EPA's Asbestos Regulations: Report on a Case Study on OMB Interference in Agency Rulemaking
United States. Congress. House. Committee on Energy and Commerce. Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1985 - Administrative procedure - 138 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
9 of TSCA action activities Agency's analysis announcement approach Asbestos Hearing asbestos risks asbestos rules authority Bedell benefits briefing cancer chemical communications concerns concluded Cong Congress Congressional considered constitutional consumer continued Control cost-benefit costs Counsel courts D.C. Cir decision decision to refer decisionmaking Deputy Administrator determinative directed discounting draft economic effect environment Environmental Protection Agency EPA Administrator EPA officials EPA's Executive Order 12291 exposure fact February Federal Federal agencies final hazards hereinafter cited human impact interpretation Interview involved issue James Barnes laws legislation letter limit major March March 27 meeting memorandum Occupational OMB officials OMB's OSHA and CPSC participation period phasedown position prepared present President proposed asbestos reduce refer asbestos regulation regulatory Report risks to OSHA rulemaking rules Safety section 9 Senate Sess significant specifically staff standard statute Subcommittee sufficient unreasonable workplace
Page 126 - In the framework of our Constitution, the President's power to see that the laws are faithfully executed refutes the idea that he is to be a lawmaker. The Constitution limits his functions in the lawmaking process to the recommending of laws he thinks wise and the vetoing of laws he thinks bad.
Page 4 - Hearings Before the Subcomm. on Oversight and Investigations of the House Comm. on Energy and Commerce, 98th Cong., IstSess. (1983) 'Role of OMB in Regulation: Hearing Before the Subcomm.
Page 55 - If the Administrator [of EPA] finds that there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of a chemical substance or mixture, or that any combination of such activities, presents or will present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment...
Page 126 - But it would be an alarming doctrine, that congress cannot impose upon any executive officer any duty they may think proper, which is not repugnant to any rights secured and protected by the constitution; and in such cases, the duty and responsibility grow out of and are subject to the control of the law, and not to the direction of the President.
Page 101 - As a practical matter, Overton Park's mandate means that the public record must reflect what representations were made to an agency so that relevant information supporting or refuting those representations may be brought to the attention of the reviewing courts by persons participating in agency proceedings. This course is obviously foreclosed if communications are made to the agency in secret and the agency itself does not disclose the information presented.
Page 124 - Government faithfully perform their duties, and he has no more power to add to or subtract from the duties imposed upon subordinate executive and administrative officers by the law than those officers have to add to or subtract from his duties.
Page 136 - ... considerations. They also have broad implications for national economic policy. Our form of government simply could not function effectively or rationally if key executive policymakers were isolated from each other and from the Chief Executive. Single mission agencies do not always have the answers to complex regulatory problems. An overworked administrator exposed on a 24-hour basis to a dedicated but zealous staff needs to know the arguments and ideas of policymakers in other agencies as well...
Page 126 - ... carried out in its results, to all cases falling within it, would be clothing the President with a power entirely to control the legislation of Congress, and paralyze the administration of justice. To contend that the obligation imposed on the President to see the laws faithfully executed implies a power to forbid their execution, is a novel 'construction of the constitution, and entirely inadmissible.