Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Credo Mobile

HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Federal Budget

Information & Access

Nonprofit Advocacy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

"[P]eople acting in a group can accomplish things which no individual acting alone could even hope to bring about." - FDR

Home :  Regulatory Policy :  RegWatch : 
RegWatch:     

News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room

 R    E    G    •    W    A    T    C    H 


Friday, October 19, 2007

New Report on E-Rulemaking

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."



Posted by Matt Madia



Entries by Theme

All Themes

Enforcement

About This Blog

Rollbacks

Safety

Industry Influence

Cost-Benefit Analysis

In Congress

Publications

Consumer Issues

Environment

Public Health

In the Courts

Oversight

In the White House

Most Recent Entries for RegWatch

Industry Ties Bind FDA Advisors

Right Whale Protection Rule Finally Here

Industry Pressuring EPA to Weaken Lead Rule

EPA Won't Keep Rocket Fuel out of Water

Roof Strength Rule Delayed Again

Bush Taking Credit for Whale Rule He Delayed

What Should the U.S. Do about China's Bad Milk?

Did OMB Block Asbestos Cleanup in Montana Town?

Whale Protection Rule Clears White House, 573 Days Later

EPA Just Kidding Around on Children's Health

Archived Entries for Oversight

July

June

May

April

March

February

January

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

November, 2006

September, 2006

July, 2006

June, 2006

April, 2006

February, 2006

January, 2006

October, 2005

September, 2005

July, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

December, 2004

November, 2004

October, 2004