[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 648 Introduced in Senate (IS)]
<DOC>
119th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. 648
To provide for the establishment of a process for the review of rules
and sets of rules, and for other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
February 20, 2025
Ms. Ernst introduced the following bill; which was read twice and
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To provide for the establishment of a process for the review of rules
and sets of rules, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Searching for and
Cutting Regulations that are Unnecessarily Burdensome Act of 2025'' or
the ``SCRUB Act of 2025''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as
follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.
TITLE I--REGULATORY CUT-GO
Sec. 101. Cut-go procedures.
Sec. 102. Applicability.
Sec. 103. OIRA certification of cost calculations.
TITLE II--RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW OF EXISTING AND NEW RULES
Sec. 201. Plan for review of existing rules.
Sec. 202. Plan for future review.
TITLE III--JUDICIAL REVIEW; EFFECTIVE DATE
Sec. 301. Judicial review.
Sec. 302. Effective date.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget.
(2) Agency.--The term ``agency'' has the meaning given that
term in section 551 of title 5, United States Code.
(3) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget.
(4) DOGE.--The term ``DOGE'' means the United States DOGE
Service under the Executive Office of the President.
(5) Major rule.--The term ``major rule'' means any rule
that the Administrator determines is likely to impose--
(A) an annual cost on the economy of $100,000,000
or more, adjusted annually for inflation;
(B) a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State,
local, or Tribal government agencies, or geographic
regions;
(C) significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on
the ability of United States-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and
export markets; or
(D) significant impacts on multiple sectors of the
economy.
(6) Rule.--The term ``rule'' has the meaning given that
term in section 551 of title 5, United States Code.
(7) Set of rules.--The term ``set of rules'' means a set of
rules that collectively implements a regulatory authority of an
agency.
TITLE I--REGULATORY CUT-GO
SEC. 101. CUT-GO PROCEDURES.
(a) In General.--Except as provided in section 102, or subsection
(b) of this section, when an agency makes a new rule, the agency shall
repeal rules or sets of rules of that agency meeting the criteria
provided in section 201(d), such that the annual costs of the new rule
to the United States economy is offset by such repeals, in an amount
equal to or greater than the cost of the new rule, based on the
regulatory cost reductions of repeal identified by the DOGE, as
calculated pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.
(b) Alternative Procedure.--
(1) In general.--An agency may, alternatively, repeal rules
or sets of rules of that agency meeting the criteria provided
in section 201(d) prior to the time specified in subsection
(a).
(2) Application of reduction of cost.--If an agency repeals
a rule or set of rules under paragraph (1) and thereby reduces
the annual, inflation-adjusted cost of the rule or set of rules
to the United States economy, the agency may thereafter apply
the reduction in regulatory costs to meet, in whole or in part,
the regulatory cost reduction required under subsection (a) to
be made at the time the agency promulgates a new rule if the
new rule is finalized within 2 years of repeal of the rule or
set of rules reducing the annual, inflation-adjusted cost
thereof.
(c) Achievement of Full Net Cost Reductions.--
(1) In general.--Subject to the provisions of paragraph
(2), an agency may offset the costs of a new rule or set of
rules by repealing a rule or set of rules that implement the
same statutory authority as the new rule or set of rules.
(2) Limitation.--When using the authority provided in
paragraph (1), the agency shall achieve a net reduction in
costs imposed by the body of rules of the agency (including the
new rule or set of rules) that is equal to or greater than the
cost of the new rule or set of rules to be promulgated,
including, whenever necessary, by repealing additional rules of
the agency meeting the criteria provided in section 201(d).
(d) Regulatory Cost Analysis.--When calculating the cost of a new
or existing rule for purposes of compliance with this section, an
agency shall not consider any non-monetized or unquantified factor.
SEC. 102. APPLICABILITY.
An agency shall no longer be subject to the requirements of
sections 201 and 203 beginning on the date on which there is no rule or
set of rules of the agency meeting the criteria provided in section
201(d) that has not been repealed such that all regulatory cost
reductions from repealing rules meeting such criteria have been
achieved.
SEC. 103. OIRA CERTIFICATION OF COST CALCULATIONS.
(a) In General.--The Administrator shall review and certify the
accuracy of agency determinations of the costs of new rules under
section 201.
(b) Inclusion.--The certification described in subsection (a) shall
be included in the administrative record of the relevant rulemaking by
the agency promulgating the rule, and the Administrator shall transmit
a copy of the certification to Congress when the Administrator
transmits the certification to the agency.
TITLE II--RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW OF EXISTING AND NEW RULES
SEC. 201. PLAN FOR REVIEW OF EXISTING RULES.
(a) In General.--The DOGE shall conduct a review of the Code of
Federal Regulations to identify and, in coordination with the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget and any relevant agency head,
repeal rules and sets of rules that collectively implement a regulatory
program that should be repealed to lower the cost of regulation to the
economy.
(b) Priority.--The DOGE shall give priority in the review to rules
or sets of rules that--
(1) are major rules or include major rules;
(2) have been in effect more than 15 years;
(3) impose paperwork burdens that could be reduced
substantially without significantly diminishing regulatory
effectiveness;
(4) impose disproportionately high costs on entities that
qualify as small entities within the meaning of section 601(6)
of title 5, United States Code; or
(5) could be strengthened in their effectiveness while
reducing regulatory costs.
(c) Goal.--The DOGE shall have as a goal to achieve a reduction of
at least 33 percent in the cumulative costs of Federal regulation with
a minimal reduction in the overall effectiveness of such regulation by
no later than July 4, 2026, by coordinating with the Director, the
Administrator, and relevant agency heads to repeal rules or sets of
rules identified pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.
(d) Nature of Review.--To identify which rules and sets of rules
should be repealed to lower the cost of regulation to the economy, the
DOGE shall apply the following criteria:
(1) Whether the original purpose of the rule or set of
rules was achieved, and the rule or set of rules could be
repealed without significant recurrence of adverse effects or
conduct that the rule or set of rules was intended to prevent
or reduce.
(2) Whether the implementation, compliance, administration,
enforcement or other costs of the rule or set of rules to the
economy are not justified by the benefits to society within the
United States that are directly attributable to the rule or set
of rules produced by the expenditure of those costs.
(3) Whether the rule or set of rules has been rendered
unnecessary or obsolete, taking into consideration the length
of time since the rule was made and the degree to which
technology, economic conditions, market practices, or other
relevant factors have changed in the subject area affected by
the rule or set of rules.
(4) Whether the rule or set of rules is ineffective at
achieving the purposes of the rule or set of rules when
evaluated using data analytics and statistical relationships,
or unable to be evaluated using such standards.
(5) Whether the rule or set of rules overlaps, duplicates,
or conflicts with other Federal rules, and to the extent
feasible, with State and local governmental rules.
(6) Whether the rule or set of rules has excessive
compliance costs or is otherwise excessively burdensome, as
compared to alternatives that--
(A) specify performance objectives rather than
conduct or manners of compliance;
(B) establish economic incentives to encourage
desired behavior;
(C) provide information upon which choices can be
made by the public;
(D) incorporate other innovative alternatives
rather than agency actions that specify conduct or
manners of compliance; or
(E) could in other ways substantially lower costs
without significantly undermining effectiveness.
(7) Whether the rule or set of rules inhibits innovation in
or growth of the United States economy, such as by impeding the
introduction or use of safer or equally safe technology that is
newer or more efficient than technology required by or
permissible under the rule or set of rules.
(8) Whether or not the rule or set of rules harms
competition within the United States economy or the
international economic competitiveness of enterprises or
entities based in the United States.
(9) Whether the rule or set of rules concerns a major
economic or policy question but lacks an explicit statutory
basis.
(10) Whether the rule or set of rules imposes costs or
burdens disproportionately and predominantly on one segment of
society or one industry if the benefits of such rule or set of
rules accrue to a distinct segment of society or industry.
(11) Whether the rule or set of rules is justified in whole
or in part by a benefit accrued by one or more foreign nations
while costs are borne by American consumers, businesses, other
entities, or individuals.
(12) Whether the rule or set of rules are not based on the
best meaning and plain reading of the enabling statute for the
rule or set of rules.
(13) Such other criteria as the DOGE devises to identify
rules and sets of rules that can be repealed to eliminate or
reduce unnecessarily burdensome costs to the United States
economy.
(e) No Substantially Similar Rule To Be Reissued.--A rule that is
repealed under subsection (a) of this section or section 101 may not be
reissued in substantially the same form, and a new rule that is
substantially the same as such a rule may not be issued, unless the
reissued or new rule is specifically authorized by a law enacted after
the date of the repeal of the original rule.
SEC. 202. PLAN FOR FUTURE REVIEW.
(a) In General.--When an agency makes a rule, the agency shall
include in the final issuance of such rule a plan for the review of
such rule by not later than 10 years after the date such rule is made.
(b) Review of Rules.--The plan for review under subsection (a)
shall use interpretations and definitions of terms included in 201(d)
that are substantially similar to those used by the DOGE under the
review pursuant to section 201.
(c) Public Comment on Plan.--Whenever feasible, an agency shall
include a proposed plan for review of a proposed rule under subsection
(a) in the notice of proposed rulemaking for the rule and shall receive
public comment on the plan.
(d) Repeal of Rules.--The Director of the Office of Management and
Budget, in coordination with any relevant agency head, shall repeal any
rule failing to meet the criteria provided section 201(d).
TITLE III--JUDICIAL REVIEW; EFFECTIVE DATE
SEC. 301. JUDICIAL REVIEW.
(a) Cut-Go Procedures.--Agency non-compliance with title I shall be
subject to judicial review under chapter 7 of title 5, United States
Code.
(b) Plans for Future Review.--Agency non-compliance with section
202 shall be subject to judicial review under chapter 7 of title 5,
United States Code.
SEC. 302. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take effect
beginning on the date of enactment of this Act.
<all>