The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions
Congressional research reportNov 29, 2017
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
The Trump Administration and the Unified
Agenda of Federal Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions
Maeve P. Carey
Specialist in Government Organization and Management
Kathryn A. Francis
Analyst in Government Organization and Management
November 29, 2017
Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R45032
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Summary
Donald J. Trump promised that if he were elected President, he would instruct federal agencies to
reduce their regulations significantly. As of late 2017, this deregulation was underway in agencies
across the federal government.
One way for Congress and the public to be informed about this deregulatory activity is to consult
the “Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions.” The Unified Agenda is a
government-wide publication of rulemaking actions agencies expect to take in the coming
months, and it contains both regulatory actions (i.e., new regulations) and deregulatory actions
(i.e., reductions in or elimination of current regulations).
The Unified Agenda is typically published twice each year by the Regulatory Information Service
Center (RISC), a component of the General Services Administration (GSA), for the Office of
Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). OIRA
is the entity within OMB that has primary oversight responsibilities over most agencies’
rulemaking activities. All entries in the Unified Agenda have uniform data elements that can be
searched in an online database. Each entry includes information about the rule, including the
department and agency issuing the rule, the title of the rule, the Regulation Identifier Number
(RIN), an abstract of the action being taken, a timetable of past actions and a projected date for
the next action, and information about the priority of the rule (e.g., whether it is “economically
significant” or “major”).
The Trump Administration’s first Unified Agenda, which was issued on July 20, 2017, and was
referred to by the Administration as the “Update to the 2017 Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions,” contains information on many deregulatory actions that
the Trump Administration has undertaken so far. For example, the Agenda lists 469 actions that
agencies have withdrawn since the previous (Fall 2016) edition of the Unified Agenda and 22
major and/or economically significant actions that were reclassified from “active” under the
Barack Obama Administration to “long-term” under the Trump Administration. The 2017 Update
lists a total of 58 economically significant “active” actions, as compared to 113 such actions that
had been published in the Fall 2016 edition.
Notably, it also appears that the Unified Agenda could be an important source of information for
another major regulatory development in the Trump Administration: the regulatory budget, which
was announced in a memorandum issued by OIRA on September 7, 2017. The Trump
Administration’s regulatory budget will require the cost of most agencies’ new regulations to
remain below a regulatory cost cap, which OMB will set for each covered agency in each fiscal
year. The tracking of agencies’ implementation of this regulatory budget is expected to be tied to
future editions of the Unified Agenda, beginning with the next edition.
This report provides an overview of the Unified Agenda, discusses the additional significance of
the Unified Agenda in the Trump Administration, provides summary information about content of
the 2017 Update, and discusses what additional information can be expected in the subsequent
edition of the Agenda.
Congressional Research Service
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Contents
Overview of the Unified Agenda ..................................................................................................... 2
Authorities for the Unified Agenda ........................................................................................... 2
Contents of the Unified Agenda ................................................................................................ 3
Significance of the Unified Agenda in the Trump Administration .................................................. 4
New Developments: EO 13771 and Related Guidance............................................................. 4
List of “Inactive” Rules Made Public ....................................................................................... 5
2017 Update Edition of the Unified Agenda: A Summary .............................................................. 6
Summary Statistics .................................................................................................................... 7
Active Actions ........................................................................................................................... 8
Notable Active Actions ....................................................................................................... 8
Withdrawn Actions .................................................................................................................... 9
Notable Withdrawn Actions ...............................................................................................11
Long-Term Actions ..................................................................................................................11
Notable Long-Term Actions.............................................................................................. 13
Forthcoming in Future Editions: Information on Agencies’ Regulatory Budgets ......................... 14
Figures
Figure 1. Active Major and/or Economically Significant Rules By Agency ................................... 8
Figure 2. Agencies with Greatest Number of Withdrawn Actions ................................................ 10
Figure 3. Withdrawn Actions by Rule Priority .............................................................................. 10
Figure 4. Ten Agencies Listing Greatest Number of Long-Term Actions ..................................... 12
Figure 5. Long-Term Actions by Rule Priority.............................................................................. 12
Tables
Table 1. Summary Data on Rulemaking Actions in the Unified Agenda ........................................ 7
Table A-1. List of Included Federal Entities.................................................................................. 15
Table B-1. Active Major/Economically Significant Rules Listed in the 2017 Update
Edition of the Unified Agenda.................................................................................................... 16
Appendixes
Appendix A. Glossary of Federal Entities ..................................................................................... 15
Appendix B. Active Major and/or Economically Significant Rulemaking Actions in the
2017 Update Edition of the Unified Agenda .............................................................................. 16
Contacts
Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 27
Congressional Research Service
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Introduction
Donald J. Trump promised that if elected President, he would instruct federal agencies to reduce
their regulations significantly. Because of certain federal rulemaking requirements, agencies must
generally undertake rulemaking procedures when they are issuing new regulations and when they
are changing or eliminating regulations.1 In other words, a change to or elimination of a
regulation that was previously issued generally has to go through a rulemaking process—the
President or his agency heads cannot unilaterally change or eliminate regulations without
following rulemaking procedures.2 Such a rulemaking process typically requires the agency to
issue a proposed rule, provide an opportunity for the public to provide comment, and then issue a
final rule.3 During the first year of the Trump Administration, this deregulation was underway in
agencies across the federal government.
One way for Congress and the public to be informed about this deregulatory activity is to consult
the “Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions” (hereinafter Unified
Agenda).4 The Unified Agenda is a government-wide publication of rulemaking actions that
agencies expect to take in the coming months, and it contains both regulatory actions (i.e., new
regulations) and deregulatory actions (i.e., reductions in or elimination of current regulations).
The Trump Administration’s first edition of the Unified Agenda, which was issued on July 20,
2017, and was referred to by the Administration as the “Update to the 2017 Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions,” contains information on many deregulatory
actions that the Trump Administration has undertaken so far and intends to undertake in the
coming months. The subsequent edition is expected to be issued in late 2017 and may contain
more detailed information on the implementation of the Trump Administration’s regulatory
budget, which was announced on September 7, 2017, in addition to serving as an update on the
deregulatory actions occurring across federal agencies.5
This report provides an overview of the Unified Agenda, discusses the additional significance of
the Unified Agenda in the Trump Administration, provides summary information about the first
1 The Administrative Procedure Act (APA; 5 U.S.C. §551(5)) defines “rulemaking” as the “agency process for
formulating, amending, or repealing a rule” (emphasis added).
2 For an overview of the federal rulemaking process, see CRS Report RL32240, The Federal Rulemaking Process: An
Overview, coordinated by Maeve P. Carey. See also CRS Insight IN10611, Can a New Administration Undo a Previous
Administration’s Regulations?, by Maeve P. Carey, and CRS Legal Sidebar WSLG1697, With the Stroke of a Pen:
What Executive Branch Actions Can President-elect Trump “Undo” on Day One?, by Todd Garvey.
3 Although the APA generally requires agencies to publish a proposed rule before promulgating a final rule, the act
provides several exceptions to this requirement. For example, the agency may forgo notice and comment procedures
when the agency finds, for “good cause,” that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest” (5 U.S.C. §553(b)(3)(B)). The APA also provides explicit exceptions to notice and comment
requirements for certain categories of regulatory actions, such as rules dealing with military or foreign affairs; agency
management or personnel; or public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts (5 U.S.C. §553(a)). Further, the APA
exempts from notice and comment agency guidance documents, including interpretative rules and general statements of
policy, and rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice (5 U.S.C. §553(b)(3)(A)).
4 The Trump Administration’s first edition of the Unified Agenda is available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
eAgendaMain.
5 The regulatory budget had been alluded to in earlier documents issued by the Trump Administration, including
Executive Order 13771, which is discussed below. However, the September memorandum introduced more detail about
the budget than had been provided previously. See Memorandum from Neomi Rao, Administrator, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, to regulatory reform officers at executive departments and agencies, “FY2018
Regulatory Cost Allowances,” September 7, 2017, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/
memoranda/2017/FY%202018%20Regulatory%20Cost%20Allowances.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
1
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
edition of the Unified Agenda released by the Trump Administration, and discusses what
additional information can be expected in the subsequent edition of the Agenda.
Overview of the Unified Agenda
The Unified Agenda is typically published twice each year by the Regulatory Information Service
Center (RISC), a component of the General Services Administration (GSA), for the Office of
Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). OIRA
is the entity within OMB that has primary oversight responsibilities over most agencies’
rulemaking activities.6
Authorities for the Unified Agenda
The Unified Agenda helps agencies fulfill two transparency requirements. First, Section 602 of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that all agencies publish semiannual regulatory
agendas in the Federal Register describing regulatory actions that they are developing that may
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.7 The RFA also
requires that agencies “endeavor to provide notice” of the regulatory agendas to small entities and
“invite comments upon each subject area on the agenda.”8
Second, Section 4 of Executive Order 12866 on “Regulatory Planning and Review” requires that
all agencies, including independent regulatory agencies, “prepare an agenda of all regulations
under development or review.”9 The stated purposes of this and other planning requirements in
the order are, among other things, to “maximize consultation and the resolution of potential
conflicts at an early stage” and to “involve the public and its State, local, and tribal officials in
regulatory planning.” The executive order also requires that each agency prepare, as part of the
fall edition of the Unified Agenda, a “regulatory plan” of the most important significant
regulatory actions that the agency reasonably expects to issue in proposed or final form during the
upcoming fiscal year.
Neither of these requirements contains a penalty for issuing a proposed or final rule without
having first provided notice of the rule in the Unified Agenda, and some prospective regulatory
actions listed in the Unified Agenda are never finalized.10
6 For more information about the role of OIRA, see CRS Report RL32397, Federal Rulemaking: The Role of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, coordinated by Maeve P. Carey.
7 5 U.S.C. §602. “Small entities” are defined in the RFA to include small businesses, small organizations such as
certain nonprofits, and municipalities (5 U.S.C. §601). The RFA applies to all agencies covered by the APA (5 U.S.C.
§551(1)), which includes independent regulatory agencies.
Although the RFA requires agencies to publish this information in April and October, the Unified Agenda has typically
been published within a few months of, but rarely during, April and October.
8 5 U.S.C. §602(c).
9 Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” 58 Federal Register 51735, October 4, 1993.
Although most of the requirements in this executive order, such as OMB review of proposed and final rules, do not
apply to independent regulatory agencies (e.g., the Securities and Exchange Commission and Federal Reserve Board),
the section of the order requiring publication of rulemaking activities in the Unified Agenda does apply to them.
10 Some Members of Congress have introduced legislation that would add to these current requirements for the Unified
Agenda. In the 115th Congress, to date, those bills include H.R. 1009, the OIRA Insight, Reform, and Accountability
Act, and its Senate companion, S. 676; S. 56, the Regulations Endanger Democracy Act of 2017 (also referred to as the
RED Tape Act of 2017); and H.R. 2623, the Lessening Regulatory Costs and Establishing a Federal Regulatory Budget
Act of 2017.
Congressional Research Service
2
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Contents of the Unified Agenda
The Unified Agenda lists upcoming activities, by agency, in four separate categories:
1. “active” actions, including rules in the prerule stage (e.g., advance notices of
proposed rulemaking or other preliminary regulatory actions that are expected to
be taken in the next 12 months); proposed rule stage (i.e., notices of proposed
rulemaking that are expected to be issued in the next 12 months, or for which the
closing date of the comment period is the next step); and final rule stage (i.e.,
final rules or other final actions that are expected to be taken in the next 12
months);
2. “completed” actions (i.e., final rules that have been promulgated or rules that
have been withdrawn from the Unified Agenda since the Fall 2016 edition
because agencies are no longer actively working on them);
3. “long-term” actions (i.e., items under development that agencies do not expect to
take action on in the next 12 months); and
4. “inactive” actions, a category of rules that was created during the Obama
Administration and was not visible to the public.
All entries in the first three categories listed above have uniform data elements that are searchable
in a database.11 The searchable data elements typically include the department and/or agency
issuing the rule, the title of the rule, the Regulation Identifier Number (RIN),12 an abstract of the
action being taken, and a timetable of past actions and a projected date (sometimes just the
projected month and year) for the next regulatory action. Each entry also indicates the priority of
the regulation (e.g., whether it is considered “economically significant” under Executive Order
12866, or whether it is considered a “major” rule under the Congressional Review Act), and other
characteristics that agencies are required to identify when issuing regulations (e.g., whether the
rule has federalism implications or international impacts).13
At present, the Unified Agenda does not have a data element to separate deregulatory actions
from regulatory actions. In many cases, the abstract states or implies whether the action is
deregulatory in nature. In part, the lack of such a data element may be because agencies are
11 The fourth category is not searchable within the database on Reginfo.gov, unlike the active, completed, and long-
term categories. The “inactive” category, which is discussed in more depth below (see “List of “Inactive” Rules Made
Public”), was provided in the 2017 Update as a pdf document listing the actions, at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/jsp/
eAgenda/InactiveRINs_2017_Agenda_Update.pdf.
12 RINs are assigned by RISC, and the Office of Management and Budget has asked agencies to include RINs in the
headings of their rulemaking documents when they are published in the Federal Register to make it easier for the
public and agency officials to track the publication history of regulatory actions. For a copy of this memorandum, see
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/IncreasingOpenness_04072010.pdf.
13 Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a “significant” regulatory action as one that is likely to result in a rule
that may “(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,
local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action
taken or planned by another agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive order.” Regulatory actions meeting the
first of these four criteria are considered “economically significant.”
The definition of a “major” rule under the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. §804) is similar to the definition of
“economically significant,” since both definitions are triggered if a rule has, among other things, a $100 million effect
on the economy.
Congressional Research Service
3
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
reviewing previous regulatory actions and are not yet clear whether a deregulatory action will
follow. According to OIRA Administrator Neomi Rao, the forthcoming editions of the Unified
Agenda may have a different classification system, allowing agencies to indicate which items are
regulatory and which are deregulatory.14
As will be discussed later in this report, future editions of the Unified Agenda may also include
information about agencies’ compliance with and implementation of the Trump Administration’s
regulatory budget, which OIRA announced in September 2017.
Significance of the Unified Agenda in the Trump
Administration
Developments in the Trump Administration have led to two notable aspects of the “Update”
edition of the Unified Agenda, which was issued on July 20, 2017. First, the focus on
deregulation makes the Unified Agenda particularly valuable for tracking agency deregulatory
activity. Second, the Trump Administration made public an additional list of regulations that had
been established during the Obama Administration and had previously not been published.
New Developments: EO 13771 and Related Guidance
As mentioned previously, no penalty exists for issuing a rule without having first published it in
the Unified Agenda. However, it appears that the Trump Administration may be placing a new
emphasis on the importance of preceding a regulatory action by an entry in the Agenda.
One criticism that has been raised in the past about the Unified Agenda is that many rulemaking
actions that agencies took had not been preceded by an entry in the Agenda.15 EO 13771, which
President Trump signed on January 30, 2017, contained the following provisions pertaining to
publication of rules in the Unified Agenda:
Each regulation approved by the Director during the Presidential budget process shall be
included in the Unified Regulatory Agenda required under Executive Order 12866, as
amended, or any successor order.
Unless otherwise required by law, no regulation shall be issued by an agency if it was not
included on the most recent version or update of the published Unified Regulatory Agenda
as required under Executive Order 12866, as amended, or any successor order, unless the
issuance of such regulation was approved in advance in writing by the Director [of OMB].16
14 Cheryl Bolen, “Spring Regulatory Agenda Marks Start of Agency Deregulation,” Bloomberg BNA, July 20, 2017, at
https://www.bna.com/spring-regulatory-agenda-n73014461976/.
15 For a discussion of these criticisms, see Curtis W. Copeland, The Unified Agenda: Proposals for Reform, report
prepared for the Administrative Conference of the United States, April 13, 2015, pp. 11-14, at https://www.acus.gov/
sites/default/files/documents/Unified%20Agenda%20Draft%20Report%20041315%20FINAL_0.pdf (hereinafter
ACUS Unified Agenda Report).
These criticisms have sometimes resulted in legislative proposals that would strengthen the requirement for publication
in the Unified Agenda prior to issuance. For example, H.R. 2623 would prohibit issuance of a significant regulatory
action if the action was not included in the most recent version of the Unified Agenda, unless otherwise approved by
OMB.
16 Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” 82 Federal Register 9339,
February 3, 2017, §§ 3(b) and 3(c).
Congressional Research Service
4
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
On April 5, 2017, OIRA issued guidance on implementation of EO 13771, which further
emphasized the requirement for publishing regulatory and deregulatory actions in the Unified
Agenda.17 Specifically, the guidance stated that “the agency’s Unified Agenda of Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions should reflect compliance with the [one-in, two-out] requirements of EO
13771, and should include, to the extent practicable, EO 13771 deregulatory actions that ... are
sufficient to offset those actions appearing in the Agenda that are or are expected to result in EO
13771 regulatory actions.”18 In other words, OMB is requiring agencies to include in their
submissions for the Unified Agenda the cost offsets of any new regulations they expect to issue.19
This was also stated in OMB’s call for data for the 2017 Update to the Unified Agenda, which
stated that “in order to facilitate the fiscal year 2018 regulatory budget planning process we are
requesting that your spring 2017 submissions include a preliminary estimate of the total costs or
savings associated with each of your planned fiscal year 2018 significant regulatory actions and
offsetting deregulatory actions.”20
Independent regulatory agencies, which are listed statutorily in the Paperwork Reduction Act and
historically have not been covered by rulemaking requirements imposed by the President and
OMB, are not required to follow Executive Order 13771.21 OMB’s guidance on the order
encourages those agencies, however, to voluntarily “identify existing regulations that, if repealed
or revised, would achieve cost savings that would fully offset the costs of significant regulatory
actions while continuing to meet the agency’s statutory obligations.”22
As will be discussed later in this report, it also appears that future editions of the Unified Agenda
may contain information about the Trump Administration’s regulatory budget.23
List of “Inactive” Rules Made Public
In April 2015, the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS)24 shed light on a
practice that had developed under the Obama Administration in which the Unified Agenda
17 Memorandum from Dominic J. Mancini, Acting Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, to
regulatory policy officers at executive departments and agencies and managing and executive directors of certain
agencies and commissions, “Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, Titled ‘Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs’,” April 5, 2017, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/
memoranda/2017/M-17-21-OMB.pdf (hereinafter “OMB Guidance on Executive Order 13771”).
18 Ibid., pp. 15-16.
19 The one-in, two-out requirement is established in two parts of Executive Order 13771. First, section 2(a) requires that
“whenever an executive department or agency (agency) publicly proposes for notice and comment or otherwise
promulgates a new regulation, it shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed.” Second, section 2(c)
states that “any new incremental costs associated with new regulations shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset
by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations.”
20 Memorandum from Dominic J. Mancini, Acting Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, to
regulatory policy officers at executive departments and agencies and managing and executive directors of certain
agencies and commissions, “Spring 2017 Data Call for the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
Actions,” March 2, 2017, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/briefing-room/presidential-actions/
related-omb-material/spring_2017_unified_agenda_data_call.pdf.
21 The list of independent regulatory agencies is at 44 U.S.C. §3502(5). For more information about independent
regulatory agencies, see CRS Report R42821, Independent Regulatory Agencies, Cost-Benefit Analysis, and
Presidential Review of Regulations, by Maeve P. Carey and Michelle D. Christensen.
22 OMB Guidance on Executive Order 13771, p. 9.
23 See section below entitled “Forthcoming in Future Editions: Information on Agencies’ Regulatory Budget.”
24 ACUS is an independent agency whose purpose is, among other things, to “study the efficiency, adequacy, and
fairness of the administrative procedure used by administrative agencies in carrying out administrative programs, and
make recommendations to administrative agencies, collectively or individually, and to the President, Congress, or the
Congressional Research Service
5
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
contained an additional category of regulations (“pending”) that was not visible to the public.25
That category appears to have been created in 2011. Around that time, it appears that OIRA
informally asked agencies to remove rules from the Unified Agenda that were not actively being
considered for issuance. But as the ACUS report explained, if an agency were to remove a rule
from the Unified Agenda and then resume work on the rule at a later time, the agency would be
required to obtain a new RIN.26 A RIN is a unique identifier that allows interested parties to track
a rule over its development; thus, having more than one RIN associated with a particular rule
could lead to confusion among individuals and entities that are tracking a specific regulation.
In an apparent effort to accommodate those concerns, OIRA and RISC created the category of
“pending” rules, which would allow the rules to remain in the Unified Agenda database but make
them invisible to public users of the database.27 ACUS recommended in June 2015 that “Federal
agencies should not keep regulations that are still under active development in a ‘pending’
category. The ‘pending’ category should be included in the published Unified Agenda. OIRA
should define the criteria distinguishing between ‘long term’ and ‘pending’ actions.”28
When issuing the 2017 Update to the Unified Agenda, the Trump Administration decided to make
the list of “pending” rules public.29 Upon release of the Agenda, OMB Director Mick Mulvaney
stated, “We will not have a hidden list of regulations that we’re thinking about doing, but we’re
not going to tell you about.”30 The list of “pending” rules, which are now being referred to as
“inactive,” is posted on OIRA’s website along with the rest of the Agenda. ACUS commended
the action on its website.31
2017 Update Edition of the Unified Agenda: A
Summary
This section provides an overview of the content of 2017 Update edition of the Unified Agenda,
including information on active, withdrawn, and long-term actions listed.32 The first section
Judicial Conference of the United States, in connection therewith, as it considers appropriate.” 5 U.S.C. §594(1).
25 ACUS Unified Agenda Report, at https://www.acus.gov/sites/default/files/documents/
Unified%20Agenda%20Draft%20Report%20041315%20FINAL_0.pdf.
26 Ibid., p. 39.
27 Some observers have noted that the timing of these attempts to reduce the number of visible Unified Agenda entries
in 2011 notably coincided with the upcoming 2012 election. OMB Director Mick Mulvaney, for example, stated the
following about the “pending” list: “They thought it would be bad for their re-election prospects in 2012, so they
created a secret list of regs that were not disclosed.” See Cheryl Bolen, “From the Old and Cold Files: Obama’s
‘Secret’ List,” Bloomberg BNA, July 20, 2017, at https://www.bna.com/old-cold-files-b73014462031/.
28 Administrative Conference of the United States, “Adoption of Recommendation,” 80 Federal Register 36758, June
26, 2015.
29 The list of these rules is available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/jsp/eAgenda/
InactiveRINs_2017_Agenda_Update.pdf.
30 Cheryl Bolen, “From the Old and Cold Files: Obama’s ‘Secret’ List,” Bloomberg BNA, July 20, 2017, at
https://www.bna.com/old-cold-files-b73014462031/.
31 Todd Rubin, “Unified Regulatory Agenda Change Accords with ACUS Recommendation,” blog post for the
Administrative Conference of the United States, September 8, 2017, at https://www.acus.gov/newsroom/
administrative-fix-blog/unified-regulatory-agenda-change-accords-acus-recommendation.
32 This section does not include data on the “inactive” rulemaking actions included in the 2017 Update because those
actions were presented in a separate list in pdf form, rather than having been presented in the searchable portion of the
database on Reginfo.gov.
Congressional Research Service
6
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
below provides summary statistics on the entries listed in the 2017 Update. Examples are then
provided for each type of action. Examples were selected based on their significant financial or
material impact on the economy (i.e., they were designated as major and/or economically
significant rules).33 The examples in each section are further categorized as follows:
Small business impact. Actions that may significantly affect small businesses,
governmental jurisdictions, or organizations such as nonprofits. The RFA
generally requires agencies to assess the impact of their regulations on these
various small entities.34
Unfunded mandates. Actions that may result in expenditures that exceed $100
million in one year by state, local, and tribal governments (in aggregate) or the
private sector. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 generally requires
agencies to assess the anticipated costs and benefits of actions that are expected
to exceed the $100 million threshold.35
Reclassified. Long-term actions that had been classified as active actions in past
editions of the Unified Agenda.
Summary Statistics
The 2017 Update includes a total of 3,521 rulemaking actions—1,731 active, 1,094 completed,
and 696 long-term. Withdrawn actions comprised 469, or 13%, of the total number of actions..
Table 1 provides summary-level data on rulemaking actions included in the 2017 Update.
Table 1. Summary Data on Rulemaking Actions in the Unified Agenda
Rulemaking Action
Count (#)
Count (% of total)
Active
Prerule stage
107
3%
Proposed rule stage
834
24%
Final rule stage
790
22%
Active Subtotal
1,731
49%
Completed
Withdrawn
469
13%
Other
625
18%
Completed Subtotal
1,094
31%
Long-term
Long-term
696
20%
Long-term Subtotal
696
20%
Total
3,521
100%
33 Major rules are defined in the Congressional Review Act at 5 U.S.C. §804(2). Economically significant rules include
those that, as defined in Executive Order 12866, will have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or
will adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments and communities.
34 5 U.S.C. §§601-612.
35 2 U.S.C. §§1532-1538.
Congressional Research Service
7
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Source: CRS, using information provided in the 2017 Update to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions.
Notes: The “Other” category contains rulemaking actions that agencies finalized since the Fall 2016 edition of
the Unified Agenda.
The sections below further analyze active, withdrawn, and long-term actions listed in the 2017
Update, including examples of rules listed by federal entities. Appendix A contains a glossary of
federal entities discussed in this section.
Active Actions
Sixty-two of the 1,731 active actions included in the 2017 Update are considered major and/or
economically significant—5 in the “prerule” stage, 26 in the “proposed rule” stage, and 31 in the
“final rule” stage. Five actions explicitly state that they are rescinding rules or proposing to delay
implementation. Three agencies listed over half (55%) of the active major and/or economically
significant actions—HHS, DOE, and the EPA. The remaining 28 actions were listed across 15
agencies (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Active Major and/or Economically Significant Rules By Agency
Source: CRS graphic representation of data elements provided in the 2017 Update of the Unified Agenda.
Notes: The pie chart depicts the percentage of major and/or economically significant rules by agency. The bar
chart depicts the raw number of rules by each agency included in the “Other” category.
Notable Active Actions
Below are examples of major and/or economically significant active actions included in the 2017
Update that fall into the “small business impact” or “unfunded mandates” categories described
above. Appendix B provides more details on each of the 62 rules, including the title, abstract, and
authorizing statutes.
Small Business Impact
Six major and/or economically significant active actions are expected to significantly impact
small entities and trigger the requirements of the RFA:
Congressional Research Service
8
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
DOT/FTA, “Protecting Transit Workers From the Risk of Assaults”;
DOC/PTO, “Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees During Fiscal Year 2017”;
DOL, “Tip Regulations Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)”;
HHS/CMS, “Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage and the
Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Programs for Contract Year 2019”;
5. HHS/CMS, “CY 2018 Updates to the Quality Payment Program”; and
6. HHS/CMS, “Advancing Care Coordination Through Episode Payment Models
(EPMs).”
1.
2.
3.
4.
Unfunded Mandates
Eleven major and/or economically significant active actions are expected to result in expenditures
that exceed $100 million in one year by state, local, and tribal governments (in aggregate) or the
private sector. Examples include the following:
DOE, “Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Non-Weatherized Gas
Furnaces and Mobile Home Gas Furnaces”;36
DOE, “Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage
Contingent Cost Allocation”;
DOL/EBSA, “Revision of the Form 5500 Series and Implementing Related
Regulations Under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA)”;
EPA, “Renewable Fuel Volume Standards for 2018 and Biomass Based Diesel
Volume (BBD) for 2019”; and
EPA, “Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products.”
Withdrawn Actions37
The 2017 Update includes 469 rulemaking actions that were withdrawn since the Fall 2016
edition spanning 27 departments, agencies, and government corporations. Ten agencies accounted
for 429, or 91%, of the withdrawn actions listed, with each of the agencies having withdrawn
between 9 and 114 actions (Figure 2). DOI withdrew the greatest amount of actions in both
actual numbers (114) and percentage of total withdrawn actions (24%), followed by HHS (69)
and USDA (62). By contrast, three agencies each withdrew one action—FERC, FRS, and
USAID.38
36 DOE listed five additional rulemaking actions regarding energy conservation standards that are expected to exceed
the $100 million threshold.
37 This section focuses on the withdrawn actions rather than all “completed” actions because the withdrawn actions
were highlighted in the preamble to the 2017 Update, as well as providing a potentially significant mechanism for
achieving the Trump Administration’s stated objective of deregulation. Furthermore, many of the other completed
actions reported in the Agenda would have been finalized by the Obama Administration, which is beyond the scope of
this report.
38 According to the 2017 Update, five agencies each withdrew one rule—FERC, FRS, GSA, USAID, and the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR). The FAR is not a recognized agency in the United States Code; rather, this entry refers
to a rule that was jointly listed by DOD, GSA, and NASA. CRS designated GSA as the listing agency for both the GSA
rule (RIN 3090-AJ66) and FAR rule (RIN 9000-AM39) in this report due to GSA’s Regulatory Secretariat Division,
which appears to manage Federal Register notices related to the FAR.
Congressional Research Service
9
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Figure 2. Agencies with Greatest Number of Withdrawn Actions
Source: CRS graphic representation of data elements provided in the 2017 Update of the Unified Agenda.
Figure 3 depicts withdrawn actions by “rule priority,” defined in the preamble to the Unified
Agenda as “an indication of the significance of a regulation.” There are five rule priority levels
listed in the Unified Agenda: Economically Significant; Other Significant; Substantive,
Nonsignificant; Routine and Frequent; and Info./Admin./Other. Approximately 58% of withdrawn
actions were classified as “Substantive, Nonsignificant.”39 Actions classified as “Routine and
Frequent” and “Info./Admin./Other,” the two lowest priority levels, together comprised a fairly
low percentage (5%) of withdrawn actions. Four percent of withdrawn actions were economically
significant—the highest rule priority level.
Figure 3. Withdrawn Actions by Rule Priority
Source: CRS graphic representation of data elements provided in the 2017 Update of the Unified Agenda.
39 “Substantive, Nonsignificant” rules are those that are expected to have “substantive impacts,” but do not rise to the
level of requiring review by OIRA under Executive Order 12866.
Congressional Research Service
10
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Notable Withdrawn Actions
Below are examples of major and/or economically significant withdrawn actions included in the
2017 Update that fall into the “small business impact” or “unfunded mandates” categories
described above.
Small Business Impact
Seven major and/or economically significant withdrawn actions may have substantially impacted
small entities and triggered the requirements of the RFA:
HHS/FDA, “Suspension of Food Facility Registration”;
HHS/FDA, “Patient Medication Information”;
HHS/CMS, “Adoption of Operating Rules for HIPAA Transactions”;
HHS/CMS, “Post-Eligibility Treatment of Income, Appeal Processes for
Medicaid, and Other Provisions Related to Eligibility and Enrollment for
Medicaid and CHIP”;
5. HHS/CMS, “Requirements for Surety Bonds for Certain Medicare Providers and
Suppliers”;
6. HHS/CMS, “Part B Drug Payment Model”; and
7. DOL/OSHA, “Occupational Exposure to Styrene.”
1.
2.
3.
4.
Unfunded Mandates
Three withdrawn actions had been expected to result in expenditures that exceed $100 million in
one year by state, local, and tribal governments (in aggregate) or the private sector:
1. HHS/CMS, “Imaging Accreditation”;
2. HHS/FDA, “Requirements for the Testing and Reporting of Tobacco Product
Constituents, Ingredients, and Additives”; and
3. HHS/FDA, “Amendments to the Current Good Manufacturing Practice
Regulations for Finished Pharmaceuticals—Components.”
Long-Term Actions
The 2017 Update includes 696 long-term rulemaking actions spanning 36 departments, agencies,
and government corporations.40 Entries from 10 agencies comprised 533, or 78%, of the longterm actions listed, ranging from 23 to 109 actions per agency (Figure 4). The FCC listed the
largest portion of long-term actions in both actual numbers (109) and percentage of total longterm actions (16%), followed by DOT (85) and DHS (76). By contrast, seven agencies each listed
one long-term action—AMBC, FCA, OPM, NRLB, GSA, SSA, and FMC.41
40 The 2017 Update includes 696 long-term actions listed by a total of 37 agencies. The 2017 Update lists the FAR as
an agency that listed one long-term action (RIN 9000-AM39). The rule, however, was jointly issued by DOD, GSA,
and NASA. CRS designated GSA as the listing agency for that rule for the purposes of this report. See footnote 38 for
more information.
41 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
11
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Figure 4. Ten Agencies Listing Greatest Number of Long-Term Actions
Source: CRS graphic representation of data elements provided in the 2017 Update of the Unified Agenda.
Figure 5 depicts long-term actions by rule priority. Similarly to the withdrawn actions,
“Substantive, Nonsignificant” actions comprised the largest portion (53%), and “Routine and
Frequent” and “Info./Admin./Other” actions, together, comprised a small portion (4%), of longterm actions included in the 2017 Update. Notably, 22 of the major and/or economically
significant long-term actions had been previously classified as active actions in the Fall 2016
edition. This change suggests the Trump Administration is reducing the significance of those
actions.
Figure 5. Long-Term Actions by Rule Priority
Source: CRS graphic representation of data elements provided in the 2017 Update of the Unified Agenda.
Congressional Research Service
12
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Notable Long-Term Actions
Below are examples of major and/or economically significant long-term actions included in the
2017 Update that fall into the “small business impact,” “unfunded mandates,” or “reclassified”
categories described above.
Small Business Impact
Six major and/or economically significant long-term actions may significantly impact small
entities and trigger the requirements of the RFA:
1. HHS/CMS, “Hospital and Critical Access Hospital (CAH) Changes to Promote
Innovation, Flexibility, and Improvement in Patient Care”;
2. HHS/CMS, “Revisions to Requirements for Discharge Planning for Hospitals,
Critical Access Hospitals, and Home Health Agencies”;
3. HHS/CMS, “Program Integrity Enhancements to the Provider Enrollment
Process”;
4. DOT/NHTSA, “Retroreflective Tape for Single Unit Trucks”;
5. DOT/FAA, “Requirements to File Notice of Construction of Meteorological
Evaluation Towers and Other Renewable Energy Projects”; and
6. STATE, “Exchange Visitors: Camp Counselors.”
Unfunded Mandates
Eight major and/or economically significant long-term actions are expected to result in
expenditures that exceed $100 million in one year by state, local, and tribal governments (in
aggregate) or the private sector:
1. DOE, “Energy Conservation Standards for Manufactured Housing”;
2. HHS/FDA, “Updated Standards for Labeling of Pet Food”;
3. DHS, “Collection of Alien Biometric Data Upon Exit From the United States at
Air and Sea Ports of Departure”;
4. DHS, “Ammonium Nitrate Security Program”;
5. DHS/CBP, “Importer Security Filing and Additional Carrier Requirements”;
6. DHS/TSA, “General Aviation Security and Other Aircraft Operator Security”;
7. EPA, “National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Radon”; and
8. EPA, “Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management
Programs under the Clean Air Act.”
Reclassified Actions
Twenty-two long-term actions had previously been classified as in the prerule, proposed, or final
rulemaking stages in the Fall 2016 edition. Examples include the following:
DHS/CBP, “Implementation of the Guam-CNMI Visa Waiver Program”;
DOE, “Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal
Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings”;
DOT/NHTSA, “Passenger Car and Light Truck Corporate Average Fuel
Economy Standards MYs 2022-2025”;
Congressional Research Service
13
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
EPA, “Water Resources Reform Development Act Farm Amendments to the Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasures Rule”;
HHS/FDA, “Postmarketing Safety Reporting Requirements for Human Drug and
Biological Products”; and
TREAS, “Assessment of Fees for Large Bank Holding Companies and Nonbank
Financial Companies Supervised by the Federal Reserve to Cover the Expenses
of the Financial Research Fund.”
Forthcoming in Future Editions: Information on
Agencies’ Regulatory Budgets
As discussed above, Executive Order 13771 and subsequent instructions and guidance from OMB
indicate that the Trump Administration intends to tie the tracking of agency progress on
deregulation with the process of issuing the Unified Agenda and regulatory plans, as the agencies
are required to identify offsets for new regulations in the corresponding Unified Agenda entry.
It appears that future editions of the Unified Agenda also could contain information on agencies’
implementation of their regulatory budgets.42 The regulatory budgets are essentially cost caps for
each agency’s new regulations, and the caps are to be set by OMB for each agency and each fiscal
year. The Trump Administration first instituted the cost caps in Executive Order 13771, in which
the Administration instructed federal agencies to have a regulatory cost cap of zero for the
remainder of FY2017.43 For each fiscal year thereafter, the order stated that agencies will be
allowed a “total amount of incremental costs” for “issuing new regulations and repealing
regulations for the next fiscal year.”44
On September 7, 2017, OIRA Administrator Neomi Rao instructed covered agencies to propose a
net reduction in total incremental regulatory costs for FY2018 and stated that the total final
incremental cost allowances would be published in conjunction with the Fall 2017 Unified
Agenda.45 Thus, forthcoming editions of the Unified Agenda may contain further information
about the Trump Administration’s implementation of its regulatory budget.
42 For an overview of the regulatory budget, see Ted Gayer, Robert Litan, and Philip Wallach, Evaluating the Trump
Administration’s Regulatory Reform Program, Brookings Institution Center on Regulation and Markets, Washington,
DC, October 2017, at https://www.brookings.edu/wp-https://www.brookings.edu/research/evaluating-the-trumpadministrations-regulatory-reform-program/.
43 Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” 82 Federal Register 9339,
February 3, 2017, §2(b).
44 Ibid.
45 Memorandum from Neomi Rao, Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, to regulatory reform
officers at executive departments and agencies, “FY2018 Regulatory Cost Allowances,” September 7, 2017, at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2017/
FY%202018%20Regulatory%20Cost%20Allowances.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
14
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Appendix A. Glossary of Federal Entities
Table A-1. List of Included Federal Entities
Cabinet-Level Departments and Subcomponents, Independent Agencies, Commissions, and
Corporations
ABMC
American Battle Monuments
Commission
FERC
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
CMS
Center for Medicare and Medicaid
Services
FMC
Federal Maritime Commission
CBP
Customs and Border Protection
FRS
Federal Reserve System
CPSC
Consumer Product Safety Commission
GSA
General Services Administration
DHS
Department of Homeland Security
HHS
Department of Health and Human Services
DOC
Department of Commerce
HUD
Department of Housing and Urban
Development
DOD
Department of Defense
NHTSA
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
DOE
Department of Energy
NLRB
National Labor Relations Board
DOI
Department of the Interior
NRC
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
DOJ
Department of Justice
OPM
Office of Personnel Management
DOL
Department of Labor
OSHA
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
DOT
Department of Transportation
SEC
Securities and Exchange Commission
EBSA
Employee Benefits Security
Administration
SSA
Social Security Administration
ED
Department of Education
STATE
Department of State
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
TREAS
Department of the Treasury
FAA
Federal Aviation Administration
TSA
Transportation Security Administration
FCA
Farm Credit Administration
USAID
Agency for International Development
FCC
Federal Communications Commission
USDA
Department of Agriculture
FDA
Food and Drug Administration
VA
Department of Veterans Affairs
FDIC
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Source: CRS, using acronyms provided in the Unified Agenda.
Congressional Research Service
15
Appendix B. Active Major and/or Economically Significant Rulemaking
Actions in the 2017 Update Edition of the Unified Agenda
Table B-1. Active Major/Economically Significant Rules Listed in the 2017 Update Edition of the Unified Agenda
Federal
Entity
Title of Rule (Regulation
Identifier Number (RIN))
Selected Provisions from Abstracts, as Stated Verbatim in Unified Agenda
Authorizing
Statute(s)
Prerule Stage
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
for External Power Supplies
(1904-AD87)
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), P.L. 110-140, requires that DOE
conduct two rulemakings to review whether the EPS [External Power Supplies] standards that are
in effect at the time the review should be amended. The first of these reviews was on February 10,
2014 (79 FR 7846). Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(3)(D)(ii), DOE is initiating the second review of
EPS standards with this new regulatory action.
42 U.S.C.
§6295(u)(3)(D)(ii)
DOE
Energy Conservation Program:
Standards for Commercial
Unfired Hot Water Storage
Tanks (1904-AD90)
Consistent with the requirements under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as
amended, DOE is examining whether to amend the current energy conservation standards in place
for unfired hot water storage tanks, a type of commercial water heater found at 10 CFR 431.110.
As a result of this effort, DOE may propose and adopt more stringent standards or issue a
determination that no amendments to the current standards are required.
42 U.S.C.
§6313(a)(6)(C)
DOE
Energy Conservation Program:
Energy Conservation Standards
for Consumer Water Heaters
(1904-AD91)
Consistent with the requirements under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as
amended, DOE is examining whether to amend the current energy conservation standards in place
for consumer water heaters found at 10 CFR 430.32(d). As a result of this effort, DOE may
propose and adopt more stringent standards or issue a determination that no amendments to the
current standards are required.
42 U.S.C.
§6295(m)(1)
DOE
Energy Conservation Program:
Energy Conservation Standards
for Commercial Air
Conditioning and Heating
Equipment (1904-AD92)
Consistent with the requirements under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as
amended, DOE is examining whether to amend the current energy conservation standards in place
for certain categories of Commercial Air Conditioning and Heating Equipment found at 10 CFR
431.97. As a result of this effort, DOE may propose and adopt more stringent standards or issue a
determination that no amendments to the current standards are required.
42 U.S.C.
§6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)
;
42 U.S.C.
§6313(a)(6)(C)(i)
DOT
Amendment to Excessive
Tarmac Delay Definition (2105AE47)
This rulemaking would amend the definition of excessive tarmac delay in DOT’s regulations for
certain situations to conform with changes made in the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of
2016.
49 U.S.C.
§§40101(a)(4)
and (9) ...
CRS-16
Proposed Rulemaking Stage
CPSC
Regulatory Options for Table
Saws (3041-AC31)
On July 11, 2006, the Commission voted to grant a petition requesting that the Commission issue a
rule prescribing performance standards for a system to reduce or prevent injuries from contacting
the blade of a table saw. The Commission also directed CPSC staff to prepare an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) initiating a rulemaking proceeding under the Consumer Product
Safety Act (CPSA) to: (1) identify the risk of injury associated with table saw blade-contact injuries;
(2) summarize regulatory alternatives, and (3) invite comments from the public. An ANPRM was
published on October 11, 2011...
5 U.S.C. §553(e);
15 U.S.C. §2051
DHS/
CBP
Western Hemisphere Travel
Initiative (WHTI)Noncompliant Traveler Fee
(1651-AB06)
This rule proposes amendments to the Department of Homeland Security regulations to establish a
user fee to cover the inspection costs of processing U.S. citizens seeking entry at U.S. land border
ports-of-entry without documents that comply with the Western Hemisphere Travel
Initiative. Additionally, this rule proposes to update the regulation regarding the establishment of
projects for the charging of a land border fee for inspection services.
8 U.S.C. §1356(q)
DOI/
BLM*
Revision or Rescission of the
2016 Waste Prevention,
Production Subject to
Royalties, and Resource
Conservation Rule (1004AE53)
This Proposed Rule would revise or rescind the Bureau of Land Management’s 2016 Final Rule,
Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation ... the Department
is reviewing the 2016 Final Rule and expects to propose a rule to determine whether revision or
rescission of the 2016 Final Rule is appropriate or necessary due to its regulatory burden on
American energy production and State and local jobs.
25 U.S.C. §396d;
25 U.S.C. §2107;
30 U.S.C. §189;
30 U.S.C. §306;
30 U.S.C. §359...
DOI/
BLM*
Waste Prevention, Production
Subject to Royalties, and
Resource Conservation; Delay
and Suspension of
Implementation Dates for
Certain Requirements
(1004-AE54)
This proposed rule would temporarily suspend and delay certain requirements contained in a final
rule that published in the Federal Register on November 18, 2016 (81 FR 83008). The final rule
went into effect on January 17, 2017. Some of its provisions have delayed implementation dates that
have not yet gone into effect ... The proposed rule would delay until July 17, 2019 (or by 18
months) provisions pertaining to: gas capture; measuring and reporting gas volumes vented and
flared; existing approvals to flare royalty free; replacing pneumatic controllers; and leak detection
and repair.
25 U.S.C. §396d;
25 U.S.C. §2107;
30 U.S.C. §189;
30 U.S.C. §306;
30 U.S.C. §359;
30 U.S.C. §1751
DOI/
FWS
Migratory Bird Hunting; 20172018 Migratory Game Bird
Hunting Regulations (1018BB40)
We propose to establish annual hunting regulations for certain migratory game birds for the 201718 hunting season. We annually prescribe outside limits (frameworks), within which States may
select hunting seasons. This proposed rule provides the regulatory schedule, describes the
proposed regulatory alternatives for the 2017-18 duck hunting seasons, requests proposals from
Indian tribes that wish to establish special migratory game bird hunting regulations on Federal Indian
reservations and ceded lands, and requests proposals for the 2018 spring and summer migratory
bird subsistence season in Alaska...
16 U.S.C. §703712;
16 U.S.C.
§742(a)-(j)
CRS-17
DOI/
FWS
Migratory Bird Hunting; 20182019 Migratory Game Bird
Hunting Regulations (1018BB73)
We propose to establish annual hunting regulations for certain migratory game birds for the 20182019 hunting season. We annually prescribe outside limits (frameworks), within which States may
select hunting seasons. This proposed rule provides the regulatory schedule, describes the
proposed regulatory alternatives for the 2018-2019 duck hunting seasons, requests proposals from
Indian tribes that wish to establish special migratory game bird hunting regulations on Federal Indian
reservations and ceded lands, and requests proposals for the 2018 spring and summer migratory
bird subsistence season in Alaska....
16 U.S.C. §703711;
16 U.S.C.
§742(a)-(j)
DOL/
EBSA
Revision of the Form 5500
Series and Implementing
Related Regulations Under the
Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (1210AB63)
This regulatory action is part of a long-term strategic project with the Internal Revenue Service and
the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation to modernize and improve the Form 5500 Annual
Return/Report of Employee Benefit Plan. Modernizing the financial and other annual reporting
requirements on the Form 5500 and making the investment and other information on the Form
5500 more data mineable are part of that evaluation. The project is also focused on enhancing the
agencies’ ability to collect employee benefit plan data that best meets the needs of changing
compliance projects, programs, and activities.
29 U.S.C. §10211025;
29 U.S.C. §1027;
29 U.S.C. §§10291030;
29 U.S.C. §1134...
DOL*
Tip Regulations Under the Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
(1235-AA21)
... In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Department will propose to rescind the current
restrictions on tip pooling by employers that pay tipped employees the full minimum wage directly.
29 U.S.C. §§201
et seq;
29 U.S.C.
§203(m)
DOT/
FTA
Protecting Transit Workers
From the Risk of Assaults
(2132-AB30)
Section 3022 of the Fast Act requires the Secretary to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) on protecting transit operators from the risk of assault. This NPRM would propose
mitigations to reduce the risk of assault to transit operators and employees of public transportation
systems, based on a Safety Management Systems approach. Proposed mitigations would include
vehicle requirements, training and other tools.
P.L. 114-94,
§3022
EPA
Renewable Fuel Volume
Standards for 2018 and
Biomass Based Diesel Volume
(BBD) for 2019 (2060-AT04)
The Clean Air Act requires EPA to promulgate regulations that specify the annual volume
requirements for renewable fuels under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program. Standards are
to be set for four different categories of renewable fuels: cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based diesel,
advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel. The statute requires that the standards be finalized by
November 30 of the year prior to the year in which the standards would apply. In the case of
biomass-based diesel, the statute requires applicable volumes to be set no later than 14 months
prior to the year for which the requirements would apply.
42 U.S.C. §§7401
et seq.
EPA*
Oil and Natural Gas Sector:
Emission Standards for New,
Reconstructed, and Modified
Sources: Extension of Stay for
Certain Requirements (2060AT59)
The EPA finalized the Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and
Modified Sources on June 3, 2016 (81 FR 35824). Several petitions were received in response to the
final rule. The petitions have raised at least one objection to the fugitive emissions, pneumatic
pumps and professional engineer certification requirements included in the final rule that arose after
the comment period or was impracticable to raise during the comment period and that is of central
relevance to the rule. In this action, the EPA intends to further extend the stay for these
requirements. Sources will not need to comply with these requirements while the stay is in effect.
42 U.S.C. §7411
CRS-18
EPA
N-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP)
and Methylene Chloride;
Rulemaking Under TSCA
Section 6(a) (2070-AK07)
...On January 19, 2017, EPA proposed under section 6 prohibitions and restrictions on the use of
methylene chloride and in consumer and most types of commercial paint and coating removal. In
that proposal, EPA identified commercial furniture refinishing as an industry for which EPA would
like more information before proposing regulations to address the risks presented by methylene
chloride, and announced its intention to propose a separate rulemaking to address those risks.
15 U.S.C. §2605
EPA
Trichloroethylene (TCE);
Rulemaking Under TSCA
[Toxic Substances Control Act]
Section 6(a); Vapor Degreasing
(2070-AK11)
...On January 19, 2017, EPA proposed to prohibit the manufacture, processing, distribution in
commerce, or commercial use of TCE in vapor degreasing. A separate Regulatory Agenda entry
(RIN 2070-AK03), published on December 16, 2016, proposes to address the unreasonable risks
from TCE when [used] as a spotting agent in dry cleaning and in commercial and consumer aerosol
spray degreasers.
15 U.S.C. §2605
EPA
Financial Responsibility
Requirements Under CERCLA
Section 108(b) for Classes of
Facilities in the Hardrock
Mining Industry (2050-AG61)
Section 108(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, establishes certain authorities concerning financial responsibility
requirements. The Agency has identified classes of facilities within the hardrock mining industry as
those for which financial responsibility requirements will be first developed. The EPA intends to
include requirements for financial responsibility, as well as notification and implementation.
42 U.S.C. §§9601
et seq.
EPA
National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations for Lead
and Copper: Regulatory
Revisions (2040-AF15)
Beginning in 2004, EPA conducted a wide-ranging review of implementation of the Lead and Copper
Rule (LCR) to determine if there is a national problem related to elevated lead levels... As a result
of this multi-part review, EPA identified seven targeted rules changes and EPA promulgated a set of
short-term regulatory revisions and clarifications on October 10, 2007, to strengthen
implementation of the existing Lead and Copper Rule. In developing the short-term revisions, EPA
identified several regulatory changes to be considered as part of identifying more comprehensive
changes to the rule...
42 U.S.C. §§300f
et seq.
HHS/
CMS
Medicaid Disproportionate
Share Hospital (DSH)
Allotment Reductions (0938AS63)
The Affordable Care Act amends the Social Security Act by requiring aggregate reductions to state
Medicaid DSH allotments from FY2014 through FY2020. CMS published a final rule in October
2013 that delineated a methodology to implement the annual reductions only for FY2014 and
FY2015. Subsequent legislation delayed the start of the reductions until FY2018. Since the earlier
final rule was only limited to FY2014 and FY2015, this rule proposes a methodology to reduce the
allotments for FY2018-2025.
P.L. 111-148,
§2551;
P.L. 114-10, §412
HHS/
CMS
CY 2018 Home Health
Prospective Payment System
Rate Update; Value-Based
Purchasing Model; and Quality
Reporting Requirements (0938AT01)
This annual proposed rule would update the 60-day national episode rate, the national per-visit
rates used to calculate low utilization payment adjustments (LUPAs), and outlier payments under
the Medicare prospective payment system for home health agencies. The rule also proposes
changes to the Home Health Value-Based Purchasing (HHVBP) Model and proposes updates to the
Home Health Quality Reporting Program (HH QRP).
42 U.S.C. §1302;
42 U.S.C.
§1395hh
CRS-19
HHS/
CMS
CY [Calendar Year] 2018
Revisions to Payment Policies
Under the Physician Fee
Schedule and Other Revisions
to Medicare Part B (0938AT02)
This annual proposed rule would revise payment polices under the Medicare physician fee schedule,
and make other policy changes to payment under Medicare Part B. These changes would apply to
services furnished beginning January 1, 2018.
42 U.S.C. §1302;
42 U.S.C.
§1395hh
HHS/
CMS
CY 2018 Hospital Outpatient
PPS [Prospective Payment
System] Policy Changes and
Payment Rates and Ambulatory
Surgical Center Payment
System Policy Changes and
Payment Rates (0938-AT03)
This annual proposed rule would revise the Medicare hospital outpatient prospective payment
system to implement statutory requirements and changes arising from our continuing experience
with this system. The proposed rule describes changes to the amounts and factors used to
determine payment rates for services. In addition, the rule proposes changes to the ambulatory
surgical center payment system list of services and rates.
42 U.S.C. §1302;
42 U.S.C.
§1395hh
HHS/
CMS
CY 2018 Changes to the EndStage Renal Disease (ESRD)
Prospective Payment System,
Quality Incentive Program, and
Durable Medical Equipment,
Prosthetics, Orthotics, and
Supplies (DMEPOS) (0938AT04)
This annual proposed rule would update the bundled payment system for ESRD facilities by January
1, 2018. The rule would also update the quality incentives in the ESRD program and implement
changes to the DMEPOS competitive bidding program.
42 U.S.C. §1302;
42 U.S.C.
§1395d(d);
42 U.S.C.
§1395f(b);
42 U.S.C. §1395q
HHS/
CMS
Policy and Technical Changes
to the Medicare Advantage and
the Medicare Prescription Drug
Benefit Programs for Contract
Year 2019 (0938-AT08)
This proposed rule would set forth programmatic and operational changes to the Medicare
Advantage (MA) and prescription drug benefit programs for contract year 2019.
P.L. 114-198,
§702...
HHS/
CMS
CY 2019 Notice of Benefit and
Payment Parameters (0938AT12)
This proposed rule would set forth payment parameters and provisions related to the risk
adjustment programs; cost sharing parameters and cost-sharing reductions; and user fees for
Federally-Facilitated Exchanges. It would also provide additional standards for several other
Affordable Care Act programs.
P.L. 111-148
HHS/
CMS
CY 2018 Updates to the
Quality Payment Program
(0938-AT13)
This rule implements provisions of the Medicare Access and CHIP [Children’s Health Insurance
Program] Reauthorization Act (MACRA) related to the Merit-based Incentive Payment System
(MIPS) and Advanced Alternative Payment Models (Advanced APMs).
P.L. 114-10, §101
HHS/
CMS
Advancing Care Coordination
Through Episode Payment
Models (EPMs) (0938-AT16)
This proposed rule would modify the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model, the
Episode Payment Models (EPMs), and the Cardiac Rehabilitation (CR) Incentive Payment Model, and
Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model.
42 U.S.C. §1315a
CRS-20
NRC
Revision of Fee Schedules: Fee
Recovery for FY2018 (3150AJ95)
This rule would implement the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA-90), as
amended, which requires the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to recover approximately 90 percent
of its budget authority in a given fiscal year, less the amounts appropriated from the Waste
Incidental to Reprocessing, generic homeland security activities, and Inspector General services for
the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, through fees assessed to licensees. This rulemaking
would amend the Commission’s fee schedules for licensing, inspection, and annual fees charged to
its applicants and licensees....
31 U.S.C. §483;
42 U.S.C. §2201;
42 U.S.C. §2214;
42 U.S.C. §5841
VA
Civilian Health and Medical
Program of the Department of
Veterans Affairs (2900-AP02)
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its regulations related to the Civilian
Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs (CHAMPVA). The proposed
revisions would clarify and update these regulations to conform to changes in law or policy that
control the administration of CHAMPVA, and would include details concerning the administration
of CHAMPVA that are not reflected in current regulations. The revisions would also propose to
expand covered services to include certain preventive services and reduce cost-share amounts and
deductibles for certain covered services.
38 U.S.C. §501;
38 U.S.C. §1781;
38 U.S.C.
§1720G(a)(7)(A)
Final Rules
DOC/
PTO
Setting and Adjusting Patent
Fees During Fiscal Year 2017
(0651-AD02)
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) takes this action to set and adjust patent
fee amounts to provide the Office with a sufficient amount of aggregate revenue to recover its
aggregate cost of operations while helping the Office maintain a sustainable funding model, reduce
the current patent application backlog, decrease patent pendency, improve quality, and upgrade the
Office’s business information technology capability and infrastructure.
P.L. 112-29
DOD
TRICARE; Reimbursement of
Long Term Care Hospitals and
Inpatient Rehabilitation
Facilities (0720-AB47)
The Department of Defense, Defense Health Agency, proposed to revise its reimbursement of Long
Term Care Hospitals (LTCHs) and Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities (IRFs).... The proposed rule set
forth the regulation modifications that would be necessary for TRICARE to adopt Medicare’s LTCH
and IRF Prospective Payment Systems and rates applicable for inpatient services provided by LTCHs
and IRFs to TRICARE beneficiaries. The Department will finalize this rule after considering public
comment.
5 U.S.C. §301
10 U.S.C. ch. 55
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
for Commercial Packaged
Boilers (1904-AD01)
EPCA [Energy Policy and Conservation Act], as amended by AEMTCA [American Energy
Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act], requires the Secretary to determine whether updating
the statutory energy conservation standards for commercial packaged boilers is technically feasible
and economically justified and would save a significant amount of energy. If justified, the Secretary
will issue amended energy conservation standards for such equipment. DOE last updated the
standards for commercial packaged boilers on July 22, 2009. DOE issued an NPRM pursuant to the
6-year-look-back requirement on March 24, 2016....
42 U.S.C.
§6313(a)(6)(C);
42 U.S.C.
§6311(11)(B)
CRS-21
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
for Portable Air Conditioners
(1904-AD02)
DOE has determined that portable air conditioners (ACs) qualify as a covered product under part
A of title III of EPCA, as amended. DOE has not previously conducted an energy conservation
standard rulemaking for portable ACs. On June 13, 2016, DOE issued a NPRM proposing energy
conservation standards for this product.
42 U.S.C.
§6292(b);
42 U.S.C.
§6295(l)
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
and Definition for General
Service Lamps (1904-AD09)
Amendments to Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) in the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 direct DOE to conduct two rulemaking cycles to evaluate energy conservation
standards for GSLs [General Service Lamps], the first of which must be initiated no later than
January 1, 2014 (42 U.S.C. 6295(i)(6)(A)-(B)). EPCA specifically states that the scope of the
rulemaking is not limited to incandescent lamp technologies. EPCA also states that DOE must
consider in the first rulemaking cycle the minimum backstop requirement of 45 lumens per watt for
general service lamps (GSLs) effective January 1, 2020.
42 U.S.C.
§6295(i)(6)(A)
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
for Residential Conventional
Cooking Products (1904AD15)
EPCA, as amended by EISA 2007 [Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007], requires the
Secretary to determine whether updating the statutory energy conservation standards for
residential conventional cooking products would yield a significant savings in energy use and is
technically feasible and economically justified. DOE is reviewing to make such determination.
42 U.S.C.
§6295(m)(1);
42 U.S.C.
§6292(a)(10)
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
for Residential NonWeatherized Gas Furnaces and
Mobile Home Gas Furnaces
(1904-AD20)
... DOE is considering amendments to its energy conservation standards for residential nonweatherized gas furnaces and mobile home gas furnaces in partial fulfillment of a court-ordered
remand of DOE’s 2011 rulemaking for these products. DOE published a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking on September 23, 2016.
42 U.S.C. §6295...
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
for Commercial Water Heating
Equipment (1904-AD34)
Once completed, this rulemaking will fulfill DOE’s statutory obligation under EPCA to either
propose amended energy conservation standards for commercial water heaters and hot water
supply boilers, or determine that the existing standards do not need to be amended....
42 U.S.C.
§§6313(a)(6)(C)(i
) and (vi)
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
for Walk-In Coolers and WalkIn Freezers (1904-AD59)
In 2014, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued a rule setting performance-based energy
conservation standards for a variety of walk-in cooler and freezer (walk-in) components. See 79 FR
32050 (June 3, 2014). That rule was challenged by a group of walk-in refrigeration system
manufacturers and walk-in installers, which led to a settlement agreement regarding certain
refrigeration equipment classes addressed in that 2014 rule and certain aspects related to that rule’s
analysis. See Lennox Int’l v. DOE, Case No. 14-60535 (5th Cir. 2014). Consistent with the
settlement agreement, and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, a working
group was established under the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(ASRAC) to engage in a negotiated rulemaking to develop energy conservation standards to replace
those that had been vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit....
42 U.S.C. §6311;
42 U.S.C.
§6313(f)
DOE
Energy Conservation Standards
for Uninterruptible Power
Supplies (1904-AD69)
DOE is considering energy conservation standards for a class of battery chargers that are
Uninterruptible Power Supplies.
42 U.S.C.
§6295(u)(1)
CRS-22
DOE
Convention on Supplementary
Compensation for Nuclear
Damage Contingent Cost
Allocation (1990-AA39)
The U.S. Department of Energy proposes to issue regulations under section 934 of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007. It establishes a retrospective risk pooling program by which
nuclear suppliers will reimburse the United States government for any contribution it is obliged to
make to an international supplementary fund under the Convention on Supplementary
Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC) in the event of certain nuclear incidents not covered by
the Price-Anderson Act....
42 U.S.C. §17373
DOT/
FRA
Passenger Equipment Safety
Standards Amendments (RRR)
(2130-AC46)
This rulemaking would update existing safety standards for passenger rail equipment. Specifically, the
rulemaking would add a new tier of passenger equipment safety standards (Tier III) to facilitate the
safe implementation of nation-wide, interoperable high-speed passenger rail service at speeds up to
220 mph.... This final rule also establishes crashworthiness and occupant protection performance
requirements as an alternative to those currently specified for Tier I passenger trainsets.
Additionally, the final rule increases from 150 mph to 160 mph the maximum speed for passenger
equipment that complies with FRA’s Tier II standards....
49 U.S.C. §20103
DOT/
FTA
Public Transportation Agency
Safety Plans (2132-AB23)
This rulemaking would establish requirements for States or recipients to develop and implement
individual agency safety plans. The requirements of this rulemaking will be based on the principles
and concepts of Safety Management Systems (SMS). SMS is the formal, top-down, organization-wide
approach to managing safety risks and assuring the effectiveness of a transit agency’s safety risk
controls. SMS includes systematic procedures, practices, and policies for managing hazards and risks.
49 U.S.C.
§5329(c)-(d)
ED*
Title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of
1965—Accountability and State
Plans (1810-AB27)
The Department amended regulations implementing programs under title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to implement changes to the ESEA by the Every Student
Succeeds Act (ESSA) on November 29, 2016. This action was disapproved under the Congressional
Review Act in H.J.Res. 57, which was signed by the President on March 27, 2017.
20 U.S.C. §1001;
20 U.S.C. §1111;
20 U.S.C.
§1221e-3...
EPA
Formaldehyde Emission
Standards for Composite
Wood Products (2070-AJ44)
On December 12, 2016, EPA issued a final rule to implement the Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products Act, which added title VI to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
The purpose of TSCA title VI is to reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products,
which will reduce exposures to formaldehyde and result in benefits from avoided adverse health
effects. This final rule includes formaldehyde emission standards applicable to hardwood plywood,
medium-density fiberboard, and particleboard, and finished goods containing these products, that
are sold, supplied, offered for sale, or manufactured (including imported) in the United States....
15 U.S.C. §2697
FCC
Protecting and Promoting the
Open Internet (3060-AK21)
In May 2014, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on rules
for Internet openness and the Commission’s legal basis to adopt such rules following the Verizon v.
FCC decision that vacated the Commission’s 2010 Open Internet Order conduct-based rules. In
February 2015, the Commission adopted a Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and
Order (2015 Order) that reclassified broadband Internet access service under title II of the
Communications Act. The Commission also adopted new rules banning blocking, throttling, and
paid prioritization under its title II authority. Finally, the 2015 Order also adopted a general conduct
standard applicable to broadband service providers, as well as additional reporting obligations....
47 U.S.C. §151;
47 U.S.C. §154(i)(j);
47 U.S.C. §201(b)
CRS-23
FDIC
Restrictions on Qualified
Financial Contracts of Certain
FDIC-Supervised Institutions;
Revisions to the Definition of
Qualifying Master Netting
Agreement and Related
Definitions (3064-AE46)
... Under this proposed rule, covered FSIs would be required to ensure that covered qualified
financial contracts (QFCs) to which they are a party provide that any default rights and restrictions
on the transfer of the QFCs are limited to the same extent as they would be under the Dodd-Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. In
addition, covered FSIs would generally be prohibited from being party to QFCs that would allow a
QFC counterparty to exercise default rights against the covered FSI based on the entry into a
resolution proceeding under the Dodd-Frank Act, FDI Act, or any other resolution proceeding of
an affiliate of the covered FSI....
12 U.S.C. §1816;
12 U.S.C. §1818;
12 U.S.C. §1819;
12 U.S.C.
§1815(a)
HHS/
CMS
FY2018 Prospective Payment
System and Consolidated Billing
for Skilled Nursing Facilities
(SNFs) (0938-AS96)
This annual proposed rule would update the payment rates used under the prospective payment
system for SNFs for fiscal year 2018.
42 U.S.C. §1302;
42 U.S.C
§1395hh
HHS/
CMS
Hospital Inpatient Prospective
Payment System for Acute
Care Hospitals and the LongTerm Care Hospital
Prospective Payment System
and FY2018 Rates (0938-AS98)
This annual final rule would revise the Medicare hospital inpatient and long-term care hospital
prospective payment systems for operating and capital-related costs. This rule implements changes
arising from our continuing experience with these systems.
42 U.S.C. §1302;
42 U.S.C.
§1395hh;
P.L. 114-255
HHS/
CMS
FY 2018 Hospice Wage Index
and Payment Rate Update and
Hospice Quality Reporting
Requirements (0938-AT00)
This annual proposed rule would update the hospice payment rates and the wage index for fiscal
year 2018. The rule also proposes changes to the Hospice Quality Reporting Program.
42 U.S.C. §1302
HHS/
CMS
CY 2018 Inpatient Hospital
Deductible and Hospital and
Extended Care Services
Coinsurance Amounts (0938AT05)
This annual notice announces the inpatient hospital deductible and the hospital and extended care
services coinsurance amounts for services furnished in calendar year 2018 under Medicare’s
Hospital Insurance program (Medicare Part A). The Medicare statute specifies the formula used to
determine these amounts.
42 U.S.C.
§1395e-2(b)(2).
HHS/
CMS
FY 2018 Inpatient Psychiatric
Facilities Prospective Payment
System—Rate Update (0938AS97)
This annual notice would update the prospective payment rates for inpatient psychiatric facilities
with discharges beginning on October 1, 2017.
42 U.S.C. §1302;
42 U.S.C.
§1395hh
NRC
Mitigation of Beyond Design
Basis Events (MBDBE) (3150AJ49)
This rule would enhance mitigation strategies for nuclear power reactors for beyond-design-basis
external events. This rulemaking addresses recommendations from the Near-Term Task Force
(NTTF) related to station blackout, spent fuel pool long-term cooling, and emergency preparedness
(NTTF Recommendations 4, 7, 8, and portions of 9, 10, and 11). In staff requirements memorandum
(SRM)-SECY-11-0124, the Commission directed the staff to initiate the station blackout rulemaking
as a high-priority activity....
42 U.S.C. §2201;
42 U.S.C. §5841
CRS-24
NRC
Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee
Recovery for FY 2017 (3150AJ73)
This rule would implement the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA-90), as
amended, which requires the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to recover approximately 90 percent
of its budget authority in a given fiscal year, less the amounts appropriated from the Waste
Incidental to Reprocessing and generic homeland security activities, through fees assessed to
licensees. This rulemaking would amend the Commission’s fee schedules for licensing, inspection,
and annual fees charged to its applicants and licensees....
31 U.S.C. §483;
42 U.S.C. §2201;
42 U.S.C. §2214;
42 U.S.C. §5841
SEC
Investment Company Reporting
Modernization; Option for
Website Transmission of
Shareholder Reports (3235AL42)
The Commission adopted new rules and forms as well as amendments to its rules and forms to
modernize the reporting and disclosure of information by registered investment companies. The
Commission proposed new rule 30e-3, which would permit, but not require registered investment
companies to transmit periodic reports to their shareholders by making the reports accessible on a
website and satisfying certain other conditions....
15 U.S.C. §§77 et
seq.;
15 U.S.C. §§77aaa
et seq...
TREAS
Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE) Required
for Electronic Entry/Entry
Summary (Cargo Release and
Related Entry) Filings (1515AE03)
This document amends the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations to reflect that
on November 1, 2015, the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) will be a CBP-authorized
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) System. This regulatory document informs the public that the
Automated Commercial System (ACS) is being phased out as a CBP-authorized EDI System for the
processing electronic entry and entry summary filings (also known as entry filings). ACE will replace
the Automated Commercial System (ACS) as the CBP-authorized EDI system for processing
commercial trade data.
Not available.
TREAS
FinCEN Found the Halawi
Exchange Co. (Halawi
Exchange) Is a Financial
Institution of Primary Money
Laundering Concern (1506AB21)
The Director of FinCEN found that a financial institution operating outside of the United States is of
primary money laundering concern pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5318(a). FinCEN issued a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to propose the imposition of two special measures against the
financial institution. See 78 FR 24584, April 25, 2013.
12 U.S.C.
§1829(b);
12 U.S.C. §§19511959...
USDA/
AMS
Organic Livestock and Poultry
Practices (0581-AD44)
This action would establish standards that support additional practice standards for organic
livestock and poultry production. This action would add provisions to the USDA organic regulations
to address and clarify livestock and poultry living conditions (for example, outdoor access, housing
environment and stocking densities), health care practices (for example physical alterations,
administering medical treatment, euthanasia), and animal handling and transport to and during
slaughter.
7 U.S.C. §§65016522
CRS-25
VA
Loan Guaranty: Ability-toRepay Standards and Qualified
Mortgage Definition Under the
Truth in Lending Act (2900AO65)
This document amends the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Loan Guaranty regulations that
implemented provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,
requiring that VA define the types of VA loans that are “qualified mortgages” for the purposes of
the Ability to Repay provisions of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA). This rule clarifies which VAguaranteed loans are to be considered “qualified mortgages” in accordance with the Ability to
Repay provisions.
38 U.S.C. §501;
15 U.S.C.
§1639C(a)(5);
15 U.S.C.
§1639C(b)(3)(B)
(ii);
38 U.S.C. §3710...
VA
Net Worth, Asset Transfers,
and Income Exclusions for
Needs-Based Benefits (2900AO73)
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposed to amend its regulations governing entitlement
to VA pension and other VA needs-based benefit programs. The proposed amendments would
establish new requirements pertaining to the evaluation of net worth and asset transfers for pension
purposes and identify those medical expenses that may be deducted from countable income for
VA’s needs-based benefit programs. The proposed amendments would also maintain the integrity of
VA’s needs-based benefit programs, and clarify and address issues necessary for the consistent
adjudication of pension and parents’ dependency and indemnity compensation claims....
38 U.S.C. §501;
38 U.S.C. §1503;
38 U.S.C. §1522;
38 U.S.C. §1543;
38 U.S.C. §1832;
38 U.S.C. §5110...
VA
Expanded Access to Non-VA
Care Through the Veterans
Choice Program (2900-AP60)
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) revised its medical regulations that implement section 101
of the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 (hereafter referred to as "the
Choice Act”), which requires VA to establish a program to furnish hospital care and medical
services through eligible non-VA health care providers to eligible veterans who either cannot be
seen within the wait-time goals of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) or who qualify based
on their place of residence (hereafter referred to as the “Veterans Choice Program” or “the
Program”) ... .
P.L. 113-146,
§101;
P.L. 114-41,
§4005;
38 U.S.C. §501
Source: CRS, using information from the 2017 Update to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions.
Notes: “Authorizing statutes” refers to the laws providing the authority to take the regulatory action, as listed by the agency in each entry in the Unified Agenda.
Asterisks (*) in the “Federal Entity” column identify actions that appear to be deregulatory based on the abstract. Additional deregulatory actions may exist, but were not
discernible based on the abstracts. Ellipses ( ... ) indicate abstracts or authorizing statutes that have been truncated to make the table more concise. The remaining
information can be found in each Agenda entry. For uniformity, the acronym “NPRM” is used in lieu of “NOPR” to abbreviate “notice of proposed rulemaking.”
a. “Federal Entity” includes the Cabinet-level department and, if applicable, the agency within a Cabinet-level department that listed the rulemaking action.
CRS-26
The Trump Administration and the Unified Agenda
Author Contact Information
Maeve P. Carey
Specialist in Government Organization and
Management
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov
, 7-....
Congressional Research Service
Kathryn A. Francis
Analyst in Government Organization and
Management
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov
, 7-....
R45032 · VERSION 4 · NEW
27
EveryCRSReport.com
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the
Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on
issues that may come before Congress.
EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The
reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to
the public.
Prior to our republication, we redacted phone numbers and email addresses of analysts who
produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made any
other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.
CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in
the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without
permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a
third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or
otherwise use copyrighted material.
Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public
understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in
connection with CRS' institutional role.
EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim
copyright on any CRS report we have republished.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.