and
‘‘(2) hold unlawful and set aside agency action,
findings and conclusions found to be—
‘‘(A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of dis-
cretion, or otherwise not in accordance with
law;
‘‘(B) contrary to constitutional right,
power, privilege, or immunity;
‘‘(C) in excess of statutory jurisdiction, au-
thority, or limitations, or short of statutory
right;
‘‘(D) without observance of procedure re-
quired by law;
‘‘(E) unsupported by substantial evidence
in a proceeding subject to sections 556 and 557
or otherwise reviewed on the record of an agen-
cy hearing provided by statute; or
‘‘(F) unwarranted by the facts to the ex-
tent that the facts are subject to trial de novo
by the reviewing court.
308
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(b) In making the determinations set forth in sub-
section (a), the court shall review the whole record or
those parts of it cited by a party, and due account shall
be taken of the rule of prejudicial error.
‘‘§ 707. Consent decrees
‘‘In interpreting any consent decree in effect on or
after the date of enactment of this section that imposes
on an agency an obligation to initiate, continue, or com-
plete rulemaking proceedings, the court shall not enforce
the decree in a way that divests the agency of discretion
clearly granted to the agency by statute to respond to
changing circumstances, make policy or managerial
choices, or protect the rights of third parties.
‘‘§ 708. Affirmative defense
‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it shall
be an affirmative defense in any enforcement action
brought by an agency that the regulated person or entity
reasonably relied on and is complying with a rule, regula-
tion, adjudication, directive, or order of such agency or
any other agency that is incompatible, contradictory, or
otherwise cannot be reconciled with the agency rule, regu-
lation, adjudication, directive, or order being enforced.
309
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘§ 709. Agency interpretations in civil and criminal
actions
‘‘(a) No civil or criminal penalty shall be imposed by
a court, and no civil administrative penalty shall be im-
posed by an agency, for the violation of a rule—
‘‘(1) if the court or agency, as appropriate,
finds that the rule failed to give the defendant fair
warning of the conduct that the rule prohibits or re-
quires; or
‘‘(2) if the court or agency, as appropriate,
finds that the defendant acted reasonably in good
faith based upon the language of the rule as pub-
lished in the Federal Register.
‘‘(b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to pre-
clude an agency:
‘‘(1) from revising a rule or changing its inter-
pretation of a rule in accordance with sections 552
and 553 of this title, and subject to the provisions
of this section, prospectively enforcing the require-
ments of such rule as revised or reinterpreted and
imposing or seeking a civil or criminal penalty for
any subsequent violation of such rule as revised or
reinterpreted;
‘‘(2) from making a new determination of fact,
and based upon such determination, prospectively
applying a particular legal requirement.
310
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(c) This section shall apply to any action filed after
the date of the enactment of the Comprehensive Regu-
latory Reform Act of 1995.’’.
(b) TECHNICAL
AMENDMENT.—The analysis for
chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by
striking the item relating to section 706 and inserting the
following new items:
‘‘706. Scope of review.
‘‘707. Consent decrees.
‘‘708. Affirmative defense.
‘‘709. Agency interpretations in civil and criminal actions.’’.
SEC. 3006. CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW.
(a) FINDING.—The Congress finds that effective
steps for improving the efficiency and proper management
of Government operations will be promoted if a morato-
rium on the implementation of certain major final and
proposed rules is imposed in order to provide Congress
an opportunity for review.
(b) IN GENERAL.—Title 5, United States Code, is
amended by inserting immediately after chapter 7 the fol-
lowing new chapter:‘‘
CHAPTER 8—CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW OF
AGENCY RULEMAKING
‘‘Sec.
‘‘801. Congressional review.
‘‘802. Congressional disapproval procedure.
‘‘803. Special rule on statutory, regulatory, and judicial deadlines.
‘‘804. Definitions.
‘‘805. Judicial review.
‘‘806. Applicability; severability.
‘‘807. Exemption for monetary policy.
311
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘§ 801. Congressional review
‘‘(a)(1)(A) Before a rule can take effect as a final
rule, the Federal agency promulgating such rule shall sub-
mit to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General a report containing—
‘‘(i) a copy of the rule;
‘‘(ii) a concise general statement relating to the
rule; and
‘‘(iii) the proposed effective date of the rule.
‘‘(B) The Federal agency promulgating the rule shall
make available to each House of Congress and the Comp-
troller General, upon request—
‘‘(i) a complete copy of the cost-benefit analysis
of the rule, if any;
‘‘(ii) the agency’s actions relevant to sections
603, 604, 605, 607, and 609;
‘‘(iii) the agency’s actions relevant to sections
202, 203, 204, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995; and
‘‘(iv) any other relevant information or require-
ments under any other Act and any relevant Execu-
tive orders, such as Executive Order No. 12866.
‘‘(C) Upon receipt, each House shall provide copies
to the Chairman and Ranking Member of each committee
with jurisdiction.
312
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(2)(A) The Comptroller General shall provide a re-
port on each major rule to the committees of jurisdiction
to each House of the Congress by the end of 12 calendar
days after the submission or publication date as provided
in section 802(b)(2). The report of the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall include an assessment of the agency’s compli-
ance with procedural steps required by paragraph (1)(B).
‘‘(B) Federal agencies shall cooperate with the Comp-
troller General by providing information relevant to the
Comptroller General’s report under subparagraph (A).
‘‘(3) A major rule relating to a report submitted
under paragraph (1) shall take effect as a final rule, the
latest of—
‘‘(A) the later of the date occurring 60 days
(excluding days either House of Congress is ad-
journed for more than 3 days during a session of
Congress) after the date on which—
‘‘(i) the Congress receives the report sub-
mitted under paragraph (1); or
‘‘(ii) the rule is published in the Federal
Register;
‘‘(B) if the Congress passes a joint resolution of
disapproval described under section 802 relating to
the rule, and the President signs a veto of such reso-
lution, the earlier date—
313
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(i) on which either House of Congress
votes and fails to override the veto of the Presi-
dent; or
‘‘(ii) occurring 30 session days after the
date on which the Congress received the veto
and objections of the President; or
‘‘(C) the date the rule would have otherwise
taken effect, if not for this section (unless a joint
resolution of disapproval under section 802 is en-
acted).
‘‘(4) Except for a major rule, a rule shall take effect
as otherwise provided by law after submission to Congress
under paragraph (1).
‘‘(5) Notwithstanding paragraph (3), the effective
date of a rule shall not be delayed by operation of this
chapter beyond the date on which either House of Con-
gress votes to reject a joint resolution of disapproval under
section 802.
‘‘(b)(1) A rule or proposed rule shall not take effect
(or continue) as a final rule, if the Congress passes a joint
resolution of disapproval described under section 802.
‘‘(2) A rule or proposed rule that does not take effect
(or does not continue) under paragraph (1) may not be
reissued in substantially the same form, and a new rule
that is substantially the same as such a rule or proposed
314
HR 2586 RDS
rule may not be issued, unless the reissued or new rule
is specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date
of the joint resolution disapproving the original rule.
‘‘(c)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this
section (except subject to paragraph (3)), a rule that
would not take effect by reason of this chapter may take
effect, if the President makes a determination under para-
graph (2) and submits written notice of such determina-
tion to the Congress.
‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) applies to a determination made
by the President by Executive order that the rule should
take effect because such rule is—
‘‘(A) necessary because of an imminent threat
to health or safety or other emergency;
‘‘(B) necessary for the enforcement of criminal
laws;
‘‘(C) necessary for national security; or
‘‘(D) issued pursuant to a statute implementing
an international trade agreement.
‘‘(3) An exercise by the President of the authority
under this subsection shall have no effect on the proce-
dures under section 802 or the effect of a joint resolution
of disapproval under this section.
‘‘(d)(1) In addition to the opportunity for review oth-
erwise provided under this chapter, in the case of any rule
315
HR 2586 RDS
that is published in the Federal Register (as a rule that
shall take effect as a final rule) during the period begin-
ning on the date occurring 60 days before the date the
Congress adjourns a session of Congress through the date
on which the same or succeeding Congress first convenes
its next session, section 802 shall apply to such rule in
the succeeding session of Congress.
‘‘(2)(A) In applying section 802 for purposes of such
additional review, a rule described under paragraph (1)
shall be treated as though—
‘‘(i) such rule were published in the Federal
Register (as a rule that shall take effect as a final
rule) on the 15th session day after the succeeding
Congress first convenes; and
‘‘(ii) a report on such rule were submitted to
Congress under subsection (a)(1) on such date.
‘‘(B) Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed
to affect the requirement under subsection (a)(1) that a
report shall be submitted to Congress before a final rule
can take effect.
‘‘(3) A rule described under paragraph (1) shall take
effect as a final rule as otherwise provided by law (includ-
ing other subsections of this section).
‘‘(e)(1) Section 802 shall apply in accordance with
its terms to any major rule that was published in the Fed-
316
HR 2586 RDS
eral Register (as a rule that shall take effect as a final
rule) in the period beginning on November 20, 1994,
through the date of enactment of the Comprehensive Reg-
ulatory Reform Act of 1995.
‘‘(2) In applying section 802 for purposes of Congres-
sional review, a rule described under paragraph (1) shall
be treated as though—
‘‘(A) such rule were published in the Federal
Register (as a rule that shall take effect as a final
rule) on the date of enactment of the Comprehensive
Regulatory Reform Act of 1995; and
‘‘(B) a report on such rule were submitted to
Congress under subsection (a)(1) on such date.
‘‘(3) The effectiveness of a rule described under para-
graph (1) shall be as otherwise provided by law, unless
the rule is made of no force or effect under section 802.
‘‘(f) Any rule that takes effect and later is made of
no force or effect by enactment of a joint resolution under
section 802 shall be treated as though such rule had never
taken effect.
‘‘(g) If the Congress does not enact a joint resolution
of disapproval under section 802, no court or agency may
infer any intent of the Congress from any action or inac-
tion of the Congress with regard to such rule, related stat-
ute, or joint resolution of disapproval.
317
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘§ 802. Congressional disapproval procedure
‘‘(a) JOINT RESOLUTION DEFINED.—For purposes
of this section, the term ‘joint resolution’ means only—
‘‘(1) a joint resolution introduced in the period
beginning on the date on which the report referred
to in section 801(a) is received by Congress and end-
ing 60 days thereafter (excluding days either House
of Congress is adjourned for more than 3 days dur-
ing a session of Congress), the matter after the re-
solving clause of which is as follows: ‘That Congress
disapproves the rule submitted by the ll relating
to ll, and such rule shall have no force or effect.’
(The blank spaces being appropriately filled in); or
‘‘(2) a joint resolution the matter after the re-
solving clause of which is as follows: ‘That the Con-
gress disapproves the proposed rule published by the
llll relating to lll, and such proposed
rule shall not be issued or take effect as a final
rule.’ (the blank spaces being appropriately filled in)
‘‘(b)(1) A joint resolution described in subsection (a)
shall be referred to the committees in each House of Con-
gress with jurisdiction.
‘‘(2) For purposes of this section, the term ‘submis-
sion or publication date’ means—
‘‘(A) in the case of a joint resolution described
in subsection (a)(1) the later of the date on which—
318
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(i) the Congress receives the report sub-
mitted under section 801(a)(1); or
‘‘(ii) the rule is published in the Federal
Register; or
‘‘(B) in the case of a joint resolution described
in subsection (a)(2), the date of introduction of the
joint resolution.
‘‘(c) In the Senate, if the committee to which is re-
ferred a joint resolution described in subsection (a) has
not reported such joint resolution (or an identical joint
resolution) at the end of 20 calendar days after the sub-
mission or publication date defined under subsection
(b)(2), such committee may be discharged from further
consideration of such joint resolution upon a petition sup-
ported in writing by 30 Members of the Senate, and such
joint resolution shall be placed on the appropriate cal-
endar.
‘‘(d)(1) In the Senate, when the committee to which
a joint resolution is referred has reported, or when a com-
mittee is discharged (under subsection (c)) from further
consideration of, a joint resolution described in subsection
(a), it is at any time thereafter in order (even though a
previous motion to the same effect has been disagreed to)
for a motion to proceed to the consideration of the joint
resolution, and all points of order against the joint resolu-
319
HR 2586 RDS
tion (and against consideration of the joint resolution) are
waived. The motion is not subject to amendment, or to
a motion to postpone, or to a motion to proceed to the
consideration of other business. A motion to reconsider the
vote by which the motion is agreed to or disagreed to shall
not be in order. If a motion to proceed to the consideration
of the joint resolution is agreed to, the joint resolution
shall remain the unfinished business of the Senate until
disposed of.
‘‘(2) In the Senate, debate on the joint resolution,
and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection
therewith, shall be limited to not more than 10 hours,
which shall be divided equally between those favoring and
those opposing the joint resolution. A motion further to
limit debate is in order and not debatable. An amendment
to, or a motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed to
the consideration of other business, or a motion to recom-
mit the joint resolution is not in order.
‘‘(3) In the Senate, immediately following the conclu-
sion of the debate on a joint resolution described in sub-
section (a), and a single quorum call at the conclusion of
the debate if requested in accordance with the rules of the
Senate, the vote on final passage of the joint resolution
shall occur.
320
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(4) Appeals from the decisions of the Chair relating
to the application of the rules of the Senate to the proce-
dure relating to a joint resolution described in subsection
(a) shall be decided without debate.
‘‘(e) If, before the passage by one House of a joint
resolution of that House described in subsection (a), that
House receives from the other House a joint resolution
described in subsection (a), then the following procedures
shall apply:
‘‘(1) The joint resolution of the other House
shall not be referred to a committee.
‘‘(2) With respect to a joint resolution described
in subsection (a) of the House receiving the joint
resolution—
‘‘(A) the procedure in that House shall be
the same as if no joint resolution had been re-
ceived from the other House; but
‘‘(B) the vote on final passage shall be on
the joint resolution of the other House.
‘‘(f) This section is enacted by Congress—
‘‘(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of
the Senate and House of Representatives, respec-
tively, and as such it is deemed a part of the rules
of each House, respectively, but applicable only with
respect to the procedure to be followed in that
321
HR 2586 RDS
House in the case of a joint resolution described in
subsection (a), and it supersedes other rules only to
the extent that it is inconsistent with such rules; and
‘‘(2) with full recognition of the constitutional
right of either House to change the rules (so far as
relating to the procedure of that House) at any time,
in the same manner, and to the same extent as in
the case of any other rule of that House.
‘‘§ 803. Special rule on statutory, regulatory, and judi-
cial deadlines
‘‘(a) In the case of any deadline for, relating to, or
involving any rule which does not take effect (or the effec-
tiveness of which is terminated) because of enactment of
a joint resolution under section 802, that deadline is ex-
tended until the date 1 year after the date of the joint
resolution. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed
to affect a deadline merely by reason of the postponement
of a rule’s effective date under section 801(a).
‘‘(b) The term ‘deadline’ means any date certain for
fulfilling any obligation or exercising any authority estab-
lished by or under any Federal statute or regulation, or
by or under any court order implementing any Federal
statute or regulation.
‘‘§ 804. Definitions
‘‘(a) For purposes of this chapter—
322
HR 2586 RDS
‘‘(1) the term ‘Federal agency’ means any agen-
cy as that term is defined in section 551(1) (relating
to administrative procedure);
‘‘(2) the term ‘major rule’ has the same mean-
ing given such term in section 621(5); and
‘‘(3) the term ‘final rule’ means any final rule
or interim final rule.
‘‘(b) As used in subsection (a)(3), the term ‘rule’ has
the meaning given such term in section 551, except that
such term does not include any rule of particular applica-
bility including a rule that approves or prescribes for the
future rates, wages, prices, services, or allowances there-
for, corporate or financial structures, reorganizations,
mergers, or acquisitions thereof, or accounting practices
or disclosures bearing on any of the foregoing or any rule
of agency organization, personnel, procedure, practice or
any routine matter.
‘‘§ 805. Judicial review
‘‘No determination, finding, action, or omission under
this chapter shall be subject to judicial review.
‘‘§ 806. Applicability; severability
‘‘(a) This chapter shall apply notwithstanding any
other provision of law.
‘‘(b) If any provision of this chapter or the applica-
tion of any provision of this chapter to any person or cir-
323
HR 2586 RDS
cumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provi-
sion to other persons or circumstances, and the remainder
of this chapter, shall not be affected thereby.
‘‘§ 807. Exemption for monetary policy
‘‘Nothing in this chapter shall apply to rules that con-
cern monetary policy proposed or implemented by the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the
Federal Open Market Committee.’’.
(c) Effective Date.—The amendment made by sub-
section (b) shall take effect on the date of enactment of
this Act.
(d) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of chapters
for part I of title 5, United States Code, is amended by
inserting immediately after the item relating to chapter
7 the following:
‘‘8. Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking ...........
801’’.
SEC. 3007. REGULATORY ACCOUNTING STATEMENT.
(a) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section, the
following definitions apply:
(1) MAJOR RULE.—The term ‘‘major rule’’ has
the same meaning as defined in section 621(5)(A)(i)
of title 5, United States Code. The term shall not
include—
(A) administrative actions governed by sec-
tions 556 and 557 of title 5, United States
Code;
324
HR 2586 RDS
(B) regulations issued with respect to a
military or foreign affairs function of the Unit-
ed States or a statute implementing an inter-
national trade agreement; or
(C) regulations related to agency organiza-
tion, management, or personnel.
(2) AGENCY.—The term ‘‘agency’’ means any
executive department, military department, Govern-
ment corporation, Government controlled corpora-
tion, or other establishment in the executive branch
of the Government (including the Executive Office of
the President), or any independent regulatory agen-
cy, but shall not include—
(A) the General Accounting Office;
(B) the Federal Election Commission;
(C) the governments of the District of Co-
lumbia and of the territories and possessions of
the United States, and their various subdivi-
sions; or
(D) Government-owned contractor-oper-
ated facilities, including laboratories engaged in
national defense research and production activi-
ties.
(b) ACCOUNTING STATEMENT.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—
325
HR 2586 RDS
(A) The President shall be responsible for
implementing and administering the require-
ments of this section.
(B) Not later than June 1, 1997, and each
June 1 thereafter, the President shall prepare
and submit to Congress an accounting state-
ment that estimates the annual costs of major
rules and corresponding benefits in accordance
with this subsection.
(2) YEARS COVERED BY ACCOUNTING STATE-
MENT.—Each accounting statement shall cover, at a
minimum, the 5 fiscal years beginning on October 1
of the year in which the report is submitted and may
cover any fiscal year preceding such fiscal years for
purpose of revising previous estimates.
(3) TIMING AND PROCEDURES.—
(A) The President shall provide notice and
opportunity for comment for each accounting
statement. The President may delegate to an
agency the requirement to provide notice and
opportunity to comment for the portion of the
accounting statement relating to that agency.
(B) The President shall propose the first
accounting statement under this subsection not
later than 2 years after the date of enactment
326
HR 2586 RDS
of this Act and shall issue the first accounting
statement in final form not later than 3 years
after such effective date. Such statement shall
cover, at a minimum, each of the fiscal years
beginning after the date of enactment of this
Act.
(4) CONTENT OF ACCOUNTING STATEMENT.—
(A) Each accounting statement shall con-
tain estimates of costs and benefits with respect
to each fiscal year covered by the statement in
accordance with this paragraph. For each such
fiscal year for which estimates were made in a
previous accounting statement, the statement
shall revise those estimates and state the rea-
sons for the revisions.
(B)(i) An accounting statement shall esti-
mate the costs of major rules by setting forth,
for each year covered by the statement—
(I) the annual expenditure of national
economic 
resources 
for 
major 
rules,
grouped by regulatory program; and
(II) such other quantitative and quali-
tative measures of costs as the President
considers appropriate.
327
HR 2586 RDS
(ii) For purposes of the estimate of costs
in the accounting statement, national economic
resources shall include, and shall be listed
under, at least the following categories:
(I) Private sector costs.
(II) Federal sector costs.
(III) State and local government ad-
ministrative costs.
(C) An accounting statement shall estimate the
benefits of major rules by setting forth, for each
year covered by the statement, such quantitative and
qualitative measures of benefits as the President
considers appropriate. Any estimates of benefits con-
cerning reduction in health, safety, or environmental
risks shall present the most plausible level of risk
practical, along with a statement of the reasonable
degree of scientific certainty.
(c) ASSOCIATED REPORT TO CONGRESS.—
(1) IN
GENERAL.—At the same time as the
President submits an accounting statement under
subsection (b), the President, acting through the Di-
rector of the Office of Management and Budget,
shall submit to Congress a report associated with
the accounting statement (hereinafter referred to as
328
HR 2586 RDS
an ‘‘associated report’’). The associated report shall
contain, in accordance with this subsection—
(A) analyses of impacts; and
(B) recommendations for reform.
(2) ANALYSES
OF
IMPACTS.—The President
shall include in the associated report the following:
(A) Analyses prepared by the President of
the cumulative impact of major rules in Federal
regulatory programs covered in the accounting
statement on the following:
(i) The ability of State and local gov-
ernments to provide essential services, in-
cluding police, fire protection, and edu-
cation.
(ii) Small business.
(iii) Productivity.
(iv) Wages.
(v) Economic growth.
(vi) Technological innovation.
(vii) Consumer prices for goods and
services.
(viii) Such other factors considered
appropriate by the President.
(B) A summary of any independent analy-
ses of impacts prepared by persons commenting
329
HR 2586 RDS
during the comment period on the accounting
statement.
(3) RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR
REFORM.—The
President shall include in the associated report the
following:
(A) A summary of recommendations of the
President for reform or elimination of any Fed-
eral regulatory program or program element
that does not represent sound use of national
economic resources or otherwise is inefficient.
(B) A summary of any recommendations
for such reform or elimination of Federal regu-
latory programs or program elements prepared
by persons commenting during the comment pe-
riod on the accounting statement.
(d) GUIDANCE FROM OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET.—The Director of the Office of Management and
Budget shall, in consultation with the Council of Economic
Advisers, provide guidance to agencies—
(1) to standardize measures of costs and bene-
fits in accounting statements prepared pursuant to
sections 3 and 7 of this Act, including—
(A) detailed guidance on estimating the
costs and benefits of major rules; and
330
HR 2586 RDS
(B) general guidance on estimating the
costs and benefits of all other rules that do not
meet the thresholds for major rules; and
(2) to standardize the format of the accounting
statements.
(e) RECOMMENDATIONS
FROM
CONGRESSIONAL
BUDGET OFFICE.—After each accounting statement and
associated report submitted to Congress, the Director of
the Congressional Budget Office shall make recommenda-
tions to the President—
(1) for improving accounting statements pre-
pared pursuant to this section, including rec-
ommendations on level of detail and accuracy; and
(2) for improving associated reports prepared
pursuant to this section, including recommendations
on the quality of analysis.
(f) JUDICIAL REVIEW.—No requirements under this
section shall be subject to judicial review in any manner.
SEC. 3008. STUDIES AND REPORTS.
(a) RISK ASSESSMENTS.—The Administrative Con-
ference of the United States shall—
(1) develop and carry out an ongoing study of
the operation of the risk assessment requirements of
subchapter III of chapter 6 of title 5, United States
Code (as added by section 4 of this Act); and
331
HR 2586 RDS
(2) submit an annual report to the Congress on
the findings of the study.
(b) ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT.—Not later
than December 31, 1996, the Administrative Conference
of the United States shall—
(1) carry out a study of the operation of the
Administrative Procedure Act (as amended by sec-
tion 3 of this Act); and
(2) submit a report to the Congress on the find-
ings of the study, including proposals for revision, if
any.
SEC. 3009. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
(a) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Except as otherwise pro-
vided, this Act and the amendments made by this Act shall
take effect on the date of enactment.
(b) SEVERABILITY.—If any provision of this Act, an
amendment made by this Act, or the application of such
provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is
held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, the
amendments made by this Act, and the application of the
provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not
be affected thereby.
Passed the House of Representatives November 9,
1995.
Attest:
ROBIN H. CARLE,
Clerk.
332
HR 2586 RDS
HR 2586 RDS——2
HR 2586 RDS——3
HR 2586 RDS——4
HR 2586 RDS——5
HR 2586 RDS——6
HR 2586 RDS——7
HR 2586 RDS——8
HR 2586 RDS——9
HR 2586 RDS——10
HR 2586 RDS——11
HR 2586 RDS——12
HR 2586 RDS——13
HR 2586 RDS——14
HR 2586 RDS——15
HR 2586 RDS——16
HR 2586 RDS——17
HR 2586 RDS——18
HR 2586 RDS——19
HR 2586 RDS——20
HR 2586 RDS——21
HR 2586 RDS——22