As table 1 shows, after taking into account the 4 agencies’ estimates of the major CFR page additions that were made during the same period that pages were eliminated, the agencies’ CFR sections decreased in size by about 926 pages—about 3 percent of their total CFR pages at the start of their initiatives and about 17 percent of the 5,532-page elimination total that had been reported to OIRA by these agencies. EPA and DOT estimated they added more pages to the CFR than they removed during their page elimination initiatives. HUD and OSHA, on the other hand, estimated they deleted more pages than they added during their initiatives, so the size of their CFR sections decreased. EPA officials pointed out that pages are often added to the CFR that permit, not restrict, actions by other entities. Finally, agency officials said that pages are sometimes not eliminated from the CFR as a result of requests from regulated entities. Some CFR Revision Efforts Will Not Reduce Regulatory Burden

As figure 2 shows, about 40 percent of the 422 CFR revision actions in the 4 agencies appeared to substantively reduce the burden felt by regulated entities through such actions as eliminating paperwork requirements and providing compliance flexibility. Another 15 percent were minor burden reductions in that they made regulatory requirements easier to find or to understand but did not change the rules’ underlying requirements or scope of applicability. We were unable to determine what, if any, impact about 9 percent of the actions would have on regulatory burden. Overall, they said that these efforts “have contributed to a more efficient and effective regulatory system.” They also noted that the elimination and revision actions are part of a larger set of initiatives designed to reform the nation’s regulatory system. Therefore, in some ways it is not surprising that the administration does not have a mechanism in place to measure burden reductions as a result of its CFR page elimination and revision initiative. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The objectives of this review were to determine whether (1) agencies’ reported Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) page elimination totals take into account the pages added to the CFR during the same period, (2) agencies’ CFR revision efforts will reduce regulatory burden, and (3) the administration has any mechanism in place for measuring burden reductions as a result of its CFR page elimination and revision initiatives. As the requester specified, we limited the scope of our work on the first two objectives to four major regulatory agencies: the Departments of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Transportation (DOT), the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). After reading all of the available information, we coded each of the actions into one of the following five categories: (1) substantive burden reduction—actions that appeared to decrease the burden on regulated entities, such as eliminating paperwork requirements, allowing flexibility in how entities can comply with or implement the rule, lowering compliance costs, or exempting certain organizations from the regulations; (2) minor burden reduction—actions that seemed to make regulatory requirements easier to read or understand or to make them easier to find (e.g., combining similar or related sections of the CFR into one section); (3) burden increase—actions that appeared to increase the burden on regulated entities, such as adding reporting requirements, requiring additional training, requiring certain testing procedures, or expanding the scope of a regulation to new entities; (4) no burden change—actions that did not seem to change the burden on the regulated entity or that primarily affected the promulgating agency, such as eliminating obsolete or duplicative regulations, establishing a committee to study an issue (with no specific proposal identified), updating agency organizational charts and/or telephone numbers, and establishing ethics regulations for employees of the promulgating agency; and (5) cannot tell—actions that had multiple parts which potentially could offset each other or were unclear as to their effect on the regulated entities.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO updated and expanded its previous review of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) page elimination and revision initiative, focusing on whether: (1) agencies' reported page elimination totals took into account any pages added to the CFR during the same period; (2) agencies' CFR revision efforts would reduce regulatory burden; and (3) the administration has any mechanism in place for measuring burden reductions as a result of its CFR page elimination and revision initiatives. GAO limited the scope of its work on the first two objectives to four agencies: the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Transportation (DOT), the Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) officials in each of the four agencies GAO reviewed said that the page elimination totals that their agencies reported to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) did not take into account the pages that their agencies had added to the CFR while the eliminations were taking place; (2) EPA and DOT estimated that they added more pages to the CFR than they removed during their page elimination initiatives; (3) HUD and OSHA, on the other hand, estimated that they deleted more pages than they added; (4) overall, when estimated page additions were counted, the 4 agencies' CFR sections decreased in size by about 926 pages--about 3 percent of the CFR pages at the start of the initiative, or about 17 percent of the amount reported to OIRA; (5) the agencies pointed out that pages are often added to the CFR because of statutory requirements or to clarify requirements placed on regulated entities and that pages are sometimes not eliminated at the request of those entities; (6) GAO's review indicated that about 40 percent of the 422 CFR revision actions in the 4 agencies would substantively reduce the burden felt by regulated entities as a result of such actions as eliminating paperwork requirements and providing compliance flexibility; (7) another 15 percent of the actions appeared to be minor burden reductions in that they seemed to make the regulations easier to find or to understand but would not change the underlying regulatory requirements or scope of applicability; (8) GAO concluded that about 27 percent of the CFR revision actions would have no effect on the burden felt by regulated entities and that about 8 percent could increase regulatory burden; (9) GAO could not determine what effect about 9 percent of the CFR revision actions would have on the regulated entities, either because the actions had multiple parts that potentially could offset each other or because the information available was unclear; (10) OIRA officials said that the administration has no mechanisms in place for measuring burden reductions as a result of the CFR page elimination and revision effort; and (11) however, they believe that the initiative is having a beneficial effect and also pointed out that the CFR page elimination and revision efforts are only part of a larger set of actions the administration is taking to reform the nation's regulatory system.