Last week, Reg•Watch blogged about an OSHA rule currently under review by the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). The rule would require employers to pay for protective equipment for their employees.

Yesterday, Rep. George Miller (D-CA and chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee) and Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA and member of the appropriations committee with jurisdiction over OSHA) wrote to OIRA Administrator Susan Dudley expressing their concern with the White House's review of the rule. (Read the letter here.)

As Miller and Roybal-Allard point out, OIRA met with representatives from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers (two groups opposing the rule) without the presence of an OSHA official. Like all OIRA meetings about rulemakings, this one occurred behind closed doors. The congressmen write:

A strong comprehensive standard that codifies OSHA's longstanding policy and practice that employers pay for safety equipment is necessary to protect the health and safety of American workers. It should not be weakened through exclusive backdoor meetings between OMB and industry representatives.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has released a report (available from OpenCRS.org) on e-rulemaking, which it defines as "the term used to describe the use of information technology (IT) to facilitate a range of activities related to the process of developing regulations." CRS specialist Curtis Copeland discusses a recent history of e-rulemaking and challenges the executive branch faces in implementing and expanding e-rulemaking.

The report also extensively discusses Regulations.gov, a federally-run website where the public can search for rules and supporting information and submit comments.

Anyone who has used Regulations.gov knows it can be frustrating. Sometimes finding a proposed rule and commenting on it is simple. Other times, even if you know exactly what you are looking for, you can become lost in the volumes of information provided through the database.

CRS conducted tests to judge the ease of navigability on the site. A description of one test is similar to the experiences of many users of Regulations.gov:

CRS also attempted to locate information on an EPA rule changing the emission standards for mercury. Using the "Search Documents" function, identifying EPA, using the "Subject" category, and putting "mercury" in the associated box led to a list of possible dockets, the first of which was for a January 2004 proposed rule.131 The docket contained a total of 6,902 documents across 277 pages of material. No index was provided, and the contents were not organized by type of document (e.g., agency generated documents versus public comments) or chronologically.

The report includes an astute observation from Professor Richard Parker, a professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law and an expert in regulatory issues: "too much information — badly disorganized — is not much better than too little."

Yesterday, The New York Times ran a story on the large number of senior administration officials who are serving on an interim basis. Senior positions in many agencies — including the cabinet positions of Attorney General and secretaries of Agriculture and Veterans Affairs — are currently filled by acting-secretaries, acting-deputies, acting-counsel, etc.

Paul C. Light, professor of public service at NYU, says, "You've got more vacancies now than a hotel in hurricane season."

While vacancies can be expected, especially towards the end of an administration, President Bush appears more inclined than his predecessors to use interim appointees or allow vacancies to remain unfilled, according to the article.

Senior presidential appointees in federal agencies make important decisions on a wide array of issues including agency regulatory activity. By staffing these positions with interim appointees who have not been subject to Senate confirmation, the Bush administration is able to escape Congressional oversight and public accountability to a certain extent.

The acting status of so many officials also weakens agencies, according to Light. "One of the things we know is that they just aren't as effective as Senate-confirmed appointees. They just don't have the standing in their agencies. Acting people are very shy about making decisions," Light states in the article.

OMB Watch is preparing to launch a web-based Regulatory Resource Center, and we need your help in making it useful. We have made a developmental site available here: www.ombwatch.org/regresources.

Please consider taking some time to review the site. If you would like to provide us with feedback, please take our short survey on the appeal and usefulness of the site. We appreciate your feedback.

Our goal is to provide a comprehensive resource for concerned citizens, advocates and decision makers. The Resource Center will provide the public, media, lawmakers and non-governmental organizations with a central location to learn about the federal regulatory process. The Resource Center will include background material as well as advocacy resources for those who want to make their voices heard.

In 2004, the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) learned of structural problems at the Crandall Canyon mine in Utah but did not share the information with mine regulators, according to the Associated Press. An August 6 collapse in the mine has left six miners trapped and presumed dead. Days later, three rescue workers died attempting to retrieve the trapped miners.

According to the AP article, "The [BLM] inspector, Stephen Falk, said that further mining by pulling out the pillars would be 'untenable.' " Unfortunately, "The BLM report was done for internal use only."

The BLM report was announced today in a hearing of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee. At the hearing, an official from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (an agency in the Labor Department) admitted the report could have helped inform decisions at the agency.

Critics have also raised concerns MSHA did not fulfill its responsibility to protect miners. MSHA approved a mining plan for Crandall Canyon in June 2007, just months after serious structural problems forced the operators to abandon a work area only 900 feet from where the miners are trapped.

The controversy underscores the need for better sharing and disclosure of government information — both among agencies and with the public. Sen. Ted Kennedy, chairman of the committee which held today's hearing, said, "This is like the CIA not getting information from the FBI when we're getting attacked by terrorists."

Posted by Matt Madia, 04:16:18 PM