HHS announces 10-year expiration date for regulations

Under a proposed rule, regulations will expire 10 years after issued, unless the department performs an assessment and renews them.

Retrospective reviews of the costs and benefits of federal regulations has long been a goal of presidents and regulatory experts across the political spectrum.

The Department of Health and Human Services on Thursday issued a notice requiring the department to review its regulations every 10 years. These reviews would determine whether they are subject to review under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), which requires regular review of certain significant regulations.

Regulations that are subject to the RFA must be reviewed in this timeframe to see if they are still necessary and are achieving the desired results. If regulations are not reviewed in a timely manner, they will expire.

Related: Coming soon to HHS: Office of Drug Manufacturing?

“For decades, presidents have said agencies should retrospectively review their regulations,” HHS Secretary Alex Azar said. “Under President Trump, HHS is actually doing it. Our proposed rule is an effective way to deliver on the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, signed by President Carter and on the books since 1980.

“With HHS regulatory responsibilities as wide-ranging as food safety, drug approval, adoption and child care, and health-care financing, it’s essential that we know — and inform the American people — whether we’re executing on these responsibilities in a way that maximizes benefits, minimizes costs and keeps up with the times.”

Under the proposed rule, any regulation issued by HHS (with certain exceptions) will cease to be effective 10 years after it is issued, unless the department performs a plenary assessment of the regulation and a more detailed review of those regulations that have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small entities. HHS regulations will be subject to a two-step review:

  1. Assessing whether they have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the standard set out under the RFA; and
  2. If it qualifies for review under the RFA, a more detailed review that will consider the continued need for the rule, complaints about it, the rule’s complexity, the extent to which it duplicates or conflicts with other rules and whether technological, economic and legal changes favor amending or rescinding the rule.

Retrospective reviews of the costs and benefits of federal regulations has long been a goal of presidents and regulatory experts across the political spectrum, according to the department. This proposed rule seeks to increase transparency, public participation and democratic accountability. As part of the review process, the public can submit comments on the impact of regulations.

The proposed rule will be subject to a public comment period, and there also will be a public hearing. Depending on the public comments, HHS could finalize a version of this rule after the public comment period concludes.

“This proposal — the boldest and most significant regulatory reform effort ever undertaken by HHS — would sunset burdensome regulations unless their necessity is publicly demonstrated to the American people,” HHS Chief of Staff Brian Harrison said.

Read more: