; (B) define the baseline for the analysis; (C) set the timeframe of the analysis; (D) analyze any available regulatory alternatives, including— (i) if rulemaking is not specifically directed by statute, the alternative of not regulating; (ii) any alternatives that specify performance objectives rather than identify or require the specific manner of compliance that regulated entities must adopt; (iii) any alternatives that involve the deployment of innovative technology or practices; and (iv) any alternatives that involve different requirements for different types or sizes of businesses, if applicable; (E) identify the effects of the available regulatory alternatives described in subparagraph (D); (F) to the maximum extent practicable, quantify and monetize the benefits and costs of the selected regulatory alternative and the available alternatives under consideration; (G) discount future benefits and costs quantified and monetized under subparagraph (F); (H) to the maximum extent practicable, evaluate non-quantified and non-monetized benefits and costs of the selected regulatory alternative and the available alternatives under consideration; and (I) characterize any uncertainty in benefits, costs, and net benefits. (c) Less burdensome alternatives If after conducting an analysis under subsection (a) for a proposed rule that is likely to lead to a significant rule, or a final rule that is a significant rule, the Secretary selects a regulatory approach that is not the least burdensome compared to an available regulatory alternative, the Secretary shall include— (1) in the summary section of the preamble a statement that the selected approach is more burdensome than an available regulatory alternative; and (2) a justification, with supporting information, for the selected approach. (d) Cumulative regulatory burden In considering the cumulative regulatory burden under subsection (b)(4), the Secretary shall— (1) identify other regulations that attempt to achieve similar regulatory objectives