Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 32 / Friday, February 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in which we choose to use this priority, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771

tkelley on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget OMB determines whether this regulatory action is significant and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by OMB. Section 3f of Executive Order 12866 defines a significant regulatory action as an action likely to result in a rule that may 1 Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities in a material way also referred to as an economically significant rule;
2 Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
3 Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement 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 Presidents priorities, or the principles stated in the Executive order.
OMB has determined that this proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section 3f of Executive Order 12866.
Under Executive Order 13771, for each new rule that the Department proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates that is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and that imposes total costs greater than zero, it must identify two deregulatory actions. For FY 2021, any new incremental costs associated with a new rule must be fully offset by the elimination of existing costs through deregulatory actions.
However, Executive Order 13771 does not apply to transfer rules that cause only income transfers between taxpayers and program beneficiaries, such as those regarding discretionary grant programs. Because the proposed priority would be used in connection with a discretionary grant program, Executive Order 13771 does not apply.
We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under Executive Order
VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:27 Feb 18, 2021

Jkt 253001

13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency 1 Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify;
2 Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into accountamong other things and to the extent practicablethe costs of cumulative regulations;
3 In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select those approaches that maximize net benefits including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity;
4 To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must adopt; and 5 Identify and assess available alternatives to direct regulation, including economic incentivessuch as user fees or marketable permitsto encourage the desired behavior or provide information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible. The OMB Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has emphasized that these techniques may include identifying changing future compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes.
We are issuing the proposed priority only on a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that maximize net benefits.
Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
We have also determined that this regulatory action does not unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions.
In accordance with these Executive orders, the Department has assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have
PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

10217

determined as necessary for administering the Departments programs and activities. The costs would include the time and effort in responding to the priority for entities that choose to respond.
In addition, we have considered the potential benefits of this regulatory action and have noted these benefits in the Background section of this document. The benefits include receiving comments regarding the best way to provide training to CAP
professionals.
Clarity of the Regulations Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum Plain Language in Government Writing require each agency to write regulations that are easy to understand. The Secretary invites comments on how to make these proposed priorities easier to understand, including answers to questions such as the following:
Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly stated?
Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms or other wording that interferes with their clarity?
Does the format of the proposed regulations grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc. aid or reduce their clarity?
Would the proposed regulations be easier to understand if we divided them into more but shorter sections?
Could the description of the proposed regulations in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of the preamble be more helpful in making the proposed regulations easier to understand? If so, how?
What else could we do to make the proposed regulations easier to understand?
To send any comments that concern how the Department could make these proposed regulations easier to understand, see the instructions in the ADDRESSES section.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification: The Secretary certifies that this proposed regulatory action would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define proprietary institutions as small businesses if they are independently owned and operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and have total annual revenue below $7,000,000.
Nonprofit institutions are defined as small entities if they are independently owned and operated and not dominant in their field of operation. Public institutions are defined as small organizations if they are operated by a
E:FRFM19FEP1.SGM

19FEP1