[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11163-11164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4513]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2011 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 11163]]



DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

2 CFR Chapter XXVII

5 CFR Chapter XXVIII

8 CFR Chapter V

21 CFR Chapter II

27 CFR Chapter II

28 CFR Chapters I, III, V, and VI

31 CFR Chapter IX

40 CFR Chapter IV

41 CFR Chapter 128

45 CFR Chapter V

48 CFR Chapter 28

[Docket No. OLP 150]


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

AGENCY: Department of Justice.

ACTION: Request for information.

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

SUMMARY: As part of its implementation of Executive Order 13563, 
``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' issued by the President 
on January 18, 2011, the Department of Justice (the Department) is 
seeking comments and information from interested parties to assist it 
in reviewing its existing regulations to determine whether any such 
regulations should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed. The 
purpose of Justice's review is to make the agency's regulatory program 
more effective and less burdensome in achieving its regulatory 
objectives.
    Comment Date: Written comments must be postmarked and electronic 
comments must be submitted on or before March 31, 2011. Commenters 
should be aware that the electronic Federal Docket Management System 
will not accept comments after 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the last day 
of the comment period.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to OLP Regulatory Docket Clerk, 
Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 4250, 
Washington, DC 20530. To ensure proper handling, please reference OLP 
Docket No. 150 on your correspondence. You may submit comments 
electronically or view an electronic version of this final rule with 
request for comments at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Hinchman, Senior Counsel, 
Office of Legal Policy, Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, 
NW., Room 4252, Washington, DC 20530; Telephone (202) 514-8059.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Posting of Public Comments. Please note that all comments received 
are considered part of the public record and made available for public 
inspection online at http://www.regulations.gov. Such information 
includes personal identifying information (such as your name, address, 
etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter.
    Personal identifying information identified and located as set 
forth above will be placed in the agency's public docket file, but not 
posted online. If you wish to inspect the agency's public docket file 
in person by appointment, please see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT paragraph.
    The Department understands that the public comment period set forth 
in this Notice is shorter than the 60-day comment period normally given 
for proposed rules. However, in this notice (which is not, of course, a 
proposed rule), the Department is not asking for detailed, lengthy 
comments on its regulations, but only on matters pertaining to the 
retrospective review plan which it currently has under development. 
Further opportunities will be given for public comment on those 
regulations that the Department identifies for retrospective review.

Overview

    The Department of Justice is not a major regulatory agency. 
Although the number and economic impact of the Department's regulations 
may be less than that of some of our sister Federal agencies, the 
Department is nonetheless committed to reviewing its existing 
regulations as described more fully below.
    On January 18, 2011, the President issued Executive Order 13563, 
``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' to ensure that Federal 
regulations seek more affordable, less intrusive means to achieve 
policy goals, and that agencies give careful consideration to the 
benefits and costs of those regulations. To that end, the Executive 
Order requires, among other things, that:
     Agencies propose or adopt a regulation only upon a 
reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs; and that 
agencies tailor regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining the regulatory objectives, taking into 
account, among other things, and to the extent practicable, the costs 
of cumulative regulations; and that agencies select, in choosing among 
alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net 
benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health 
and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity).
     The regulatory process encourages public participation and 
an open exchange of views, with an opportunity for the public to 
comment.
     Agencies coordinate, simplify, and harmonize regulations 
to reduce costs and promote certainty for businesses and the public.
     Agencies consider lower-cost approaches that reduce 
burdens and maintain flexibility.
     Regulations be guided by objective scientific evidence.
    Additionally, the Executive Order directs agencies to consider how 
best to promote retrospective analyses of existing rules. Specifically, 
agencies must develop a preliminary plan under which the agency will 
periodically review existing regulations to determine which should be 
maintained, modified, strengthened, or repealed to increase the 
effectiveness and decrease the burdens of the agency's regulatory 
program.
    To implement the Executive Order, the Department is taking several 
immediate steps to launch its retrospective review of existing 
regulatory requirements. As described further below, the Department is 
issuing this Request for Information (RFI) seeking public comment on 
how best to

[[Page 11164]]

review its existing regulations and to identify whether any of its 
existing regulations should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or 
repealed. We will also be working with the Department's rulemaking 
components on a preliminary plan for the periodic review of its 
existing regulations, including ways to institutionalize, within the 
Department, the ongoing review of the Department's regulations, in an 
open dialog with the public. Through this process, the Department will 
consider the elimination of rules that are no longer warranted, and 
will also consider strengthening, complementing, or modernizing rules 
where necessary or appropriate--including, as appropriate, undertaking 
new rulemaking actions.
    Consistent with the Department's commitment to public participation 
in the rulemaking process, the Department is beginning this process by 
soliciting views from the public on how best to conduct its analysis of 
existing Justice rules and how best to identify those rules that might 
be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed. It is also seeking 
views from the public on specific rules or obligations that should be 
altered or eliminated. While the Department promulgates rules in 
accordance with the law and to the best of its ability, we recognize 
that the best information as to the consequences of a rule, including 
its costs and benefits, comes from practical, real-world experience 
(both on the part of the public and on the part of the Department) 
after the rule has been implemented. Members of the public and of 
entities affected by Department's regulations are likely to have useful 
information and perspectives on the benefits and burdens of existing 
requirements beyond the information that was available to the 
Department at the time a regulation was issued. Interested parties may 
also be well-positioned to identify those rules that are most in need 
of review and, thus, assist the Department in prioritizing and properly 
tailoring its retrospective review process. In short, engaging the 
public in an open, transparent process is a crucial first step in the 
Department's review of its existing regulations.

Questions for Commenters

    The following list of questions represents a preliminary attempt to 
identify issues raised by the Department's efforts to develop a 
preliminary plan for the retrospective analysis of its regulations and 
to identify rules/obligations on which it should immediately focus. 
This nonexhaustive list is meant to assist in the formulation of 
comments and is not intended to restrict the issues that may be 
addressed. In addressing these questions or others, we request that 
commenters identify with specificity the regulation or reporting 
requirement at issue, providing the legal citation and providing where 
possible empirical information on the impact of the rule on those 
subject to it. We also request that the submitter explain, in as much 
detail as possible, why a regulation or reporting requirement should be 
modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed, as well as suggest 
specific alternative means for the Department to better achieve the 
statutory or regulatory objectives.
    (1) How can the Department best promote meaningful periodic reviews 
of its existing rules and how can it best identify those rules that 
might be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed?
    (2) What factors should the agency consider in selecting and 
prioritizing rules for review?
    (3) Are there regulations that have become ineffective or been 
overtaken by technological or other change and, if so, what are they? 
How can they be modernized to accomplish the statutory or regulatory 
objectives better?
    (4) Are there rules that can simply be revoked without impairing 
the Department's statutory obligations and policy objectives and, if 
so, what are they?
    (5) Are there rules that are still necessary, but have not operated 
as well as expected such that a modified, stronger, or different 
approach is justified?
    (6) How can the Department best obtain and consider accurate, 
objective information and data about the costs, burdens, and benefits 
of existing regulations consistent with the Paperwork Reduction Act and 
without imposing information collection burdens on the public? Are 
there existing sources of data the Department can use to evaluate the 
post-promulgation effects of regulations over time? We invite 
interested parties to provide data that may be in their possession that 
documents the costs, burdens, and benefits of existing requirements.
    The Department notes that this Request for Information is issued 
solely for information and program-planning purposes. The Department 
will give careful consideration to the responses, and may use them as 
appropriate during the retrospective review, but we do not anticipate 
providing a point-by-point response to each comment submitted. While 
responses to this RFI do not bind the Department to any further actions 
related to the response, all submissions will be made publically 
available on http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: February 22, 2011.
Christopher H. Schroeder,
Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-4513 Filed 2-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P