OIRA Watch

 Federal News Radio

Editor’s Note: The scholars of CPR argue for a new OIRA Administrator who does not see his or her role as ” restraining overly zealous regulatory agencies”.  Without a doubt there are some regulators who are overly zealous; on the other hand there are a far greater number of regulators who recognize that they could be subject to a “silo mentality” resulting from the fact that they are merely one cog in the massive federal regulatory state  which makes it impossible for them to balance the conflicting statutory roles of different agencies–thus the need for an intensive OIRA review of regulations.

 Letter from Jim Tozzi

 The aforementioned criticism is contained in the post reproduced below.

 OIRA does have a strong economic mission; however economics  is just one of the capabilities required of a successful desk officer. Other capabilities include a  knowledge of the administrative process, public administration and science policy.

 I was involved in  establishing the central regulatory review function in OMB for five Presidential Administrations.  Pursuant to the response of the OIRA critics I have attached my resume. I believe it not only satisfies the requirements demanded  by the OIRA critics but  more importantly it is representative, at a minimum,  of the expertise of the current generation of OIRA Desk Officers.

Letter from Jim Tozzi

Center for Regulatory Effectiveness

There is an interesting article in the Harvard Law Review written by Rachel Barkow titled the THE ASCENT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE AND THE DEMISE OF MERCY. [121 Harv. L. Rev. 1332 (2008)]

In the introduction to the article, Professor Barkow states:

Editor’s Note:  Forbes has it completely wrong in criticizing the President’s selection of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to develop the Executive Order’s Cybersecurity Framework. Throughout the implementation of FISMA and other activities, NIST has proven itself from a technical and management standpoint to have the knowledge, skills, deep understanding of national and international standards processes, and the commitment to transparency necessary to develop the Framework.  The career professionals and leadership of NIST were the exact right choice by the President for the crucial task of developing the Cybersecurity Framework.

Obama’s Cybersecurity Action Reaches Too Far

Jody Westby

 The Oil and Gas Journal reports that a number of US  Senators have advised the President that “While we support your administration’s decision not to allow lease sales for offshore oil and gas drilling in the Atlantic Ocean, the proposed seismic testing poses a serious threat to our coastal economy, environment, and marine life,”

 The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness has just released a detailed review of  seismic operations in the United States, titled: “Seismic Exploration is Heavily and Effectively Regulated In The Gulf of Mexico”.

One of the lasting accomplishments of the Nixon Administration was the creation of OMB. In part this action was taken because it was believed that its predecessor was preoccupied with “green eye shade” issues.

Nonetheless during the early days of OMB it was inhabited by BOB personnel and their culture. This culture included an overbearing and complete commitment that OMB generated information, or information  generated under its direct supervision, had to be accurate at all costs.

It appears that over the years the BOB mentality has nearly escaped OMB. Consider the recent release of the Unified Regulatory Agenda. CRE has read select components from key agencies and found them to be full of inaccuracies.

Editor’s Note:   RE:  Of Mollusks and Men

 A very objective analysis  For a primer on the Data Quality Act, see http://www.thecre.com/pdf/20120301_NavalLawReview.pdf

Regarding the Berkeley legal analysis–the law establishes the boundaries for action not the decision itself.   Let’s not overbill the relevance of footnotes and legal citations.

The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness recently submitted a Protest to BLM on its Final Oil Shale PEIS.

BLM’s decision to revise oil shale decisions made in 2008 could have enormous impacts on domestic energy production.  Specifically, The Government Accountability Office states, “The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimates that the Green River Formation contains about 3 trillion barrels of oil, and about half of this may be recoverable, depending on available technology and economic conditions.  This is an amount about equal to the entire world’s proven oil reserves.”^[1]  Nevertheless, BLM is now planning to reduce the amount of federal land available for oil shale development by 75%, with a 90% reduction in Colorado.  BLM is seeking to effectively eliminate oil shale development in the United States without offering any compelling basis, except for a lawsuit[2] challenging BLM’s initial 2008 oil shale determinations.^[3]