Regulatory Accountability Act
- Bill Number
- S. 1708
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Government Operations and Politics
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-05-12: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- Last Updated
- 2026-01-10T06:40:46Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The Regulatory Accountability Act (S. 1708) aims to enhance the transparency, accountability, and efficiency of federal agency rulemaking processes. It seeks to ensure that regulations are based on thorough analysis, including costs, benefits, and alternatives, while promoting public participation and limiting undue regulatory burdens, particularly for economically significant rules.
Key Provisions
- Definitions (Amendments to 5 U.S.C. § 551): Introduces terms such as "guidance" (non-binding agency policy statements), "major guidance" (guidance with significant economic or policy impacts), "major rule" (rules with $100 million+ annual economic effects, major cost increases, or significant adverse impacts on competition, employment, etc.), and clarifies the role of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Administrator.
- Rulemaking Considerations (Amendments to 5 U.S.C. § 553): Agencies must evaluate:
- Legal authority for the rule.
- The problem's nature and whether existing laws contribute to it.
- At least three alternatives to the rule, including performance-based options, incentives, or disclosures rather than mandates.
- For major rules, detailed cost-benefit analyses, including direct/indirect effects, risks, and impacts on small businesses or supply chains.
- Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM):
- Agencies submit proposals to OIRA for review before Federal Register publication.
- NPRM must include legal basis, rule text, summaries of considerations, and for major rules, preliminary justification of benefits over costs, discussion of alternatives, and public comment solicitation.
- Requires public access to supporting data/studies (via docket or reference, with exceptions for confidential info).
- Minimum 60-day comment period (90 days for major rules), plus 30-day responsive period for major rules; prohibits agencies from advocating for/against the rule during this time.
- If a rule is reclassified as major post-publication, additional 30-day comments are allowed.
- Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) for Major Rules:
- Agencies must publish an ANPRM at least 90 days before NPRM, describing the problem, legal authority, and inviting alternatives/data (30-day response period).
- Establishes electronic dockets and timetables with milestones; delays trigger reports to Congress and OIRA, published in the Federal Register.
- Final Rules:
- For major rules, agencies must select the alternative maximizing net benefits (considering only statutory-scope benefits); exceptions require OIRA approval for unquantifiable factors or additional gains.
- Final notice includes basis/purpose, responses to comments, plain-language summary, and justification that benefits justify costs.
- Emphasizes best available scientific/technical/economic data.
- Allows 90-day delay for rules near presidential transitions to seek comment on amendments/rescissions.
- Publication at least 30 days (60 for major rules) before effective date.
- Guidance Documents:
- Must state they are non-binding and be posted centrally online.
- Major guidance requires reasoned determination of understandability, compliance, and justified costs/benefits.
- OIRA issues guidelines for consistent, simple guidance.
- Retrospective Review of Major Rules:
- Agencies include assessment frameworks in NPRM/final notices, with metrics for effectiveness, data collection plans, and reviews within 10 years.
- Assessments evaluate if rules meet objectives, are outdated, or need modification; results published in Federal Register, with periodic re-assessments.
- OIRA oversees compliance; agencies may recommend congressional changes if statutorily barred from altering rules.
- OIRA Responsibilities: Provides guidelines on rule assessments, simplification, and consistency; reviews proposals; submits annual compliance reports to Congress. Precludes judicial review of most OIRA actions.
- Exceptions and Applicability:
- Good cause exemptions for urgent rules (with justifications); allows direct final or interim final rules under strict timelines.
- Exempts monetary policy, internal procedures, and certain copyrights.
- Other laws' specific requirements take precedence if conflicting.
- Petitions and Judicial Review (Amendments to 5 U.S.C. §§ 701, 706):
- Agencies must allow petitions for rule issuance/amendment/repeal and solicit retrospective review suggestions.
- Courts review entire records, applying "prejudicial error" standard; de novo review of legal questions, with agency rule interpretations weighted by thoroughness/consistency.
- Limits review of non-interpretive guidance; defines "substantial evidence" as adequate record support.
- Technical Amendments: Updates references in dozens of statutes (e.g., Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act) to align with new section numbering and procedures.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Overhauls the Administrative Procedure Act's (APA) core rulemaking section (5 U.S.C. § 553), replacing informal notice-and-comment basics with mandatory structured analyses, OIRA gatekeeping, and extended timelines—shifting from minimal requirements to rigorous, benefit-focused processes.
- Introduces ANPRM and retrospective review mandates for major rules, absent in prior APA.
- Strengthens cost-benefit requirements beyond Executive Orders (e.g., EO 12866), making them statutory and limiting benefits to statutory scope.
- Modifies judicial review (5 U.S.C. § 706) to emphasize record-based scrutiny, remand without vacatur in some cases, and limited OIRA immunity.
- Applies prospectively: Does not affect pending or completed rulemakings as of enactment.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: Increased procedural burdens may slow rulemaking (e.g., longer periods, OIRA reviews), requiring more resources for analyses and data access; could reduce rule volume but improve quality and reduce litigation risks.
- Citizens and Businesses: Greater transparency and public input may lead to less burdensome, more justified regulations; economic analyses could lower compliance costs for industries (e.g., via alternatives) but delay protections in health/safety areas; enhances ability to challenge rules via petitions.
- International Relations: By prioritizing U.S. competitiveness in major rule definitions (e.g., effects on exports), it may indirectly support trade positions but has no direct foreign policy provisions.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Agencies: Primary implementers, facing new oversight and analytical duties (e.g., EPA, FDA, DOT).
- Businesses and Regulated Industries: Benefit from cost-benefit scrutiny and alternatives but may face delays in new rules.
- Public and Advocacy Groups: Gain from expanded comment periods, data access, and retrospective reviews for ongoing input.
- Congress and OIRA/OMB: Congress receives reports and recommendations; OIRA gains statutory enforcement powers.
- Courts: Handle more procedural challenges under refined review standards.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Codifies and expands Executive Order practices (e.g., OIRA review) into statute, potentially reducing agency discretion and increasing successful challenges for procedural non-compliance; clarifies guidance as non-binding to limit "regulation by guidance."
- Constitutional: Reinforces due process (Fifth Amendment) through enhanced notice, comment, and record review, ensuring rules are not arbitrary; upholds separation of powers by bolstering congressional oversight via reports and precluding broad judicial second-guessing of OIRA.
- Political: Promotes regulatory restraint, potentially curbing executive overreach; bipartisan introduction (Sens. Lankford and Johnson) signals cross-aisle appeal for efficiency, but could spark debates on delaying public protections versus easing economic burdens. No direct impact on elections or funding.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (1)
Recent Actions
- 2025-05-12: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 2025-05-12: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Regulatory Accountability Act — issued 2025-05-12 — PDF (74 pages)