Regulatory Management: Communication About Technology-Based Innovations Can Be Improved
Published: 2001-02-12T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Federal and state agencies are making extensive use of information technology (IT) to address traditional regulatory management. For example, the Department of Labor has a system of electronic "advisors" imitating the interaction that an individual might have with an employment law expert, and the Environmental Protection Agency is working with partners in state government to develop a national environmental information exchange network. Several of the state innovations include interactive systems that allow regulated entities to identify their regulatory responsibilities and complete related transactions. For example, the Texas Railroad Commission has an electronic process that allows users to obtain oil or gas well permits on-line, complete the required forms, and pay any associated fees. Representatives from nongovernmental organizations suggest that federal agencies improve both the content and access to on-line information, more broadly and consistently use some existing applications, and adopt some new applications. Several key factors that facilitate or hinder the adoption and diffusion of innovative IT applications are (1) top-level leadership commitment/support, (2) adequate financial resources and human capital, (3) legislative and executive branch IT initiatives, (4) internal and external partnerships with critical stakeholders, (5) reengineering of existing business processes, and (6) development of a communication infrastructure.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: During the past several years, information technology (IT) has played an  increasingly important role in how federal agencies interact with the public  and accomplish their missions. Sometimes referred to as “electronic  government” or “E-gov,” the use of IT has already changed how public  policy is developed and administered in a variety of areas and has the  potential to introduce even more changes in the future. One area of public  policy that is beginning to feel the effects of IT is regulatory management,  which includes such interrelated processes as rulemaking, compliance  assistance, information collection and dissemination, and regulatory  enforcement. The use of IT in regulatory management can reduce  regulatory burden; improve the transparency of regulatory processes; and,  ultimately, facilitate the accomplishment of regulatory objectives.
Last year, we reported on innovative uses of IT to facilitate public  participation in federal rulemaking. This report responds to your request  that we examine the use of IT in other aspects of regulatory management.  Specifically, we agreed to identify (1) examples of how federal agencies are  innovatively using IT, either individually or in collaboration with other  agencies or levels of government, to facilitate regulatory management; (2)  examples of how state regulatory agencies are innovatively using IT to  facilitate regulatory management; (3) IT applications that representatives  of nongovernmental organizations believe could be more widely used by  federal regulatory agencies; and (4) what officials and staff in federal and  state regulatory agencies and nongovernmental organizations believe are  the key factors that facilitate or hinder the adoption and diffusion of  innovative IT applications in regulatory management. The parties relevant  to each of these objectives (i.e., federal or state agencies and  nongovernmental organizations) identified which applications they  considered “innovative.”
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Several legislative initiatives enacted during the past decade have  emphasized the potential of IT to improve the federal government’s  performance. For example, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)  requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to  “promote the use of information technology to improve the productivity,  efficiency, and effectiveness of Federal programs, including through  dissemination of public information and the reduction of information  collection burdens on the public.” The Information Technology  Management Reform Act of 1996 (known as the Clinger-Cohen Act) also  requires the OMB Director to “promote and be responsible for improving  the acquisition, use, and disposal of information technology by the Federal  Government to improve the productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness of  Federal programs, including through dissemination of public information  and the reduction of information collection burdens on the public.”  Additionally, the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) requires  the OMB Director to ensure that federal agencies “provide for the option of  electronic maintenance, submission, or disclosure of information, when  practicable as a substitute for paper” by October 2003. GPEA’s full  implementation will give individuals and organizations the option to submit  information or transact business with agencies electronically.
Executive branch initiatives have also encouraged the use of IT in the  federal government. For example, in September 1993, the National  Performance Review (later the National Partnership for Reinventing  Government) announced a set of recommendations that were intended to  improve government by reengineering through the use of information  technology. Those recommendations included the development of  integrated electronic access to government information and service; the  creation of a national environmental data index; and the use of IT and other  techniques “to increase opportunities for early, frequent, and interactive  public participation during the rulemaking process and to increase  program evaluation efforts.” In July 1996, President Clinton issued  Executive Order 13011 on “Federal Information Technology,” which,  among other things, established a Chief Information Officers Council (CIO  Council) as the principle interagency forum to improve agency information  resource management and to “share experiences, ideas, and promising  practices.” A December 17, 1999, presidential memorandum on electronic  government noted that “as public awareness and Internet usage increase,  the demand for online Government interaction and simplified, standardized  ways to access Government information and services becomes increasingly  important” and directed federal agencies to take steps to address that  growing demand. Additionally, this directive called for the establishment of  a “one stop” gateway to government information available on the Internet.
The federal government has taken some steps to establish electronic  gateways that provide one-stop access to information from a variety of  agencies, including regulatory agencies. For example, the “FirstGov” Web  site (www.firstgov.gov), which was launched on September 22, 2000,  provides links to all on-line federal resources—from applying for student  loans to tracking Social Security benefits. Also, the U.S. Business Advisor  site (www.business.gov) provides businesses with one-stop access to  federal information on such topics as taxes, international trade, financial  assistance, and laws and regulations. The laws and regulations link allows  users to connect with the Federal Register, the United States Code, and  compilations of laws and regulations affecting small businesses. The U.S.  Business Advisor site was created by the Small Business Administration  (SBA), the National Performance Review, and an interagency task force  and is maintained and funded by SBA.
In our report issued last year, we identified a number of examples of how  federal agencies were using IT to facilitate public participation in  rulemaking. Although all of the departments and agencies we contacted  were developing some type of IT-based participation vehicles, officials and  staff in those agencies questioned the need for standardization of those  practices across agencies. They said that agencies need to be able to design  their procedures to fit their particular circumstances, and that  standardization would require scarce agency resources. However, agency  officials and staff were supportive of efforts to better coordinate the use of  those participation mechanisms to avoid each agency’s reinventing the  wheel.
subsections: section_title: OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
paragraphs: OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which was  created by the PRA of 1980, is responsible for providing guidance and  oversight for both IT and regulatory issues. The OIRA Administrator sits on  the CIO Council, which is chaired by OMB’s Deputy Director for  Management. Executive Order 12866 identifies OIRA as “the repository of  expertise concerning regulatory issues” and makes the office responsible  for coordinating agencies’ regulatory missions. The executive order also  established a Regulatory Working Group that is chaired by the OIRA  Administrator and is comprised of representatives of the heads of each  agency with significant domestic regulatory responsibilities. The order also  says that the Regulatory Working Group “shall serve as a forum to assist  agencies in identifying and analyzing important regulatory issues,”  including “the development of innovative regulatory techniques.”
OIRA has taken some steps to encourage the use of IT specifically to  improve regulatory management in federal agencies. For example, in April  2000, the OIRA Administrator launched an initiative focusing on using IT to  improve the quality of the information that the government collects, while  minimizing the burden. The initiative began with a public forum that  featured senior officials from a number of federal regulatory agencies  presenting information on their agencies’ initiatives, followed by a series of  roundtable discussions. Additionally, OIRA and OMB have provided  guidance to agencies on a variety of information policy issues, including  the implementation of GPEA, privacy, and data exchanges with the states.  The guidance applies to regulatory management as well as other agency  functions.
section_title: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: The objectives of our review were to identify (1) examples of how federal  agencies are using IT innovatively, either individually or in collaboration  with other agencies or levels of government, to facilitate regulatory  management; (2) examples of how state regulatory agencies are using IT  innovatively to facilitate regulatory management; (3) IT applications that  representatives of nongovernmental organizations believe could be more  widely used by federal regulatory agencies; and (4) what officials and staff  in federal and state regulatory agencies and nongovernmental  organizations believe are the key factors that facilitate or hinder the  adoption and diffusion of IT applications in regulatory management.
We focused our efforts regarding the first objective on the Departments of  Agriculture (USDA); Labor (DOL); Health and Human Services (HHS); and  Transportation (DOT) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We  selected these agencies because they are primarily responsible for federal  health, safety, and environmental regulations that have been the target of  reform initiatives. In each agency, we identified the IT and regulatory  management officials and staff to interview, either through our designated  liaisons or through publications that featured relevant IT applications,  including the agencies’ Web sites and agency documents. We asked each of  these officials and staff to identify IT-based regulatory management  applications that they considered innovative. We did not attempt to define  the word “innovative” but made it clear that the application should not  simply be that the agency had a page on the Web. We also obtained  information on the agencies’ innovative or “best practice” uses of IT in  regulatory management from individuals and groups focusing on regulatory  reform, including the Regulatory Working Group, the Council for  Excellence in Government, and academics.
In each agency, we asked a series of structured questions that were keyed  to our reporting objectives. For each of the federal IT-based regulatory  management applications that the agencies or others identified, we  conducted a structured, follow-up interview that was designed to obtain  more detailed information from relevant agency officials. Specifically, we  asked, among other things, for a detailed description of the innovation and  for information on the regulatory purpose(s), status, scope, and results of  the IT-based application. Additionally, we asked about lessons learned,  including obstacles and facilitators to development. We also reviewed  information on the innovations on agencies’ Web sites and other relevant  documents.
In some cases, the innovations we identified were primarily located in one  part of the agency. For example, in HHS, the innovations identified for this  study were primarily in the Department’s Food and Drug Administration  (FDA). Additionally, in some instances, we selected certain innovations for  presentation in this report from a longer list of suggestions that was  provided by the agency. For example, FDA officials provided a list of more  than a dozen applications that they considered innovative. Working with  FDA officials, we selected applications for inclusion in this report that  represented different types of functions.
For the second objective, we interviewed officials from organizations  representing state governments (e.g., the National Governors Association  and the Environmental Council of the States) to identify promising  regulatory IT applications at the state level. Again, we allowed these  organizations to define the word innovative. We also identified state IT  applications in the regulatory arena that other organizations (e.g., the  Council for Excellence in Government and the National Association of  State Information Resource Executives) or publications identified as  examples of best practices. For each of the identified state IT-based  applications, we talked to officials or staff in the state agencies involved in  the development and/or implementation of the application and reviewed  information on the agencies’ Web sites.
For the third objective, we interviewed representatives of business  associations, consumer advocacy groups, and academic centers that deal  with regulatory reform issues. Although we recognize that there are  numerous organizations that are interested in regulatory issues, we  judgmentally selected these nongovernmental organizations to contact  because they have been actively involved in recent regulatory reform  initiatives and represent alternative perspectives on regulatory reform. We  contacted the following organizations: the National Federation of  Independent Businesses, the National Association of Manufacturers, the  U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Hospital Association, the  Natural Resources Defense Council, Public Citizen, OMB Watch,  Information Renaissance, the American Bar Association, the Heritage  Foundation, Citizens for a Sound Economy, the Mercatus Center of George  Mason University, American University’s Washington College of Law, and  Washington University’s Center for the Study of American Business. Some  of these organizations provided extensive information, while others gave  us more limited answers to our questions. We also reviewed available Web  sites for the organizations and looked at relevant publications discussing IT  applications that may have potential for improving federal regulatory  management.
For the fourth objective, we asked all of the individuals that we interviewed  what they viewed as the key factors that facilitate or hinder the adoption  and diffusion of IT applications in regulatory management.
Our review was intended to provide examples of innovative IT-based  applications in regulatory management and should not be viewed as a  compendium of all such applications, even within the federal agencies and  states that are the focus of this report. Also, the suggestions offered by  representatives of the nongovernmental organizations in relation to the  third objective are not intended to be comprehensive of all possible  suggestions. We did not attempt to validate federal or state agency officials’  views or data regarding the performance of the innovations that they  identified.
We conducted our work between June 2000 and December 2000 in  Washington, D.C., in accordance with generally accepted government  auditing standards. We provided a draft of this report to the Director of  OMB for his review and comment. OMB officials said that they had no  comments on the draft report. We also provided federal and state agency  officials with the relevant draft report sections attributed to them to ensure  that we correctly characterized their systems and comments.
section_title: Federal Agencies Used IT in Different Ways to Facilitate Regulatory Management
paragraphs: All of the federal agencies included in our review were using some form of  IT to improve regulatory management and to meet legislative and executive  branch mandates in this area. The applications that the agencies and others  identified as innovative covered all of the dimensions of regulatory  management that we examined, and most applications covered more than  one dimension. Most of the applications involved using IT to improve  traditional regulatory management approaches within their agencies. Other  applications were more interactive in nature and appeared to change the  nature of the relationship between regulatory agencies and the relevant  public. A few of the applications attempted to address issues involving  interagency or intergovernmental coordination. Although agency officials  were able to identify perceived benefits for the innovations, few agencies  had performance data clearly demonstrating the effect of the innovations  on the agencies’ effectiveness or efficiency, burden reduction, or other  regulatory outcomes.
subsections: section_title: Most Innovative Federal IT Applications Attempted to Improve Traditional Regulatory Management Approaches
paragraphs: The innovative IT-based applications that attempted to improve traditional  regulatory management approaches addressed several of the different  dimensions of regulatory management—rulemaking, information  collection, compliance assistance, information dissemination, and other  compliance/enforcement actions. Many of these applications also had  implications for burden reduction and/or improved transparency of the  regulatory process.
subsections: section_title: Rulemaking
paragraphs: Several of the federal IT-based applications and initiatives that agency  officials and others identified as innovative were attempting to improve the  internal management of the rulemaking process.
DOT’s Docket Management System (DMS) is an electronic, image-based  database covering every agency and every rulemaking within the  Department. A DOT official said that the DMS not only offered easier  access to rulemaking materials to the public, but it also made it easier  for DOT lawyers, analysts, managers, and others involved in the  rulemaking to find the information they needed when they needed it.  For example, they said agency professionals could review public  comments on proposed rules at their desks or even from their homes as  they develop final rules. As noted in our previous report, the DMS has  become the official rulemaking record for the Department, enabling  DOT to save more than $1 million each year in administrative costs.
USDA’s Risk Management Agency—the agency responsible for crop  insurance programs—developed an Internet-based Regulatory  Processing Management Tracking System that monitors proposed and  final rules through all steps in the rulemaking process. The system  permits agency employees and others to identify planned regulations  and their estimated time frames, the status of rules being developed  (including the number of days in each processing step), and the next  steps required in the process. The system also has a forecasting feature  that allows users to develop a list of process steps required for  publication of rules and to calculate estimated dates of publication that  are based on best and worst case scenarios. Other features are planned  for the future, and other agencies within USDA have expressed interest  in developing similar systems.
DOT’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has developed an  Internet-based Integrated Rulemaking Management Information System  (IRMIS) to track the status of rulemaking projects, including their  corresponding schedules and associated documents. IRMIS also  provides users with access to other rulemaking-related systems,  including DOT’s DMS; federal regulations; and the agency’s Regulatory  Guidance Library. DOT officials said the Department expects to  implement a DOT-wide tracking system within a year that will interact  with IRMIS and other agency tracking systems.
section_title: Information Collection
paragraphs: Several agencies have developed IT-based applications that involve the  collection of information through some form of electronic reporting. Two  agencies’ efforts in this area are particularly noteworthy—EPA and FDA.
EPA has established a central Office of Environmental Information  (www.epa.gov/oei/) to coordinate the agency’s information collection  and dissemination activities and to develop integrated, standardized  collections of information (among other things). EPA is also taking a  number of actions to make electronic reporting available to all regulated  communities for all environmental compliance reports, including (1)  developing electronic data interchange (EDI) standards; (2) developing  user-friendly Web-based forms, which would be appropriate for  electronic reporting by companies that are not EDI-capable; and (3)  implementing a “central data exchange facility” to provide a single, one- stop point of entry for data submitted to EPA. In addition, the agency is  developing electronic reporting and recordkeeping best practices and  implementation support to help state and local agencies accept  electronic reports under EPA-delegated programs. EPA does not yet  have any data on the amount of burden actually reduced through the use  of electronic reporting. However, on the basis of industry experience  with electronic commerce, EPA officials estimated that these initiatives  could ultimately reduce regulated entities’ paperwork time and costs by  as much as 20 percent for a given entity, allow EPA and state and local  agencies potentially to save millions of dollars in processing costs, and  reduce data entry errors.
FDA’s Operational and Administrative System for Import Support is an  automated system for processing and making admissibility  determinations for shipments of foreign-origin, FDA-regulated products  seeking to enter domestic commerce. Agency officials said that  admissibility decisions are transmitted to importers’ agents within  minutes after shipment data are electronically submitted to FDA, and  that 85 percent of shipments are cleared without any submission of  paper. Automated screening functions also reportedly enhance FDA’s  ability to detect problems, thereby keeping certain products from  entering the country. An FDA contractor estimated that the system  would save the import industry $1.2 billion during a 7-year period, and  FDA believes that the system will also improve the effectiveness and  productivity of agency employees. This system has won a number of  awards, including the CIO Council’s and Industry Advisory Council’s  1998 Best IT Practices in the Federal Government and Government  Executive magazine’s 1998 Government Technology Leadership Award.
FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health has developed an  Internet-based Mammography Program Reporting and Information  System to support the agency’s statutorily mandated responsibility for  certification and inspection of all mammography facilities in the United  States. The system permits the electronic tracking and monitoring of a  facility’s accreditation, certification, inspection, and compliance history.  FDA and state inspectors use laptop computers to record inspection  results and send the results to a centralized database, which is also used  by FDA-approved accreditation bodies. The system allows access to  data from all authorized user locations and was built to accommodate a  variety of users’ computing environments.
FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition’s Voluntary  Cosmetics Registration System provides Internet-based access to a  database that allows cosmetic companies to obtain a registration  number and subsequently submit formulation information and  ingredient lists to the center in a secure manner. FDA officials said that  cosmetic companies are more willing to voluntarily register with the  agency through the system because it reduces the amount of time the  companies spend registering and submitting information.
FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research has designed and  implemented an Electronic Regulatory Submission Review Program to  support the required performance goals in the Prescription Drug User  Fee Act and proposed international standards. The purpose of the  program is to move from a largely paper-based, regulatory submission  and review environment toward one that works with an all-electronic  regulatory submission. Agency officials said that the program would  enable the efficient receipt, viewing, storage, and archiving of electronic  submissions, thereby allowing access to information from any  reviewer’s desktop and automating analytical and administrative  processes.
section_title: Compliance Assistance
paragraphs: Compliance assistance has long been recognized as a way to reduce the  burden associated with federal regulations, but those efforts have not  always proved successful. In our 1996 report on federal regulatory burden,  federal agencies said that several private sector companies we contacted  during our review had misstated or misinterpreted statutory or regulatory  requirements, sometimes incurring unnecessary expenses. Some of the  companies told us that it was difficult to obtain clear compliance  information from federal agencies. We observed in our report that the  mechanisms agencies used to provide information on regulatory  requirements appeared fragmented both between and within agencies, and  that this fragmented approach may be contributing to ineffective  communication between regulatory agencies and the business community.
Some of the IT-based applications that agency officials and others  identified as innovative during this review were intended to inform  regulated entities of their responsibilities under applicable statutes and  regulations.
EPA has partnered with industry associations, environmental groups,  universities, and other government agencies to create 10 compliance  assistance centers for specific sectors, many of which are heavily  populated with small businesses and other small entities. (See  www.assistancecenters.net.) Sectors served by the centers include  agriculture, automotive services and repair, metal finishers, printing,  transportation, local governments, and federal facilities. EPA manages  two of the centers (agriculture and federal facilities), with the other  eight managed by organizations outside of EPA. The centers offer a  range of communication services, including Internet sites, E-mail  groups, fax-back systems, and telephone assistance hotlines.  Information provided through these mechanisms include plain-language  compliance guides, updates on industry-specific regulatory  developments, on-line access and search capabilities for state  regulations, and training and satellite conferences. According to EPA,  the centers were used more than 400,000 times by regulated entities and  the public in fiscal year 2000, a 56-percent increase from fiscal year  1999.
DOL’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) offers  electronic Compliance Assistance Tools (e-CAT) that help businesses  identify workplace hazards in specific areas. They also provide safety  and health information to help businesses address the identified  hazards. (See www.osha-slc.gov/dts/osta/oshasoft/osha-advisors.) The  six available e-CATs cover compliance requirements for baggage  handling, nursing homes, the logging industry, respirator protection,  silica protection, and lockout/tagout inspections.
section_title: Information Dissemination
paragraphs: Although all of the selected agencies had IT-based systems to provide  information to the public, four EPA systems were particularly noteworthy.   “Envirofacts” (www.epa.gov/enviro/) is an Internet-based system that  allows users to retrieve environmental information about different  media and issues (e.g., air and water quality, hazardous wastes, and  toxic releases) from several EPA databases. Envirofacts also includes  (1) mapping programs that allow users to identify sources of pollution  within the users’ community and (2) a Facility Registry System database  that provides a single, integrated source of comprehensive information  about particular facilities. Envirofacts has received numerous awards,  including the Government Computer News Agency Excellence Award in  2000 and the 1999 Government Technology Leadership Award.
EPA’s Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) database  (www.epa.gov/oeca/idea/) is a comprehensive source of environmental  performance information on any EPA-regulated facility, retrieving data  from across agency program offices. The database provides federal and  state employees with facility-specific historical profiles of inspections,  enforcement actions, penalties assessed, toxic chemicals released, and  emergency hazardous spills. Public users can obtain access to certain  information in the system by registering with EPA and paying for  computing services.
EPA has also developed a separate but related Sector Facility Indexing  Project (SFIP) database (www.epa.gov/oeca/sfi) to provide information  from the IDEA database to the public in a more user-friendly and  accessible manner. SFIP currently provides information about  compliance and enforcement history, pollutant releases and spills,  production capacities, and the demographics of the surrounding  community for facilities in five industrial sectors: pulp mills, petroleum  refining, automobile assembly, iron and steel, and primary nonferrous  metals. EPA officials said they plan to expand the database to include  federal facilities in the near future.
EPA’s “AirNow” Program (www.epa.gov/airnow/) is a Web site that  provides environmental information to the public through links to  regional cameras that show air quality in various parts of the country.  The site also provides public health information on the environmental  effects of air pollution, featuring interactive ozone maps, air quality  forecasts, and health advisories that help keep users informed about the  air they breathe. The site won a Government Technology Leadership  award in 1998 and was selected by Government Executive magazine as  one of the “Best Feds on the Web” for 2000.
section_title: Some Federal IT Applications Offered New Ways of Interacting With the Public
paragraphs: The applications previously discussed, although innovative in many  respects, are not interactive or transactional in nature and generally do not  represent significant departures from traditional regulatory management  functions. On the other hand, a few of the applications that the agencies  and others identified as innovative have gone beyond the traditional  constructs and provide new forms of interaction with the public.
subsections: section_title: DOL’s “Elaws” Advisors
paragraphs: One such application is DOL’s set of Employment Laws Assistance for  Workers and Small Businesses (elaws) advisors. (See  http://www.dol.gov/elaws/.) Elaws is a set of interactive advisors that is  available on the Internet to help workers and small businesses understand  their rights and responsibilities under federal employment laws and  regulations. Each advisor imitates the interaction that an individual might  have with a DOL employment law expert, asking questions and providing  answers that are based on the responses provided. For example, the  Confined Spaces Advisor leads the user through a series of questions  designed to determine whether a particular business is covered by the  applicable regulations. Among other things, the advisor asks whether the  space in question  is large enough for a worker to enter bodily;  is configured so that a worker can perform work inside;  has a restricted entry or exit;  is designed for continuous worker occupancy;  has a hazardous atmosphere; and  has a floor that slopes down to a narrower cross section.
At the end of this series of questions, the advisor informs the user whether  OSHA considers the space in question to be a confined space, and whether  a permit is required for its use. The advisor also directs the user to an  overview of OSHA guidance on permit-required confined spaces.
The elaws advisors differ in the types of interactions they support. For  example, the Posters Advisor not only allows business owners to identify  any DOL-required posters their business must display, but also allows them  to print the required posters. Other advisors help users fill out required  forms and submit them electronically. As of November 2000, DOL had  elaws advisors covering a variety of issues and DOL-administered statutes,  including the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Drug-Free Workplace Act of  1988, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. According to DOL, the various  advisers were accessed more than 450,000 times during fiscal year 2000,  and their use is increasing.
section_title: OSHA’s Expert Advisors
paragraphs: In addition to its on-line Fire Safety and Confined Spaces advisors as part  of the DOL elaws system, OSHA also has a set of downloadable expert  advisors. These advisors run on personal computers and enable  businesses and others to receive answers off-line on how OSHA regulations  apply to their work sites. (See www.osha-slc.gov/dts/osta/oshasoft /.) An  OSHA official said that off-line advisors allow users to input detailed  information about their companies without privacy or enforcement  concerns associated with on-line systems connected to the agency. The  OSHA advisors include (1) a Hazard Awareness Advisor to identify hazards  in general industry workplaces; (2) an Asbestos Advisor for building  owners, managers, and others; and (3) a Lead in Construction Advisor to  help clarify the coverage of OSHA’s rule, the use of exposure data, and  other issues. In each of these advisors, users are interviewed about relevant  issues; asked follow-up questions that are based on the answers previously  provided; and, in most cases, provided a written report tailored to the  circumstances described. In August 2000, the Ford Foundation and  Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government named  OSHA’s expert advisors as a finalist in the Innovations in American  Government Award, which recognizes responsive and innovative  government programs.
section_title: DOT’s “Do It Yourself” System
paragraphs: Another interactive IT-based application used in federal regulatory  management is DOT’s “Do It Yourself” (DIY) system. (See http://diy.dot.gov.) The DIY system was developed by DOT’s finance office  and permits regulated entities to file for required licenses and certifications  and to make related payments using a credit card through a central DOT  Web site or through the regulating agency’s Web site. DOT agencies using  the DIY system as of November 2000 included, among others, (1) the  Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) (for registration  applications, insurance payments, and fine payments); (2) the National  Highway Traffic Safety Administration (for import fee payments, technical  information services payments, and Freedom of Information Act request  payments); and (3) FAA (for aircraft registration and airman data). Users  are guided through a series of screens that ask for confirmation of  transaction requests and address information. Built-in error messages in  the on-line forms help users complete the forms correctly, thereby  eliminating rework for both the users and the agency. The final screens  take the user through the credit card part of the transaction and provide the  user with a transaction number that can be used to track orders. DOT  officials said that, in most cases, users should be able to complete the  transactions in 10 minutes or less. The DIY system was designed to provide  better service to customers, reduce paperwork, and introduce efficiencies  into DOT’s operations, and agency officials said the system has already  demonstrated its effectiveness. For example, they said the DIY system has  helped FMCSA eliminate a 5-week backlog of applications from truckers  wanting to engage in interstate hauling because staff no longer have to  contact truckers about errors and no longer have to follow a series of steps  to process the application and payment.
section_title: A Few Applications Involved Interagency or Intergovernmental Cooperation
paragraphs: A few of the federal regulatory management innovations that the agencies  or others identified involved interagency or intergovernmental  cooperation—one EPA effort involving the states and separate efforts at  DOT and FDA involving multiple federal agencies.
subsections: section_title: EPA’s National Environmental Information Exchange Network
paragraphs: EPA is working with the states to develop a “national environmental  information exchange network” that the agency believes can improve both  the quality and access to environmental data. The exchange network is a  voluntary, standards-based system that links different state systems and  EPA systems, using common language and secure connections through the  Internet. In October 2000, a team comprising participants from EPA,  individual states, and the Environmental Council of the States released a  Blueprint for a National Environmental Information Exchange Network  that lays out the network design and partnership agreements for  implementing the network. Both federal and state officials consider  coordination and cooperation between EPA and the states essential to  successful implementation of the environmental electronic reporting  initiative previously discussed.
section_title: Government-wide International Trade Data System
paragraphs: DOT has been involved in an interagency effort to develop an Integrated  Government-wide International Trade Data System (ITDS) that the  developers hope will coordinate the collection, use, and dissemination of  international trade information. When fully developed (in an estimated 5 to  6 years), ITDS will be the public and interagency interface for all  international trade and transportation transactions for the movement of  cargo in either direction across U.S. borders. ITDS goals include improving  compliance with trade requirements; reducing burden on both the trade  community and the government; and providing more accurate, timely, and  thorough international trade data. According to system developers, ITDS  will provide the primary inspector with “one look” at the truck, its goods,  and the driver’s compliance with key federal requirements before the truck  enters the United States. Truckers will electronically file transport  declarations and goods declarations before arriving at the port of entry.  ITDS will pass relevant data to the agency for selective screening and  determination of appropriate action. In October 2000, DOT’s FMCSA  agreed to participate in the first deployment of ITDS at the federal ports of  entry in Buffalo, NY, in 2001. Also expected to participate in the Buffalo  pilot are the Customs Service within the Department of Commerce, the  Immigration and Naturalization Service within the Department of Justice,  FDA, and the trade and transportation communities.
section_title: Food Safety Initiative
paragraphs: Ensuring the safety of the nation’s food supply is the responsibility of an  interlocking monitoring system that watches over food production and  distribution at every level of government—local, state, and national. Given  the complex set of food safety laws, regulations, and responsibilities, even  obtaining information about which entity has responsibility for what task  can be daunting. In 1997, the Clinton administration created a Food Safety  Initiative to strengthen the fight against food-borne illnesses, which afflict  between 6.5 million and 33 million Americans every year. The President  directed the Secretaries of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and HSS and  the Administrator of EPA to identify ways to further improve the safety of  the food supply.
One outgrowth of the Food Safety Initiative has been the development of a  gateway Web site (www.foodsafety.gov) that is maintained by the FDA’s  Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. The site provides links to a  wide range of information on food safety, including information on relevant  laws, regulations, and enforcement responsibilities. Also included are links  to dozens of federal, state, and local agencies involved in food safety and  buttons on the site’s home page that provide safety alerts and methods to  report illnesses and product complaints.
section_title: States Are Using IT to Facilitate Regulatory Management
paragraphs: A number of agencies in the state governments that we contacted were also  using IT to facilitate regulatory management. The applications these state  government organizations identified as innovative, like their federal  counterparts, represented the range of regulatory management functions.  Several of the state innovations were interactive systems that allowed  regulated entities to identify their regulatory responsibilities and  sometimes to complete the related transactions. One of the innovations  was proactive, notifying users of opportunities to participate in rulemaking.  States also used other less interactive or proactive IT-based applications to  improve traditional management approaches.
subsections: section_title: Interactive IT Applications Help Regulated Entities Comply With State Requirements
paragraphs: Agencies in four of the states we contacted (Florida, Texas, Virginia, and  the State of Washington) have developed IT-based regulatory management  systems with extensive interactive capabilities. Most of these systems help  regulated entities comply with state requirements.
For example, Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has  a “One-Stop Permit Registry” (OSPREY) allowing users to obtain  information about all environmental permits administered by the  department. (See http://osprey.dep.state.fl.us.) According to a DEP official,  OSPREY was developed as a result of customer comments on how difficult  it was to (1) identify the right DEP contact, (2) determine the appropriate  permits that had to be filed, (3) determine where the permits had to be  filed, and (4) identify the responsible officials for permit approval. To  determine what permits a particular activity requires, users first select the  Florida county in which the activity will be performed and then identify the  type of activity involved (e.g., home building, construction of a boat launch,  or road building). OSPREY then asks a series of questions, culminating in a  “Consultation Summary” that lists applicable permit requirements and  contact points and provides links to the application forms. The site also  contains links to help users determine the fees associated with an  application and a link to allow users to check on the status of a submitted  application. Although the department has not developed any performance  measures for the system, a DEP official said that customer feedback has  been very positive.
Another interactive state application is the Texas Railroad Commission’s  Electronic Compliance and Approval Process (ECAP) system. (See  http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/ecap.) ECAP streamlines regulatory  requirements by implementing a totally paperless workflow that allows  users to obtain oil or gas well permits on-line and captures, stores, and  transmits oil or gas well permitting information electronically. The system  encompasses all aspects of permit requirements, including  security/authentication, fee collection, data reuse, and electronic  transmission of required attachments. ECAP users can file the appropriate  forms, pay the associated fees, and submit the required attachments on- line. Once the commission receives the information, it processes the forms  and issues the permit. The industry information is stored by the system so  that the user needs to enter facility data only once.
The ECAP project is being implemented through a 3-phase pilot project  that will provide the ability to electronically file, process, and approve a  drilling permit application. According to commission officials, the first  phase of the project has been completed and the second phase will soon be  released. The last phase, scheduled for implementation in September 2001,  includes data entry of a complex permit, complete integration with existing  mainframe computer systems, comprehensive on-line permit approval, and  concurrent update of its two database environments. Industry estimates  that ECAP will save them between $3 million to $6 million annually for  drilling permits alone. By 2005, when ECAP is expanded to include all  permits and performance reports, commission officials estimate that the  savings to industry will be over $17 million per year, and that the savings  for the Railroad Commission could be up to $1 million per year.
A third example of an interactive state system is the Virginia Department of  Motor Vehicle’s (DMV) Virtual Customer Service Center. (See  http://www.dmv.state.va.us.) Through this system, users are able, among  other things, to renew licenses and vehicle registrations on-line. A user’s  information (including digital photographs) is stored within the system,  thereby allowing on-line renewals. The Virtual Customer Service Center  started by allowing customers to view the catalogue of over 150 different  license plates. A customer was able to access the site and determine if a  particular personalized message was still available and, if it was, to reserve  that message for 90 days. To go further and allow customers to avoid  waiting in line, the DMV was able to modify its IT architecture to support  Internet-based applications. This involved reviewing the various activities  performed by DMV personnel for the different functions and then writing a  program that could emulate the various steps. As a result, the Virginia DMV  was able to provide many of the functions performed at the various  customer service centers via the Internet.
The State of Washington’s Department of Labor and Industries has  developed several IT-based “assistance network” systems that are  interactive and facilitate compliance with state rules and regulations. Users  can access these systems either through the department’s Web site  (http://www.lni.wa.gov) or through a statewide portal called “Access  Washington” (http://access.wa.gov), which links all state agencies and  provides the public with a common access point to state government  information and services. The department provides an assistance network  that enables users to obtain regulatory information and complete  transactions. For example, the systems (1) allow users to determine what  labor-related rules are applicable to their operations, (2) provide computer- based training to help employers comply with various labor rules, and (3)  offer a training management system to track whether employees are  fulfilling training requirements. The department also maintains a database  that the public can access to identify registered or certified contractors and  to report unregistered contractors. The department is also implementing a  site that will allow employers to pay industrial insurance premiums on-line.  Officials plan to expand the site to include allowing employers to make  other required payments.
Both the Departments of Ecology and Labor and Industries in the State of  Washington have developed proactive systems that notify customers by E- mail of upcoming regulatory actions, including the publication of proposed  rules, rulemaking hearings, the issuance of interpretive statements, and  semiannual regulatory agenda updates. The departments’ goal in  developing these systems was to provide the public with accurate, current,  user-friendly, and timely information related to their rulemaking activities  by informing users of new rules or revisions. According to a 1999  Department of Ecology report, the public downloaded more than 3,000  rules per month in its first year of operation, saving the department about  $132,000 in printing and mailing costs.
section_title: States Also Use Less Interactive IT Applications
paragraphs: Some of the IT-based regulatory management applications that the states  and others identified were less interactive or proactive, often focusing on  providing regulatory information to the public. For example, the previously  mentioned Virtual Customer Service Center in the State of Virginia also  provides the public with information on a variety of topics—from licensing  requirements to waiting times at customer service and telephone centers.  Customers are also able to ask questions on-line and receive a response  within the next business day.
The State of Washington’s Departments of Ecology  (http://www.ecy.wa.gov/) and Labor and Industry have also developed  systems that facilitate the dissemination of information to the public. The  Department of Ecology’s index of rules, regulations, and related documents  is located at one Web site so users can “one-stop shop” for information.  This index was created to give the public a crosswalk between the  department’s various rules and publications. The Department of Labor and  Industries also has an index of rules and regulations grouped by program  area to provide the public with easier access to the information.
Washington’s Department of Ecology is in the process of implementing an  on-line comment site that will allow the public the opportunity to submit  their comments electronically and have questions addressed by department  personnel. Users wishing to comment on a proposed rule will be able to  visit the department’s Web site and use an on-line form to submit written  comments. This form will generate an explanatory statement that  combines all comments and responses on a particular proposed rule. User- specific information will be maintained by the system, thereby making it  easier for an individual to comment multiple times on various rules and  only submit personal information once.
section_title: Representatives of Nongovernmental Organizations Suggested Regulatory Management Improvements, Identified Concerns
paragraphs: Representatives from the nongovernmental organizations who participated  in our review recognized and supported federal regulatory agencies’  current efforts to use IT to improve their regulatory management  processes. However, the representatives also said that federal agencies  could improve their performance in this area. Specifically, they suggested  that agencies improve both the content and access to on-line information,  more broadly and consistently use some existing applications, and adopt  some new applications. The representatives also expressed concern that  the use of IT-based applications in regulatory management could (1) make  individuals and businesses more vulnerable to scrutiny and federal  enforcement actions and (2) disadvantage those individuals and businesses  with limited technical resources.
subsections: section_title: Improve On-line Information/Access
paragraphs: The representatives of nongovernmental organizations affected by federal  regulations recognized that federal agencies’ Web sites already provide  regulated entities and others with a great deal of useful information.  However, several of the representatives said that these sites vary  considerably in terms of their format, content, and ease of navigability.  They also said some sites provide a clear link on their home pages to  regulatory information, but, in other sites, users must search for the same  types of information. One of the representatives said that some agencies  are not providing the public with some types of information that could be  useful, and that the agencies could do more to disseminate that information  electronically to the public and other agencies.
Most of the representatives agreed that agencies should provide as much  regulatory information as possible on-line, including information  developed during the rulemaking process (e.g., economic analyses, hearing  transcripts, and comments from the public) and other types of information  (e.g., agencies’ agendas of upcoming regulatory actions). Several  representatives specifically mentioned the DOT docket management  system as a model that could be followed by other agencies. One  representative suggested that OMB implement a DOT-type docket system  itself and become the model or standard system that other agencies could  emulate.
section_title: Broader Use of Existing Applications
paragraphs: Several of the representatives suggested that other innovative regulatory  management applications that certain agencies are beginning to implement  also should be used more broadly. For example, several representatives  suggested that more agencies allow the public to comment on proposed  rules electronically and make all of the comments the agencies received on  a proposed rule available on-line. One person said permitting electronic  comments should allow the agencies to save money because fewer staff  would be needed to handle the comments received. Other representatives  suggested wider use of proactive electronic notification systems (e.g., list  servers) to increase the dialog between regulated entities and the public  and to encourage more people to get involved in regulatory issues. Another  representative suggested that agencies make greater use of video  technology and make their public hearings available, either live or on tape,  through the agencies’ Web sites. According to the representative, this  approach would enable more people to participate in the process,  particularly those who were in remote locations or otherwise unable to  attend a public hearing on a rule in which they were interested.
section_title: Use of New Applications
paragraphs: Some of the applications that the representatives suggested do not, to our  knowledge, currently exist. For example, one representative suggested that  agencies could develop a “rule cost calculator” that would include all of the  costs of complying with a rule. By entering pertinent information about its  own business (e.g., type of business or number of employees), a regulated  entity could calculate the potential cost of the proposed rule to its  business. Others said that they would like to be able to go to one place and  find out all applicable federal regulations. One representative said that this  kind of one-stop shopping is particularly appealing to small businesses.
section_title: Areas of Concern
paragraphs: Although these representatives of affected communities generally  encouraged agencies’ efforts to use IT in regulatory management, some  also indicated that regulated entities are sometimes nervous about how an  agency’s use of technology may affect them. For example, they said  regulated entities are concerned that they may be opening themselves up to  additional scrutiny and enforcement actions as a result of the electronic  trail they might leave if they access or query a regulator’s Web site for  information. They said this was of particular concern to regulated entities  that must provide private or proprietary information about their business in  order for the agency to electronically develop a list of applicable  regulations.
In addition, some of the representatives also expressed concerns about the  “digital divide”—that is, differences within the regulated community in  terms of their technological capabilities. One representative said that some  regulated entities, particularly small businesses, do not have the latest  technological equipment or the financial or staff resources available to take  advantage of the IT-based applications that some of the agencies are  developing. Therefore, the representative suggested that it would be best  for agencies to make the use of IT for regulatory compliance purposes  voluntary, and to continue to allow businesses to comply with regulations  and obtain information using traditional approaches.
section_title: Factors Facilitating the Development and Diffusion of Innovative IT-based Regulatory Management Approaches
paragraphs: Federal and state agency officials and representatives of nongovernmental  organizations identified a number of factors that they believed affect the  adoption and diffusion of IT-based approaches in regulatory management:  (1) top-level leadership commitment/support, (2) adequate financial  resources and human capital, (3) legislative and executive branch  initiatives, (4) internal and external partnerships with critical stakeholders,  (5) reengineering of existing business processes, and (6) the development  of a communication infrastructure.
subsections: section_title: Top-Level Leadership Commitment/Support
paragraphs: Federal and state agency officials and staff said that the commitment and  support of top-level leaders is critical to the successful development and  implementation of IT-based systems to improve regulatory management.  Federal officials said that leadership commitment is very important in  overcoming resistance to changing the traditional ways that agencies  conduct business. Officials in DOL said that projects could languish  without commitment from the top. Therefore, before beginning to develop  an elaws advisor in a new DOL agency, they require that the agency commit  the resources—both dollars and people—to ensure successful  development.
In some cases, the federal officials indicated that leadership support could  be positively influenced by factors outside of the agencies. For example,  several officials pointed to the importance of presidential initiatives (e.g.,  the Clinton administration’s E-gov initiative) and congressional mandates  (e.g., GPEA) in focusing the agencies’ attention and in obtaining the  commitment and resources needed to carry out initiatives. An HHS official  said that leadership support can also be stimulated by a few pioneers in the  agency who have a vision and can sell the idea to agency management.  Some of the officials also indicated that leadership support can be  engendered by success. For example, a DOT official said that obtaining  early demonstrable savings helped obtain top-level support and widespread  interest in the Department’s docket management system. On the other  hand, federal officials also said that frequent changes in top agency  leadership could make it difficult to sustain commitment to specific  projects. Therefore, they said, agencies need to devise ways to get long- term commitment to proposed innovations that transcends changes in  leadership.
All of the state officials and staff that we interviewed also cited the support  of top-level management as a key factor in their ability to develop and  implement innovative systems. State officials said that the support of  department heads, state CIOs, and/or the states’ governors allowed them to  consider new ways to address issues raised by customers and develop  mechanisms to respond to their concerns. For example, officials in both  the State of Washington and the Commonwealth of Virginia cited the  enthusiastic support and leadership of their respective governors. In  Washington, the governor issued an executive order directing all state  agencies to develop and implement technological approaches to regulatory  management. In Virginia, the governor made the application of technology  to all governmental activities a priority.
section_title: Adequate Financial Resources and Human Capital
paragraphs: Federal and state officials and staff also said that leadership commitment  involves not only giving initiatives priority and visibility, but also  committing appropriate financial resources and human capital to  implement IT-based regulatory management applications. Federal officials  said that the lack of adequate resources has been the biggest obstacle to  implementing innovative IT-based approaches in their respective agencies.  However, they recognized that agency leaders must allocate increasingly  scarce resources among competing priorities both across programmatic  areas and among IT initiatives.
To resolve this issue, several federal officials said that top leadership  commitment could help to forge partnerships among program areas and  help to obtain the financial resources needed to implement new programs.  For example, several program managers at EPA were able to use financial  resources provided to the Office of Environmental Information to help  develop and implement the agency’s electronic reporting initiative. Top- level commitment can also help ensure that adequate human capital is  invested in developing these IT-based approaches. One official in the State  of Washington emphasized how important it was to the success of the  project that leaders in the Department of Ecology dedicated the people that  developers needed to complete their work. Without adequate human  capital investment, the official said that the department would not have had  the right mixture of skills necessary for the development of innovative  applications to facilitate regulatory management.
section_title: Legislative and Executive Branch Initiatives
paragraphs: Several of the federal and state officials said that legislative and executive  branch IT initiatives had acted as catalysts in developing IT-based  approaches to facilitate regulatory management. As previously mentioned,  several of the federal officials that we contacted said that the passage of  GPEA had helped them to obtain the top leadership commitment needed to  support IT innovations in their agencies. They also said the legislation had  helped the agencies develop clear schedules for moving toward the use of  IT in regulatory management. OMB officials also said that GPEA had  served as an impetus for developing new IT-based approaches to regulatory  management. In the State of Washington, agency officials credited  Executive Order 97-02 as the impetus for many of the IT-based  developments occurring in state agencies. The executive order required all  state agencies to review their reporting requirements. The goal of this  review was to develop reporting requirements that are coordinated with  other state agencies requiring similar information, that are economical and  understandable, and that rely on the electronic transfer of information.
section_title: Internal and External Partnerships
paragraphs: Federal and state officials and staff said that creating appropriate  partnerships—intra-agency, interagency, and/or public-private—was also  critical in developing systems that facilitated regulatory management. They  said that intra-agency partnerships helped the agencies eliminate internal  “stovepipes” that were a barrier to developing and implementing innovative  IT approaches. Federal officials particularly cited the need for internal  partnerships between IT and program officials for successful development  and implementation of IT projects. They said that developing IT-based  management programs is often considered strictly an IT issue, and that  program officials (in this case, regulatory officials) often do not get  involved with developing those applications for their areas of  responsibility. However, federal and state officials and staff said it is  essential to involve the people familiar with current regulatory processes  and issues in each stage of planning, developing, and implementing new IT  applications in their areas of expertise. For example, DOL officials told us  that a standard part of the development of a new elaws application is  identifying and involving appropriate regulatory managers, subject matter  experts, consultants, and lawyers who are knowledgeable about the  program. Without this kind of partnership between IT and program office  personnel, they said, agencies are likely to automate inefficient processes  that will not meet new programmatic needs.
Federal officials also cited the importance of external partnerships in  developing and disseminating innovative regulatory management systems.
For example, in developing EPA’s electronic reporting initiative, the agency  established partnerships with the states through the National Governors  Association and the Environmental Council of States. As a result of these  partnerships, EPA was able to leverage financial and human capital  resources to develop the National Environmental Information Exchange  Network. In addition, these partnerships helped ensure that all  stakeholders shared information and provided input into the development  of system requirements. Although agency officials said that the  development of these partnerships had been a huge task, they believed that  the final system would yield the results they expected—reduced regulatory  burden and consistent data collection and analysis.
State officials also emphasized the benefits of internal and external  partnerships. In Florida, the Department of Environmental Protection  formed a working group consisting of representatives from other  departmental offices to assist in developing OSPREY. Virginia’s DMV was  able to develop its system through the cooperation of other departmental  officials who not only participated in the development process, but also  played a key role in the testing and verification of the system before it was  released to the public. Texas officials cited the importance of partnerships  with the private sector. In Texas, state officials formed a public/private  partnership with the regulated community as well as with the federal  Department of Energy. Texas officials said that stakeholders’ participation  in the developmental process ensured that (1) their issues were addressed  and (2) that they would assume ownership and use of the system that was  developed.
section_title: Reengineering of Existing Business Processes
paragraphs: Several of the federal and state agency officials said that comprehensive  reengineering of their business processes before developing new systems  enabled them to develop more innovative IT-based regulatory management  processes. As a result of reengineering, they said they not only increased  the efficiency of the selected processes but also eliminated processes that  no longer made sense and introduced new ways of relating to the regulated  community and the public. However, federal officials cautioned that  reengineering their regulatory processes is not always possible because  agencies may be legally prohibited from making substantive changes.  Federal officials also said it is sometimes important to implement in  segments, rather than undertaking “grand designs.” For example, DOL staff  involved in the development of the elaws advisors emphasized the  importance of modular development within their formal, structured  development model. They said that developing and testing key pieces that  they showed to program management helped maintain support for the  program. A DOT official also told us that developing the basic capability of  the DMS and gradually adding new features and capabilities to meet  additional needs as additional resources became available has worked for  them. Also, some officials in Washington and Virginia said they believed it  is better to seize opportunities and move ahead without substantive  reengineering, particularly in developing interactive Internet-based  applications. As one official said, “it is better to beg for forgiveness than to  ask for permission.”
section_title: Communication Infrastructure
paragraphs: State officials also indicated that a well-developed communication  infrastructure was important to facilitate the adoption and diffusion of  these innovative regulatory management systems. In some cases, the  governors in those states were critical to the establishment of that  infrastructure. For example, the Governor of the State of Washington  created a Subcabinet on Management Improvement and Results that was  charged with the responsibility of overseeing the regulatory process and  ensuring that the state government “pursues a fair, effective, and sensible  regulatory strategy.” The subcabinet’s responsibilities included making  recommendations for statutory, administrative, and organizational changes  as well as special projects that result in regulatory improvements in state  government. In Virginia, the governor appointed a Secretary of Technology  who presides as chairman of the governor’s Council on Technology  Services. The council consists of 23 representatives from state and local  government agencies and institutions and is charged with implementing  electronic government in various areas, such as procurement, services,  communications, and computing architecture, and coordinating  technologies-based systems at all levels of government. The governor of  Florida established a similar type of interagency working group that  facilitated information sharing and served as a catalyst for partnerships  between respective state agencies.
State officials said that the availability of organizations that serve as  clearinghouses of information about technological applications in other  states helped in not only developing their own systems, but also in  disseminating information about their systems to other states. Officials  cited several organizations, such as the National Association of State  Information Resource Executives, the National Association of State Chief  Administrators, the National Governors Association, and the  Environmental Council of States, for having served as information conduits  among states. They said these organizations sponsor conferences,  newsletters, and databases that members may use as mechanisms to  inform other entities about the development of systems to address various  regulatory management requirements. State officials also said that  involving segments of the regulated community provided valuable insights  to the process and ensured stakeholder ownership of the resulting system.  Officials in Texas, Washington, and Florida said their states had involved  members of the regulated community during the development of their  systems, and, in each case, the states benefited from the collaboration. In  Texas, the oil and gas industries not only provided input into the  development process but were also a valuable funding source for the  system. In Washington and Florida, members of the regulated community  participated in developing the system requirements. This participation in  the development process facilitated the implementation of the system since  this key group of stakeholders perceived themselves as part of the system,  not as having the system imposed on them.
subsections: section_title: Federal Agencies Suggested Improvements in Communication About Innovations
paragraphs: Federal regulatory officials and staff said they were aware of some, but not  all, of the IT-based applications that other agencies, or even other offices  within their own agencies, were using to improve regulatory management.  They said that most of their knowledge about other agencies’ practices  came about through ad hoc and informal mechanisms, such as brown-bag  lunches by career officials assisting the Regulatory Working Group and  meetings sponsored by GAO and others. They told us that there was a need  for some type of communication infrastructure to promote more consistent  and structured sharing of information about IT innovations to facilitate the  diffusion of those innovations across agencies. They said that a new  organization was not needed, and that they preferred to use existing groups  to share information.
Several federal agency officials also recommended greater use of IT to  assist in disseminating information on what other agencies are doing. Some  thought that there should be a governmentwide portal focused on  regulatory issues or a section of a portal, such as FirstGov, that would be a  single point of entry for regulatory agencies as well as the public. One  official suggested that there should be an inventory of best practices in the  use of IT in federal regulatory management available on-line. There was  widespread interest among federal officials and staff in several types of  best practices, including electronic dockets, new options for developing  and implementing electronic reporting, and certain interactive models that  enable agencies to change the way they interact with the public. Federal  officials also said that OMB needed to play a role in facilitating  communication regarding this issue. For example, one agency official  suggested that OMB devote one meeting each year to discussing innovative  applications of IT in regulatory management.
OMB officials noted that the electronic government committee of the CIO  Council has more than 1,000 best practices in its inventory of innovative IT  applications, and that this information would be available on the Internet  soon. Although regulatory management applications are not separately  identified, these applications could be highlighted for use in regulatory  management. The OMB officials also noted that the agency had taken a  number of steps to encourage the use of IT in regulatory management, and  that the CIO Council and the National Association of State Information  Resource Executives were setting up a working structure for continuing  discussion of IT issues between state and federal agencies. Nevertheless,  they recognized that more could be done to improve communications  among the agencies. For example, they said OMB could encourage  interagency forums on the topic of IT in regulatory management and could  highlight regulatory issues as part of the agency’s oversight of the  implementation of GPEA.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: Federal and state regulatory agencies are already making extensive use of  IT to address traditional regulatory problems and improve regulatory  management. However, they are just beginning to realize the full  capabilities of IT and the Internet to develop interactive regulatory  management practices and facilitate interagency and intergovernmental  uses. Our work during this review and during our review last year indicates  that innovative IT-based approaches to regulatory management have the  potential to increase the amount and quality of public participation in  rulemaking, increase regulatory transparency, reduce burden on regulated  entities and help them understand their responsibilities, save regulatory  agencies money, and improve the quality of agencies’ regulatory programs.  Most of the agencies that we contacted cited benefits of their innovative IT  applications, although few had performance data yet that clearly  demonstrated the effect of the innovations on the agencies’ efficiency or  effectiveness, burden reduction, or other regulatory management  outcomes. Such performance data would be useful as other agencies try to  decide which IT-based applications to adopt or adapt in their own agencies.
A key factor in encouraging greater use of IT-based innovations in  regulatory management is, ironically, information. Officials in federal  regulatory agencies were sometimes unaware of the innovative uses of IT  to improve regulatory management in other agencies, and sometimes in  other parts of their own agencies. As a result, federal agencies may either  not adopt innovative approaches that could be useful to them or reinvent  the wheel as they develop their own approaches in those areas. Federal  regulatory agency officials told us that there is a need for better  communication and sharing of information about innovative IT  applications and indicated that existing organizations, such as the CIO  Council and the Regulatory Working Group, be used to facilitate  information sharing.
Representatives of the nongovernmental organizations and officials and  staff in the regulatory agencies themselves also called for greater  consistency across agencies’ IT-based regulatory management systems.  However, both parties cautioned against mandatory conformity. As agency  officials told us during our first review, agencies may need to have  somewhat different systems because of differences in their operating  environments. Also, common IT-based approaches may be more  appropriate for some aspects of regulatory management than others. For  example, federal rulemaking processes are somewhat similar across  federal agencies, so common approaches regarding that aspect of  regulatory management may be more appropriate than in other, more  idiosyncratic parts of the process (e.g., enforcement or licensing  requirements.) Specific options in the rulemaking area could include  common approaches for accepting electronic comments on proposed  rules, similarly structured electronic docketing systems, and tracking  systems that allow agencies to understand the causes of delays in their  rulemaking processes. Compliance assistance functions similar to DOL’s  elaws and OSHA’s expert advisor programs appear to have broad  applicability.
OIRA is responsible for providing guidance and oversight for both IT and  regulatory issues. The OIRA Administrator sits on the CIO Council, which  Executive Order 13011 says should allow agencies to “share experiences,  ideas, and promising practices.” The OIRA Administrator chairs the  Regulatory Working Group, which Executive Order 12866 says “shall serve  as a forum to assist agencies in identifying and analyzing important  regulatory issues,” including “the development of innovative regulatory  techniques.” Although OIRA has taken some steps to encourage the use of  IT in regulatory agencies, we believe that it could do more to encourage  information sharing among the agencies on IT innovations. For example,  OIRA could encourage additional forums on the use of IT in regulatory  management, devote a portion of its Web site to innovative IT applications,  or work with the CIO Council to encourage dialogue between the  regulatory and IT elements of agencies’ workforces. It could also make the  use of IT in regulatory management a specific focus in its implementation  of GPEA. We also believe that OIRA can work with the agencies to identify  specific types of innovative IT-based approaches that multiple agencies  could use to improve regulatory management. By implementing common  approaches regarding regulatory functions that are used in multiple  agencies, the regulatory management approaches can begin to have a more  consistent “look and feel,” which some nongovernmental and federal  representatives believed is needed.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: We recommend that the OIRA Administrator develop a systematic process  by which federal agencies can share information regarding the use of  innovative IT-based applications in regulatory management. We also  recommend that the Administrator work with federal agencies to identify  types of innovative IT-based approaches that multiple agencies could use to  improve regulatory management.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: On December 20, 2000, we sent a draft of this report to the Director of OMB  for his review and comment. OMB officials told us that OMB had no  comments on the draft report. We also provided federal and state agency  officials with the relevant draft report sections attributed to them to ensure  that we correctly characterized their systems and comments. These  officials provided several technical corrections, which we incorporated as  appropriate.
As we arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce this  report’s contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of it until 30 days  after the date of this letter. We will then send copies to Representative Dan  Burton, Chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform. We will  also provide copies to the Honorable Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., Director,  OMB; the Honorable Ann Veneman, Secretary of Agriculture; the  Honorable Tommy Thompson, Secretary of Health and Human Services;  the Honorable Elaine Chao, Secretary of Labor; the Honorable Norman Y.  Mineta, Secretary of Transportation; and the Honorable Christine Todd  Whitman, Administrator, EPA. We will also make copies available to others  and post this report on GAO’s home page at www.gao.gov.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact me or Curtis  Copeland on (202) 512-6806. Key contributors to this assignment were  Elizabeth Powell, Joseph Santiago, and Ellen Grady.
section_title: Ordering Information
paragraphs: The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of  reports are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out to  the Superintendent of Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit  cards are accepted, also.
Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are  discounted 25 percent.
Orders by mail: U.S. General Accounting Office P.O. Box 37050 Washington, DC  20013 Orders by visiting: Room 1100 700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S. General Accounting Office Washington, DC Orders by phone: (202) 512-6000 fax: (202) 512-6061 TDD (202) 512-2537 Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and  testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list  from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone  phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain  these lists.
section_title: To Report Fraud, Waste, or Abuse in Federal Programs
paragraphs: Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm  e-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov  1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)