H.R.3048 - Regulatory Flexibility Amendments Act of 1996104th Congress (1995-1996)
|Sponsor:||Rep. Ewing, Thomas W. [R-IL-15] (Introduced 03/07/1996)|
|Committees:||House - Judiciary; Small Business|
|Latest Action:||03/28/1996 Referred to the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law. (All Actions)|
This bill has the status Introduced
Here are the steps for Status of Legislation:
Summary: H.R.3048 — 104th Congress (1995-1996)All Bill Information (Except Text)
Introduced in House (03/07/1996)
Regulatory Flexibility Amendments Act of 1996 - Permits an affected small business, within one year after the effective date of a final rule, to petition for judicial review of an agency's: (1) certification that such rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses; or (2) final regulatory flexibility analysis for such rule. Authorizes the court to: (1) order an agency to prepare a final regulatory analysis for a rule for which such a certification was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion; (2) order an agency to take appropriate corrective action for a final regulatory flexibility analysis that was prepared without observance of the proper procedure; and (3) stay the rule or grant other appropriate relief if the agency fails to take such action within 90 days.
Requires an agency, on or before the 30th day preceding the date of publication of a general notice of proposed rulemaking, to transmit to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration: (1) a copy of the proposed rule; and (2) a copy of the initial regulatory flexibility analysis for the rule or a determination that such an analysis is not required. Directs the Chief Counsel, within 15 days thereafter, to transmit to such agency a written statement of the effect of the proposed rule on small entities. Requires publication of such response in the Federal Register. Provides a special rule with respect to proposed rules of certain Federal banking agencies.
Expresses the sense of the Congress that the Chief Counsel should be permitted to appear as amicus curiae in any action brought for the purpose of reviewing a rule.