Durability + Design
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on LinkedIn Like us on Facebook Follow us on Instagram Visit the TPC Store
Search the site

 

D+D News

Main News Page


Paint Makers Push Regulatory Overhaul

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

More items for Good Technical Practice

Comment | More

Stand and challenge “sue and settle” and other means of regulatory overreach, the American Coatings Association is urging Congress.

The paint and coating manufacturers group wants federal lawmakers to pass a law to curb the controversial pressure tactic known as "sue and settle," which uses lawsuits to force new regulations.

The association is also backing separate legislation that would subject proposed regulations to a more rigorous review as they are developed.

The two bills are the Regulatory Accountability Act of 2013, which would provide more transparency in the way federal agencies develop regulations; and the Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2013, which aims to end regulation advancement through "sue and settle" litigation with federal agencies.

Regulatory Accountability Act

ACA and several other organizations joined the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in signing letters to members of the U.S. House and Senate Judiciary Committees, urging passage of the Regulatory Accountability Act of 2013.

Red tape
eadvocate.cga-alberta.org

This is the second year that business groups have fought "sue and settle." Last year's "Red Tape Reduction" bill passed the House but died in the Senate.

The act (H.R. 2122 and companion bill S. 1029) was introduced May 23 and would modernize the 66-year-old Administrative Procedure Act to improve the way federal agencies promulgate regulations for better accountability and the integrity of rulemaking activity.

"If we are to grow our economy and get more Americans back to work, Washington must get out of the way," said Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), the bill's sponsor and House Judiciary Committee Chairman.

"The Regulatory Accountability Act solves the problem of overreaching and unnecessary regulation by providing greater transparency, cost-benefit analysis of new rules, and a more thorough process for high-impact rules," said Goodlatte.

In 2011, the legislation passed in the House of Representatives but stalled in the Senate.

Fixing Regulatory Burdens

The Regulatory Accountability Act requires federal agencies to choose the lowest-cost rulemaking alternative that would:

  • Meet statutory objectives;
  • Improve agency fact-gathering, fact-finding, and identification of regulatory alternatives;
  • Require advance notice of proposed major rulemakings to increase public input before costly agency positions are proposed; and
  • Fortify judicial review of new agency regulations.

The measure also presents a new defintion for a "major rule" that would include any rule expected to cost the economy $100 million; impose "a major increase in costs or prices" for consumers or industries; or bring "significant adverse effects" for competition, employment, investment, productivity, or U.S. companies' ability to compete with foreign players.

In the letters to members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, dated June 5, ACA wrote: "Our regulatory process has not been updated in more than six decades, and as a result we are seeing a rising number of massive, costly rules that breed uncertainty, drive up costs, and stifle hiring and investment.

"Small and large businesses alike consistently cite growing regulatory burdens and the uncertainty that occurs when badly written regulations must be corrected through years of litigation as the most significant obstacles to new hiring."

Regulatory Accountability Act
Flickr / Mike_tn

"If we are to grow our economy and get more Americans back to work, Washington must get out of the way," said Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA).

ACA wrote that the bill would not prevent federal agencies from issuing regulations, but would ensure that regulators base their decisions on solid information, make the process more transparent, and hold agencies more accountable to the public.

Ending 'Sue and Settle'

In April, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) introduced the Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2013 (H.R. 1493, S. 714), which aims to end the practice of federal agencies advancing regulations through "sue and settle" litigation.

The bill would require agencies to provide timely notice of lawsuits and give regulated entities sufficient opportunity to intervene in cases.

The bill was the topic of a hearing June 5 before the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial, and Antitrust Law.

The same bill was introduced during the last Congress and passed the full House as part of a larger bill—the Red Tape Reduction and Small Business Job Creation Act—but the Senate did not take up the measure.

ACA joined 53 other organizations in a letter to the bills' sponsors supporting the legislation. The letters said that, under the legislation, "agencies would continue to be free to enter into settlement agreements and consent decrees that result in regulations; however, the public and regulated parties would no longer be excluded from participating in our regulatory system because of this 'sue and settle' tactic."

Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act
Environmental Protection Agency

Regulations issued after "sue and settle" litigation have included revised hazardous air pollutant standards for cement kilns.

ACA offered this take on "sue and settle" in its letters to the House and the Senate: "Organizations sue federal agencies to compel agencies to take specific actions, such as issuing new regulations. Behind closed doors, these organization and agencies then enter into consent decrees and settlement agreements compelling the agency to issue rules.

"The public and those regulated entities most affected by these rules are often not aware of these lawsuits and, even when they are, have an extremely difficult time when trying to intervene in the cases. Their only recourse is after the settlement has been agreed to by the agency—in essence, after the damage has been done."

The Fruits of 'Sue and Settle'

According to ACA, there have been many "sue and settle" actions in recent years, including:

  • The New Source Performance Standards for greenhouse gas emissions from utilities and refineries;
  • Numeric nutrient criteria for the state of Florida;
  • Revisions to the definition of solid waste;
  • Revised hazardous air pollutant standards for cement kilns;
  • Clean Water Act guidance for mountaintop removal; and
  • Multi-industry section 112 air toxic rules.

"Sue-and-settle litigation damages the transparency, public participation, and judicial review protections Congress has guaranteed for all of our citizens in the rulemaking process," said Grassley, ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

   

Tagged categories: American Coatings Association (ACA); Government; Lawsuits; Regulations

Comment Join the Conversation:

Sign in to our community to add your comments.

 
 
 

Technology Publishing Co., 1501 Reedsdale Street, Suite 2008, Pittsburgh, PA 15233

TEL 1-412-431-8300  • FAX  1-412-431-5428  •  EMAIL webmaster@durabilityanddesign.com


The Technology Publishing Network

Durability + Design PaintSquare the Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings Paint BidTracker

 

© Copyright 2012-2019, Technology Publishing Co., All rights reserved