# data[].attributes.body
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 addresses concerns raised by the small business community regarding the burden of federal regulations. Its objectives surrounds providing assistance to small businesses in navigating regulatory complexities, granting them a platform to voice concerns during rulemaking, and ensuring fair treatment from federal agencies. SBREFA achieves these goals through various key provisions, including the production of Small Entity Compliance Guides, involvement in rule development through Small Business Advocacy Review Panels, and the implementation of penalty reduction policies tailored to small businesses. Moreover, SBREFA's significance lies in its role in assisting small businesses with compliance, increasing their influence in regulatory processes, and safeguarding their rights through provisions for judicial review and fair treatment. In essence, SBREFA represents a comprehensive legislative effort to create a more favorable regulatory environment for small businesses, promoting their growth and sustainability within the broader economy.

# data[].attributes.body
The legislative history of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) reflects a series of significant milestones and discussions within the United States Congress. There was bipartisan support for this legislation because it reduced regulatory burdens, enhanced regulatory compliance, promote fairness and transparency, and ensure accountability.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
June 13, 1995

Senate Bill 917 introduced, remarks by Senator Domenici.

All actions on bill

Remarks

Congressional Record - S8255

June 16, 1995

Senate Bill 942 introduced, remarks by Senator Bond.

All actions on bill

Remarks

Congressional Record - S8560

February 28, 1996

Hearing on Senate Bill 942 and 917, Senate Small Business Committee

Senate Hearing 104-443 (not available)

March 6, 1996

Markup of Senate Bill 942, Senate Small Business Committee

No Report Filed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
DateDescriptionReportJune 13, 1995Senate Bill 917 introduced, remarks by Senator Domenici.All actions on billRemarksCongressional Record - S8255June 16, 1995Senate Bill 942 introduced, remarks by Senator Bond.All actions on billRemarksCongressional R

# data[].attributes.body
The Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panels, mandated by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing regulatory compliance costs for small businesses.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Insight

Dan Bosch, Jillian Provost
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panels have proven effective at reducing regulatory compliance costs for small businesses, but only three federal agencies are required to use them.

Legislation to expand the SBAR process to other agencies that often issue rules affecting small businesses will be considered later this month; past attempts have been derailed due to concerns that too many panels would strain the affected agencies.

This analysis estimates that the proposed reform would yield as many as 27 new panels, which would provide meaningful review of a selection of rules; it does not anticipate it would overwhelm the agencies involved.

INTRODUCTION
The 116 th Congress has been bereft of action on regulatory reform efforts. The Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, however, is expected to mark up a bill soon to reauthorize the Small Business Administration (SBA) including draft language that promises to give small businesses a stronger voice on rules that directly affect them.

The draft language would increase the number of agencies that would be required to hold Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panels, sometimes called small business panels, on rules that significantly affect small businesses. While this reform is deep in the regulatory weeds, it is likely to improve several regulations without straining the capacity of federal agencies.
BACKGROUND
Today, small businesses account for 99.9 percent of all United States businesses and employ over 47.5 percent of the U.S. workforce. Despite the vital importance of small businesses to the U.S. economy, federal laws and regulations have often disproportionately burdened them relative to large firms, leaving many small businesses struggling to survive. A working paper published by the Mercatus Center estimated that a 10 percent increase in regulatory restrictions on an industry resulted in a .5 percent reduction in the number of firms. A 10 percent reduction in regulatory restrictions had no significant impact on larger firms, however. Accordingly, small businesses are disproportionality affected by regulation.

To help reduce the relatively heavy burden of federal regulations on small businesses, Congress passed the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) in 1980 and an amending law, the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) in 1996. Both laws aimed to improve regulation and promote competition by ensuring agencies consider the impact of their rules on small businesses. These efforts have shown promise, with the federal government estimating it has saved small entities more than $130 billion in regulatory costs since 1998. Today, the RFA and SBREFA give small businesses a voice to advocate for flexible regulation that does not place an unnecessary burden on small businesses.

The RFA requires federal agencies, before they propose and finalize a rule, to conduct regulatory impact analyses on all regulations that affect small businesses and other small entities. The RFA does not mandate that federal agencies adopt regulations that are beneficial to small business. Instead, it aims to ensure that agencies consider the specific circumstances of small businesses and limit undue regulatory burden whenever possible.

SBREFA amended the RFA by providing for direct input by small businesses and industry stakeholders during the rulemaking process. One particular way SBREFA strengthened the RFA is by mandating that specific federal agencies - originally the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and later the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) - conduct SBAR panels before proposing any rule that would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. These panels are comprised of federal employees from the specified agencies, the Office of Advocacy (an independent agency at SBA), and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The panels interact directly with small businesses owners and other stakeholders before rules are proposed with the goal of increasing efficiency and minimizing burden. History shows that the panels can be effective at allowing agencies to meet their objectives while reducing direct compliance impacts on small businesses.

For example, in FY 2007 the EPA convened an SBAR panel to discuss a proposed rule to increase air pollution standards for small gasoline-powered engines and equipment. Due to concerns that the rule would place a greater burden on small businesses, the panel recommended the compliance deadline be extended and suggested ways to streamline the certification requirements and hardship exemptions for small businesses. The EPA incorporated these recommendations, saving small businesses $36.4 million in first-year costs and $5.6 million in annual recurring costs. Similarly, in FY 2015 the Obama Administration finalized OSHA's Confined Spaces in Construction rule with significant input from a related SBAR panel. OSHA streamlined the definitions of confined spaces, resulting in savings of $8.2 million in annual regulatory costs for small businesses.
POSSIBLE EXPANSION OF SBAR PANELS
Given the relative success of the SBAR panel process in improving regulatory outcomes and reducing compliance costs for small firms, it is no surprise that many have called for expanding the requirement to other agencies. Draft language included in the SBA Reauthorization would expand coverage to the Department of the Interior (DOI), the Department of Labor (DOL), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the SBA. These agencies often issue regulations that could be considered unduly burdensome on small businesses.

Previous efforts to add agencies to the SBAR panel process have failed for a variety of reasons. One reason for these failures is that expanded coverage to additional agencies has previously been coupled with broadening the definition of "impact." Currently, impact is defined as costs imposed on small businesses directly regulated by a rule. For example, a small business required by the EPA to report chemical usage would be considered directly regulated.

Past reform attempts have sought to broaden this definition to "reasonably foreseeable indirect" impacts, such as a rule that would tighten regulations on power plants and result in an increase in the cost of electricity on end users, like small businesses. While this idea has merit, it also increases the number rules that would be subject to panels. Some have contended this would make the SBAR panel process unsustainable, since it would surpass the capacity of the Office of Advocacy in both cost and manpower. It is not possible to estimate the number of panels that would be required under this expanded definition, since agencies currently do not estimate indirect economic effects.

The draft language in the SBA Reauthorization legislation leaves the current definition of "impact" intact, making it possible to estimate the effect of the proposed SBAR process on agencies. This study calculates this estimate below.
ESTIMATED PANELS AND IMPLICATIONS
Using data from the Spring 2019 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, this study estimates the number of panels that would be expected from the current slate of rules is as many as 38 of the 754 active rules in the pipeline at these agencies. To arrive at this estimate, this study selected current actions in the Prerule (initial development) or Proposed Rule stage that were tagged as either "small businesses affected" or "Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required." Only actions marked as either "regulatory" or "other" under Executive Order 13,771 were included since deregulatory and insignificant actions have not triggered the SBAR panel requirement under the Trump Administration.

The chart below breaks down these panels among the relevant agencies. Of these 38 panels, 11 are from rules that would be covered under existing law (seven from CFPB, three from DOL [OSHA] and one from EPA). That leaves 27 newly covered rules, should the proposed reforms get enacted. (None of the rules in FDIC's most recent regulatory agenda would qualify.)

It is possible that this estimate is higher than the true number of panels that would be convened under the proposed reforms. All 14 of the IRS's rules are marked as affecting small businesses, but not marked as requiring a regulatory flexibility analysis, meaning that the agency thinks small businesses will be affected, but perhaps not at a level that requires an SBAR panel. Therefore, none, all, or some of the 14 could result in a panel. In contrast, all nine of SBA's rules are marked as requiring a regulatory flexibility analysis, meaning the agency would be expected to convene panels for those rules.

Aside from the questions surrounding the IRS, the implications of this reform appear to be modest in an administration that is less regulatory than its predecessors. There would be more panels - meaning those rules should be improved - but not so many more that agencies, especially the Office of Advocacy, would be overwhelmed. It is important to point out that since many of these rules often take several years in development, these panels would occur over years, not immediately. For context, during the full 16 years of the George W. Bush and Obama Administrations, EPA completed 24 SBAR panels and OSHA completed 9. The CFPB has completed five since it began convening panels in 2012. Assuming the covered IRS rules ultimately shake out somewhere in the center of its 0-14 range, none of the newly covered agencies appear to be significant outliers from the history of previously covered agencies.

This estimate is based on current regulatory activity, it should be noted, which could skew the results somewhat. Expanding the SBAR panel process would likely have a greater effect in a more traditionally regulatory administration. Because such an administration would propose more regulatory actions, we could expect to see more panels than we have estimated here. The panel process should improve those regulations in terms of their efficiency, however, by achieving the agencies' desired goals while minimizing the impact on small businesses to the extent possible.
CONCLUSION
Improving the RFA by expanding the SBAR panel process to more agencies makes sense. Panels have proven effective at reducing compliance costs for small businesses - an important outcome, since small businesses are disproportionately affected by regulations. The proposed reform in the SBA Reauthorization would expand coverage to a limited number of agencies that most often propose rules that affect small businesses. Accordingly, one should anticipate a meaningful, but measured increase in regulations going through the panel process.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Estimating the Effect of Small Business Panel Reform - AAF

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panels have proven effective at reducing regulatory compliance costs for small businesses, but only three federal agencies are required to use them. Legislation to expand the SBAR process to other agencies that often issue rules affecting small businesses will be considered later this month; past attempts have been [...]

# data[].attributes.headline
Provisions of SBREFA Small Entity Compliance Guides

# data[].attributes.subject
Provisions of SBREFA Small Entity Compliance Guides

# data[].attributes.body
Small Entity Compliance Guides (SECGs) are a vital component of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996, mandated under section 212 of the act.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Small Entity Compliance Guides (SECGs) are prepared pursuant to section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) ((29 pp, 186 K, Title II of Public Law 104-121 (PDF)About PDF)). EPA prepares a SECG unless the agency can certify that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. By clicking on the the title of an action in the "Small Business Advocacy Review Panel Title" column in the table below, you can access the Panel page with a link to the SECG you're interested in.

Small Business Advocacy Review Panel Title

SECG
Publication Date

Authoring
Office

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
List of Small Entity Compliance Guides available to aid the user in complying with an associated rule

# data[].attributes.body
Did you know SBREFA created the Office of the National Ombudsman? This office helps small businesses deal with excessive or unfair federal regulatory enforcement actions, like audits or fines. If you're a small business feeling bullied by federal agencies, this is your go-to place for help!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), the Small Business Administration (SBA) established a National Small Business Ombudsman to receive comments from small businesses about federal agency enforcement actions. If your company is a small business as defined by the SBA, you can file a comment with the Ombudsman using the contact information below.

# data[].attributes.body
Following federal regulations can be daunting for small businesses. SBREFA not only advocates for fairer laws but also offers guidelines and resources to help businesses comply. It's like having a roadmap to navigate the tricky landscape of federal regulations, making compliance way more manageable.

# data[].attributes.body
Under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), covered agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) are mandated to convene Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panels before proposing a rule with an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 provided new avenues for small businesses to participate in the federal regulatory arena.

SBREFA created Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panels, which certain agencies must convene prior to proposing rules that would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

SBREFA Panels

Three agencies are now required to convene SBAR (or SBREFA) panels: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). This SBAR panel is made up of a chair from the covered agency, the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, and the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The panel meets with representatives of directly regulated small entities and offers an opportunity to provide advice and recommendations on regulatory alternatives to minimize the burden on small entities.

Under SBREFA, covered agencies (the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) must conduct a Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panel before publishing a proposed rule with an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. This SBAR panel, made up of a chair from the covered agency, the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, and the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, meets with representatives of directly regulated small entities and offers an opportunity to provide advice and recommendations on regulatory alternatives to minimize the burden on small entities.

Small Business Advocacy Review Panels Convened From 1997 to the Present under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Environmental Protection Agency

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 provided new avenues for small businesses to participate in the federal regulatory arena.SBREFA created Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panels, which certain agencies

# data[].attributes.body
Want to see SBREFA in action? Check out stories of small businesses that flourished because of the support and protections SBREFA offers. It's super motivating to see how legislation can have such a positive impact on the small business community!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Secret To Success - an eye opening story

# data[].attributes.body
Under SBREFA, small businesses have recourse to judicial review when they believe that an agency's rule or regulation, which they anticipate will have adverse effects, has not complied with the analysis and disclosure requirements outlined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA).

# data[].attributes.body
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 introduces vital measures to simplify regulatory compliance and reform enforcement practices for small businesses.

# data[].attributes.body
In response to Executive Order 13892, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) submits a report detailing its compliance efforts under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA).

# data[].attributes.headline
Provisions of SBREFA Small Business Advocacy Review Panels

# data[].attributes.subject
Provisions of SBREFA Small Business Advocacy Review Panels

# data[].attributes.body
The Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panels, established under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), play a crucial role in the rulemaking process of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panels | US EPA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Provides an overview on Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panels, which convene for proposed rules unless the rule will not have a significant economic impact on small entities

# data[].attributes.body
The provisions of SBREFA's Penalties Reduction Policy, as outlined in Section 223 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, are integral to ensuring fairness and flexibility in regulatory enforcement.

# data[].attributes.headline
Provisions of SBREFA Involvement in Rule Development

# data[].attributes.subject
Provisions of SBREFA Involvement in Rule Development

# data[].attributes.body
The provisions of SBREFA (Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act) involvement in rule development aim to address the disproportionate impact of federal regulations on small businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The following text of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, is taken from Title 5 of the United States Code, sections 601-612. The Regulatory Flexibility Act was originally passed in 1980 (P.L. 96-354). The act was amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-121), the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203), and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-240).

Congressional Findings and Declaration of Purpose

(a) The Congress finds and declares that -

(1) when adopting regulations to protect the health, safety and economic welfare of the Nation, Federal agencies should seek to achieve statutory goals as effectively and efficiently as possible without imposing unnecessary burdens on the public;

(2) laws and regulations designed for application to large scale entities have been applied uniformly to small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions even though the problems that gave rise to government action may not have been caused by those smaller entities;

(3) uniform Federal regulatory and reporting requirements have in numerous instances imposed unnecessary and disproportionately burdensome demands including legal, accounting and consulting costs upon small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions with limited resources;

(4) the failure to recognize differences in the scale and resources of regulated entities has in numerous instances adversely affected competition in the marketplace, discouraged innovation and restricted improvements in productivity;

(5) unnecessary regulations create entry barriers in many industries and discourage potential entrepreneurs from introducing beneficial products and processes;

(6) the practice of treating all regulated businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions as equivalent may lead to inefficient use of regulatory agency resources, enforcement problems and, in some cases, to actions inconsistent with the legislative intent of health, safety, environmental and economic welfare legislation;

(7) alternative regulatory approaches which do not conflict with the stated objectives of applicable statutes may be available which minimize the significant economic impact of rules on small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions;

(8) the process by which Federal regulations are developed and adopted should be reformed to require agencies to solicit the ideas and comments of small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions to examine the impact of proposed and existing rules on such entities, and to review the continued need for existing rules.

(b) It is the purpose of this Act [enacting this chapter and provisions set out as notes under this section] to establish as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given serious consideration.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

§ 601 Definitions

§ 602 Regulatory agenda

§ 603 Initial regulatory flexibility analysis

§ 604 Final regulatory flexibility analysis

§ 605 Avoidance of duplicative or unnecessary analyses

§ 606 Effect on other law

§ 607 Preparation of analyses

§ 608 Procedure for waiver or delay of completion

§ 609 Procedures for gathering comments

§ 610 Periodic review of rules

§ 611 Judicial review

§ 612 Reports and intervention rights
§ 601 Definitions
For purposes of this chapter -

(1) the term "agency" means an agency as defined in section 551(1) of this title;

(2) the term "rule" means any rule for which the agency publishes a general notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to section 553(b) of this title, or any other law, including any rule of general applicability governing Federal grants to State and local governments for which the agency provides an opportunity for notice and public comment, except that the term "rule" does not include a rule of particular applicability relating to rates, wages, corporate or financial structures or reorganizations thereof, prices, facilities, appliances, services, or allowances therefor or to valuations, costs or accounting, or practices relating to such rates, wages, structures, prices, appliances, services, or allowances;

(3) the term "small business" has the same meaning as the term "small business concern" under section 3 of the Small Business Act, unless an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal Register;

(4) the term "small organization" means any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field, unless an agency establishes, after opportunity for public comment, one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal Register;

(5) the term "small governmental jurisdiction" means governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand, unless an agency establishes, after opportunity for public comment, one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and which are based on such factors as location in rural or sparsely populated areas or limited revenues due to the population of such jurisdiction, and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal Register;

(6) the term "small entity" shall have the same meaning as the terms "small business," "small organization" and "small governmental jurisdiction" defined in paragraphs (3), (4) and (5) of this section; and

(7) the term "collection of information" -

(A) means the obtaining, causing to be obtained, soliciting, or requiring the disclosure to third parties or the public, of facts or opinions by or for an agency, regardless of form or format, calling for either -

(i) answers to identical questions posed to, or identical reporting or recordkeeping requirements imposed on, 10 or more persons, other than agencies, instrumentalities, or employees of the United States; or

(ii) answers to questions posed to agencies, instrumentalities, or employees of the United States which are to be used for general statistical purposes; and

(B) shall not include a collection of information described under section 3518(c)(1) of title 44, United States Code.

(8) Recordkeeping requirement - The term "recordkeeping requirement" means a requirement imposed by an agency on persons to maintain specified records.
§ 602. Regulatory agenda
(a) During the months of October and April of each year, each agency shall publish in the Federal Register a regulatory flexibility agenda which shall contain -

(1) a brief description of the subject area of any rule which the agency expects to propose or promulgate which is likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities;

(2) a summary of the nature of any such rule under consideration for each subject area listed in the agenda pursuant to paragraph (1), the objectives and legal basis for the issuance of the rule, and an approximate schedule for completing action on any rule for which the agency has issued a general notice of proposed rulemaking, and

(3) the name and telephone number of an agency official knowledgeable concerning the items listed in paragraph (1).

(b) Each regulatory flexibility agenda shall be transmitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment, if any.

(c) Each agency shall endeavor to provide notice of each regulatory flexibility agenda to small entities or their representatives through direct notification or publication of the agenda in publications likely to be obtained by such small entities and shall invite comments upon each subject area on the agenda.

(d) Nothing in this section precludes an agency from considering or acting on any matter not included in a regulatory flexibility agenda, or requires an agency to consider or act on any matter listed in such agenda.
§ 603. Initial regulatory flexibility analysis
(a) Whenever an agency is required by section 553 of this title, or any other law, to publish general notice of proposed rulemaking for any proposed rule, or publishes a notice of proposed rulemaking for an interpretative rule involving the internal revenue laws of the United States, the agency shall prepare and make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. Such analysis shall describe the impact of the proposed rule on small entities. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis or a summary shall be published in the Federal Register at the time of the publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking for the rule. The agency shall transmit a copy of the initial regulatory flexibility analysis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. In the case of an interpretative rule involving the internal revenue laws of the United States, this chapter applies to interpretative rules published in the Federal Register for codification in the Code of Federal Regulations, but only to the extent that such interpretative rules impose on small entities a collection of information requirement.

(b) Each initial regulatory flexibility analysis required under this section shall contain -

(1) a description of the reasons why action by the agency is being considered;

(2) a succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis for, the proposed rule;

(3) a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply;

(4) a description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record;

(5) an identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant Federal rules which may duplicate, overlap or conflict with the proposed rule.

(c) Each initial regulatory flexibility analysis shall also contain a description of any significant alternatives to the proposed rule which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and which minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities. Consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, the analysis shall discuss significant alternatives such as -

(1) the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities;

(2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities;

(3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and

(4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small entities.

(d) (1) For a covered agency, as defined in section 609(d)(2), each initial regulatory flexibility analysis shall include a description of-

(A) any projected increase in the cost of credit for small entities;

(B) any significant alternatives to the proposed rule which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and which minimize any increase in the cost of credit for small entities; and

(C) advice and recommendations of representatives of small entities relating to issues described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) and subsection (b).

(2) A covered agency, as defined in section 609(d)(2), shall, for purposes of complying with paragraph (1)(C)-

(A) identify representatives of small entities in consultation with the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration; and

(B) collect advice and recommendations from the representatives identified under subparagraph (A) relating to issues described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) and subsection (b).
§ 604. Final regulatory flexibility analysis
(a) When an agency promulgates a final rule under section 553 of this title, after being required by that section or any other law to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking, or promulgates a final interpretative rule involving the internal revenue laws of the United States as described in section 603(a), the agency shall prepare a final regulatory flexibility analysis. Each final regulatory flexibility analysis shall contain -

(1) a statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule;

(2) a statement of the significant issues raised by the public comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a statement of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments;

(3) the response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change made to the proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the comments;

(4) a description of and an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such estimate is available;

(5) a description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record;

(6) a description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the impact on small entities was rejected;

(6)1 for a covered agency, as defined in section 609(d)(2), a description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize any additional cost of credit for small entities.

(b) The agency shall make copies of the final regulatory flexibility analysis available to members of the public and shall publish in the Federal Register such analysis or a summary thereof.

1So in original. Two paragraphs (6) were enacted.
§ 605. Avoidance of duplicative or unnecessary analyses
(a) Any Federal agency may perform the analyses required by sections 602, 603, and 604 of this title in conjunction with or as a part of any other agenda or analysis required by any other law if such other analysis satisfies the provisions of such sections.

(b) Sections 603 and 604 of this title shall not apply to any proposed or final rule if the head of the agency certifies that the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the head of the agency makes a certification under the preceding sentence, the agency shall publish such certification in the Federal Register at the time of publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking for the rule or at the time of publication of the final rule, along with a statement providing the factual basis for such certification. The agency shall provide such certification and statement to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

(c) In order to avoid duplicative action, an agency may consider a series of closely related rules as one rule for the purposes of sections 602, 603, 604 and 610 of this title.
§ 606. Effect on other law
The requirements of sections 603 and 604 of this title do not alter in any manner standards otherwise applicable by law to agency action.
§ 607. Preparation of analyses
In complying with the provisions of sections 603 and 604 of this title, an agency may provide either a quantifiable or numerical description of the effects of a proposed rule or alternatives to the proposed rule, or more general descriptive statements if quantification is not practicable or reliable.
§ 608. Procedure for waiver or delay of completion
(a) An agency head may waive or delay the completion of some or all of the requirements of section 603 of this title by publishing in the Federal Register, not later than the date of publication of the final rule, a written finding, with reasons therefor, that the final rule is being promulgated in response to an emergency that makes compliance or timely compliance with the provisions of section 603 of this title impracticable.

(b) Except as provided in section 605(b), an agency head may not waive the requirements of section 604 of this title. An agency head may delay the completion of the requirements of section 604 of this title for a period of not more than one hundred and eighty days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of a final rule by publishing in the Federal Register, not later than such date of publication, a written finding, with reasons therefor, that the final rule is being promulgated in response to an emergency that makes timely compliance with the provisions of section 604 of this title impracticable. If the agency has not prepared a final regulatory analysis pursuant to section 604 of this title within one hundred and eighty days from the date of publication of the final rule, such rule shall lapse and have no effect. Such rule shall not be repromulgated until a final regulatory flexibility analysis has been completed by the agency.
§ 609. Procedures for gathering comments
(a) When any rule is promulgated which will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the head of the agency promulgating the rule or the official of the agency with statutory responsibility for the promulgation of the rule shall assure that small entities have been given an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking for the rule through the reasonable use of techniques such as-

(1) the inclusion in an advance notice of proposed rulemaking, if issued, of a statement that the proposed rule may have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities;

(2) the publication of general notice of proposed rulemaking in publications likely to be obtained by small entities;

(3) the direct notification of interested small entities;

(4) the conduct of open conferences or public hearings concerning the rule for small entities including soliciting and receiving comments over computer networks; and

(5) the adoption or modification of agency procedural rules to reduce the cost or complexity of participation in the rulemaking by small entities.

(b) Prior to publication of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis which a covered agency is required to conduct by this chapter-

(1) a covered agency shall notify the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and provide the Chief Counsel with information on the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and the type of small entities that might be affected;

(2) not later than 15 days after the date of receipt of the materials described in paragraph (1), the Chief Counsel shall identify individuals representative of affected small entities for the purpose of obtaining advice and recommendations from those individuals about the potential impacts of the proposed rule;

(3) the agency shall convene a review panel for such rule consisting wholly of full time Federal employees of the office within the agency responsible for carrying out the proposed rule, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief Counsel;

(4) the panel shall review any material the agency has prepared in connection with this chapter, including any draft proposed rule, collect advice and recommendations of each individual small entity representative identified by the agency after consultation with the Chief Counsel, on issues related to subsections 603(b), paragraphs (3), (4) and (5) and 603(c);

(5) not later than 60 days after the date a covered agency convenes a review panel pursuant to paragraph (3), the review panel shall report on the comments of the small entity representatives and its findings as to issues related to subsections 603(b), paragraphs (3), (4) and (5) and 603(c), provided that such report shall be made public as part of the rulemaking record; and

(6) where appropriate, the agency shall modify the proposed rule, the initial regulatory flexibility analysis or the decision on whether an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is required.

(c) An agency may in its discretion apply subsection (b) to rules that the agency intends to certify under subsection 605(b), but the agency believes may have a greater than de minimis impact on a substantial number of small entities.

(d) For purposes of this section, the term "covered agency" means

(1) the Environmental Protection Agency,

(2) the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of the Federal Reserve System; and

(3) the Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the Department of Labor.

(e) The Chief Counsel for Advocacy, in consultation with the individuals identified in subsection (b)(2), and with the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget, may waive the requirements of subsections (b)(3), (b)(4), and (b)(5) by including in the rulemaking record a written finding, with reasons therefor, that those requirements would not advance the effective participation of small entities in the rulemaking process. For purposes of this subsection, the factors to be considered in making such a finding are as follows:

(1) In developing a proposed rule, the extent to which the covered agency consulted with individuals representative of affected small entities with respect to the potential impacts of the rule and took such concerns into consideration.

(2) Special circumstances requiring prompt issuance of the rule.

(3) Whether the requirements of subsection (b) would provide the individuals identified in subsection (b)(2) with a competitive advantage relative to other small entities.
§ 610. Periodic review of rules
(a) Within one hundred and eighty days after the effective date of this chapter, each agency shall publish in the Federal Register a plan for the periodic review of the rules issued by the agency which have or will have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small entities. Such plan may be amended by the agency at any time by publishing the revision in the Federal Register. The purpose of the review shall be to determine whether such rules should be continued without change, or should be amended or rescinded, consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, to minimize any significant economic impact of the rules upon a substantial number of such small entities. The plan shall provide for the review of all such agency rules existing on the effective date of this chapter within ten years of that date and for the review of such rules adopted after the effective date of this chapter within ten years of the publication of such rules as the final rule. If the head of the agency determines that completion of the review of existing rules is not feasible by the established date, he shall so certify in a statement published in the Federal Register and may extend the completion date by one year at a time for a total of not more than five years.

(b) In reviewing rules to minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on a substantial number of small entities in a manner consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, the agency shall consider the following factors-

(1) the continued need for the rule;

(2) the nature of complaints or comments received concerning the rule from the public;

(3) the complexity of the rule;

(4) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates or conflicts with other Federal rules, and, to the extent feasible, with State and local governmental rules; and

(5) the length of time since the rule has been evaluated or the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule.

(c) Each year, each agency shall publish in the Federal Register a list of the rules which have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, which are to be reviewed pursuant to this section during the succeeding twelve months. The list shall include a brief description of each rule and the need for and legal basis of such rule and shall invite public comment upon the rule.
§ 611. Judicial review
(a) (1) For any rule subject to this chapter, a small entity that is adversely affected or aggrieved by final agency action is entitled to judicial review of agency compliance with the requirements of sections 601, 604, 605(b), 608(b), and 610 in accordance with chapter 7. Agency compliance with sections 607 and 609(a) shall be judicially reviewable in connection with judicial review of section 604.

(2) Each court having jurisdiction to review such rule for compliance with section 553, or under any other provision of law, shall have jurisdiction to review any claims of noncompliance with sections 601, 604, 605(b), 608(b), and 610 in accordance with chapter 7. Agency compliance with sections 607 and 609(a) shall be judicially reviewable in connection with judicial review of section 604.

(3) (A) A small entity may seek such review during the period beginning on the date of final agency action and ending one year later, except that where a provision of law requires that an action challenging a final agency action be commenced before the expiration of one year, such lesser period shall apply to an action for judicial review under this section.

(B) In the case where an agency delays the issuance of a final regulatory flexibility analysis pursuant to section 608(b) of this chapter, an action for judicial review under this section shall be filed not later than-

(i) one year after the date the analysis is made available to the public, or

(ii) where a provision of law requires that an action challenging a final agency regulation be commenced before the expiration of the 1-year period, the number of days specified in such provision of law that is after the date the analysis is made available to the public.

(4) In granting any relief in an action under this section, the court shall order the agency to take corrective action consistent with this chapter and chapter 7, including, but not limited to -

(A) remanding the rule to the agency, and

(B) deferring the enforcement of the rule against small entities unless the court finds that continued enforcement of the rule is in the public interest.

(5) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the authority of any court to stay the effective date of any rule or provision thereof under any other provision of law or to grant any other relief in addition to the requirements of this section.

(b) In an action for the judicial review of a rule, the regulatory flexibility analysis for such rule, including an analysis prepared or corrected pursuant to paragraph (a)(4), shall constitute part of the entire record of agency action in connection with such review.

(c) Compliance or noncompliance by an agency with the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to judicial review only in accordance with this section.

(d) Nothing in this section bars judicial review of any other impact statement or similar analysis required by any other law if judicial review of such statement or analysis is otherwise permitted by law.
§ 612. Reports and intervention rights
(a) The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration shall monitor agency compliance with this chapter and shall report at least annually thereon to the President and to the Committees on the Judiciary and Small Business of the Senate and House of Representatives.

(b) The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration is authorized to appear as amicus curiae in any action brought in a court of the United States to review a rule. In any such action, the Chief Counsel is authorized to present his or her views with respect to compliance with this chapter, the adequacy of the rulemaking record with respect to small entities and the effect of the rule on small entities.

(c) A court of the United States shall grant the application of the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to appear in any such action for the purposes described in subsection (b).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The following text of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, is taken from Title 5 of the United States Code, sections 601-612. The Regulatory Flexibility Act was originally passed in 1980 (P.L. 96-354). The act was amended by the Small

# data[].attributes.headline
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act Real Life Testimony's

# data[].attributes.subject
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act Real Life Testimony's

# data[].attributes.body
OSHA is currently developing a potential standard, "Prevention of Workplace Violence in Healthcare and Social Assistance," recognizing the pressing need for addressing workplace violence in these sectors. Through a Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel convened in March 2023, OSHA engaged with Small Entity Representatives (SERs) from various industry segments to gather insights and perspectives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CMS Small Entity Compliance Guides | CMS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Medicare Program: Changes to the Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and CY 2010 Payment Rates; Changes to the Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment System and CY 2010 Payment Rates

# data[].attributes.headline
Extra sources: SBREFA Review Panels Fact Sheet

# data[].attributes.subject
Extra sources: SBREFA Review Panels Fact Sheet