![]() | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1997: A Test For Regulatory ReviewPosted 2/10/1997By Robert L. Redding, Jr.
Much has been said about the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) latest initiative for Air Quality Standards for Ozone and Particulate Matter, whereby the EPA developed a proposal that changes the standards for pollutants. These changes are likely to throw large areas of the country into non-attainment with the Clean Air Act, and many counties and cities currently complying with federal standards will be unable to meet the new limits unless they take steps to reduce pollution from motor vehicles and industries. Although these are critical issues for the automobile industry, they might not possess the same level of significance as the action taken in the 104th Congress to alleviate the stress felt by small businesses when new federal rules are implemented. In the last Congress, the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act became law. Under the law, Congress can postpone the effective date of a final rule for up to 60 days while it reviews the agency's documentation and paperwork. Congress has 60 legislative days to move a joint resolution through both chambers to disapprove the rule. What few people remember is that the resolution cannot be filibustered. A simple majority vote in the Senate will determine whether the resolution is approved or disapproved. Another provision allows the resolution to be considered on the floor of one chamber immediately after the other chamber approves it. This process, bypassing the committee system, changes the playing field in light year terms for the small-business community. If a new regulation is offensive to small businesses, Congress can address it quickly and make a decision without getting buried in a procedural wilderness. Sen. Kit Bond, chairman of the Senate Small Business Committee, stated, "The measure seeks to change the very culture of regulators by making them more accountable for their actions. It gives small businesses more influence in the regulatory process and subjects agency enforcement practices to independent review by Congress." Many federal agencies will argue that certain rules do not impact small entities or specific new standards do not impact small business until states implement the national rules. This bill, like many major small business initiatives, did not receive the publicity of other high profile congressional legislation. And there's more to it. With this act, small businesses now have a way to challenge federal regulations in court if they believe the agencies have not complied with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, which requires federal agencies to review the impact of new federal regulations on small businesses. In the past, even if an agency ignored this responsibility, small business had no recourse or opportunity for judicial review. The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act requires certain federal agencies to continue to collect advice and recommendations from small businesses to improve their analyses. What is the rule's potential impact? What are ways to reduce the impact? The act applies to any "major" rule, which by most standards includes those rules having an impact of more than $100 million. With regard to an agency's enforcement practices, an independent ombudsman at the Small Business Administration (SBA) will be responsible for soliciting information from small businesses about an agency's enforcement practices. Regional citizen review boards will be responsible for taking confidential complaints and comments from small businesses about their dealings with federal regulators, and will then publish the findings in report cards for each agency. Some refer to this as "rate the regulators." Attorneys' fees may also be recovered by small businesses in civil and administrative actions. Also, the agencies are directed to waive certain fines for "first-time, non-serious" violations by small businesses if the violations are corrected within a certain time period. All new forms are required to be simplified in plain English. The message in the new law is very clear: the federal government wants to help the small business community cope with federal regulations. Unfortunately, the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act did not receive much attention during 1996. This also occurred with several of the small-business tax breaks and incentives passed by Congress earlier this year. Clearly the act will be one of the first small-business issues to come to light in the 105th Congress. EPA's Clean Air Act proposal may be the test. The small business community needs to do a better job educating its members about the advantages this act gives small-business advocates in dealing with issues that have historically been useless to combat. The playing field has been made more level and agencies need to realize that having the business community involved early in the regulatory process helps to avoid many of the pitfalls that traditionally come when new regulations are published and implemented. ASA is proud to be a supporter of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act and looks forward to working with federal agencies in developing practical and sound regulations that deal with the business community.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||