Reauthorization of the Paperwork Reduction Act and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs: Hearings Before the Legislation and National Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, One Hundred First Congress, First Session, July 25, 27; August 1 and 2, 1989
United States. Congress. House. Committee on Government Operations. Legislation and National Security Subcommittee
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995 - Delegated legislation - 998 pages
Distributed to some depository libraries in microfiche.
Other editions - View all
Administration asbestos authority bill Census Chairman chemical Committee concerns CONGRESS THE LIBRARY congressional CONYERS cost Court decisions delay depository libraries develop Director documents draft drugs effect electronic ensure environmental ethylene oxide Executive Order Executive Order 12291 federal agencies Federal information government information HASTERT Hazard Communication HORTON impact implementation important Information and Regulatory information collection information dissemination policy information policy information products issues Jay Plager labeling legislation Management and Budget manufacturers MARTONIK NHTSA Office of Management OIRA OMB's OSHA paperwork burden Paperwork Reduction Act PLAGER President problem proposed public access Public Citizen public information questions reauthorization record regulations Regulatory Affairs regulatory review request requirements Resources Management Act responsibility Reye's Syndrome risk role rulemaking short-term exposure limit staff standard statement statistical statutory STEL Subcommittee tampon Task Force testimony Thank tion toxic toxic shock syndrome WEISS
Page 410 - ... to the extent feasible, on the basis of the best available evidence, that no employee will suffer material impairment of health or functional capacity even if such employee has regular exposure to the hazard dealt with by such standard for the period of his working life.
Page 943 - This Order is intended only to improve the internal management of the Federal government, and is not intended to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a party against the United States, its agencies, its officers or any person.
Page 347 - I am here today testifying on behalf of the US Chamber of Commerce, the world's largest federation of businesses, chambers of commerce, and trade and professional associations.
Page 702 - ... (2) Within sixty days after the notice of proposed rulemaking is published in the Federal Register, the Director may file public comments pursuant to the standards set forth in section 3508 on the collection of information requirement contained in the proposed rule.
Page 137 - Major rule" means any regulation that is likely to result in: (1) An annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; (2) A major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal...
Page 136 - ... incontestible" trade-mark "That the mark has been or is being used to violate the antitrust laws of the United States." We believe that this provision in its present form is unnecessary, ambiguous and fosters unfair competition without deterring antitrust violation. It is unnecessary because the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission in the field of trade-mark antitrust questions is fully preserved in the Act itself.159 It is ambiguous because on its face the...
Page 307 - Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility...
Page 126 - Fuller, The Forms and Limits of Adjudication, 92 Harv. L. Rev. 353 (1978), and the ideal of reasoned decisionmaking is for that reason less easily applied there than in the regulatory context.
Page 132 - Of course there may be duties so peculiarly and specifically committed to the discretion of a particular officer as to raise a question whether the President may overrule or revise the officer's interpretation of his statutory duty in a particular instance.