Health and Safety Regulation

eggs

Public Interest Comment on The Food Safety and Inspection Service’s proposed rule: Egg Products Inspection Regulations

June 12, 2018

By Richard B. Belzer, Independent Consultant
This public interest comment provides an overview of the Food Safety Inspection Service’s (FSIS) proposed rule requiring official plants that process egg products to develop and implement Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point Systems and Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures. FSIS would eliminate certain existing requirements, and add new labeling requirements. The comment reviews the justifications for the rulemaking change, and provides answers to how it would affect previous rules, industry growth, and foodborne illness rates.

CPSC Logo

CPSC Hearing on Safety Standard Addressing Blade-Contact Injuries on Table Saws

August 14, 2017

By Sofie E. Miller & Jacob Yarborough
In a testimony before the Consumer Product Safety Commission, Miller and Yarborough discuss three components of the Commission's proposed performance standard for table saws: 1) there is not a clear market failure to justify the rulemaking, 2) the rule will have negative effects on competition by creating a legal monopoly, and 3) the benefits that the Commission expects to result from its standard are uncertain.

Table saw

Public Comment on the CPSC’s Proposed Rule: Safety Standard Addressing Blade-Contact Injuries on Table Saws

July 27, 2017

By Sofie E. Miller and Jacob Yarborough
The CPSC’s proposed rule mandates that all table saws sold in the U.S. be equipped with Active Injury Mitigation (AIM) technology. Miller and Yarborough argue that this rule would lead to a monopoly of the table saw market. This monopoly would reduce consumer choice, dramatically raise costs, and stifle innovation. In addition, they question the underlying assumptions and models that the CPSC uses to conduct their benefit-cost analysis and argue that the benefits may be overstated and the costs understated.

Google car

Public Comment on NHTSA’s Federal Automated Vehicles Policy: Accelerating the Next Revolution In Roadway Safety

November 16, 2016

By Sofie E. Miller, Howard Beales and Daniel R. Pérez
This comment on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) recent Federal Automated Vehicles Policy considers the impact of regulating driverless car technology on innovation and social welfare. NHTSA is correct to be cautious of the effects that a federal policy could have on innovation, particularly because the safety gains from highly automated vehicles (HAV) could be significant. As a result, the agency should avoid any type of premarket approval authority for HAV technology, which could potentially delay the adoption of life-saving innovations and result in thousands of traffic fatalities.

Mosquito alert

Public Comment on FDA’s Public Availability of: Draft Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Finding of No Significant Impact Concerning Investigational Use of Oxitec OX513A Mosquitoes

May 13, 2016

By Daniel R. Pérez
Genetically-modified mosquitoes hold great promise for addressing mosquito-borne diseases that threaten South Florida. Yet, the Florida Keys Mosquito Control District has been waiting since 2011 for approval from FDA to allow the biotechnology company Oxitec to conduct field trials for this promising technology. This public interest comment points out that the trial poses no appreciable risk to human or animal health or the environment. The unusually lengthy timeframe for approval has unnecessarily limited our ability to combat the spread of life-threatening diseases, like Zika and Dengue.

US-EU Regulatory Cooperation: Lessons and Opportunities

April 26, 2016

By D. Pérez, S. Dudley, N. Eisner, R. Lutter, D. Zorn and N. Nord
The George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center prepared this report as part of a grant from the European Union to analyze regulatory cooperation between the EU and U.S. The report includes three case studies examining how cooperation has worked in practice between U.S. regulatory agencies and their EU counterparts and an analysis of U.S. regulations likely to have significant effects on international trade and investment. These analyses identify opportunities to reduce incompatible approaches while indicating areas where differences could persist due to issues of national sovereignty and structural differences between countries.

Sequoyah nuclear power plant

Public Comment: NRC's Financial Qualifications for Reactor Licensing

July 30, 2015

By Gerald W. Brock, Co-Director
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission published a draft regulatory basis for a proposed rulemaking that would amend the financial qualifications standard for new reactor licensing from the current "reasonable assurance" to the proposed "appears to be financially qualified." However, the proposed standard is unnecessary because there is a market test of financial qualifications that is more accurate than regulatory review. While the proposed new financial qualification standard is better than the current financial qualification standard, simply abolishing the financial qualifications requirement for licensing would be an improvement over the proposed new standard.

Pregnant woman

Public Interest Comment on the Department of Labor's Proposed Rule: Discrimination on the Basis of Sex

April 16, 2015

By Lynn White, Esq.
In this proposed rule, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) attempts to clarify the requirements that contractors must fulfill to ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of sex. The OFCCP understated the total costs of the proposed rule, limiting the regulatory analysis to rule familiarization and new costs associated with providing pregnancy accommodations to a limited number of contractor employees. However, actual costs could reach an estimated $130 million or more per year, according to the author's analysis.

Crystalline 200

Will the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Proposed Standards for Occupational Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica Reduce Workplace Risk?

March 26, 2015

By Susan E. Dudley & Andrew P. Morriss
This article finds that OSHA's proposed rule would contribute little in the way of new information, particularly since it is largely based on information that is at least a decade old—a significant deficiency, given the rapidly changing conditions observed over the last 45 years. The article concludes with recommendations for alternative approaches that would be more likely to generate information needed to improve worker health outcomes.

Ozone image

Public Comment: National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone

March 17, 2015

By Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, Jr., Affiliated Scholar
EPA’s quantitative risk estimate (QRA) provides no legitimate reason to believe that the proposed action is “requisite to protect public health” or that reducing the ozone standard further will cause any public health benefits. Given EPA’s information and the unquantified model uncertainty that remains, there is no sound technical basis for asserting with confidence, based on the models and analyses in EPA’s ozone risk assessment, that an ozone standard of 65 ppb would be any more protective than 70 ppb, or that 80 ppb is less protective than 60 ppb. To the contrary, available data suggest that further reductions in ozone levels will make no difference to public health, just as recent past reductions in ozone have had no detectable causal impact on improving public health.

cars

Public Interest Comment on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) Communications

October 21, 2014

By Gerald W. Brock and Lindsay M. Abate (Scherber)
Seeking to address the high number of motor vehicle crashes in the United States, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently issued an ANPRM that preliminarily proposes to mandate vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication capabilities in new passenger cars and light trucks beginning in 2020. While NHTSA argues that a mandate is necessary to induce collective action because "no single manufacturer will have the incentive to build vehicles able to 'talk' to other vehicles if there are no other vehicles to talk to," we argue that the agency has not clearly demonstrated a market failure that requires regulation. Second, we contend, based on previous government attempts at anticipatory standardization, that it is impossible to predict the future course of technology with enough confidence to prescribe a specific detailed standard that will remain in effect for many years. Finally, we argue that NHTSA's cost-benefit analysis, though necessarily uncertain at this time, appears to underestimate some costs and overestimate some benefits.

Susan Dudley with Senator Lieberman

OSHA’s Long-Awaited Crystalline Silica Rule

April 16, 2014

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration recently sought comment on proposed standards to reduce occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica. The agency faces multiple challenges in devising a regulatory approach that will meet its statutory goal of reducing significant risk. In a comment filed on the public record, University of Alabama law professor Andrew Morriss and I recognize OSHA’s challenges; however, we find that the greatest obstacle to reducing risks associated with silica exposure is not lack of will (on the part of employers or employees), but rather lack of information. Our analysis concludes that the proposed rule will contribute little in the way of new information and, indeed, may stifle the necessary generation of knowledge by precluding flexibility for experimentation and learning.

fruit

Small Farms, Big Costs

September 10, 2013

By Sofie E. Miller & Cassidy B. West
The Food and Drug Administration recently extended to November 15 the deadline for public comment on its proposed rule, Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption. This is the second extension, providing the public an unusually long 304 days to comment on the proposed regulation and offer suggestions for its improvement. It is also a welcome opportunity, as the draft rule does not meet statutory and executive requirements and may needlessly harm consumers as well as small farmers domestically and abroad.

electric car

Questioning NHTSA’s ‘Noisy Electric Cars’ Rule

July 09, 2013

By Sofie E. Miller
Early this year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published a proposed rule that would require hybrid and electric vehicles to make a sound while being operated at speeds slower than 18 miles per hour. Because they use an electric motor, hybrid and electric vehicles generate less noise than conventional vehicles with internal combustion engines (ICEs), and legislators and regulators alike are concerned that pedestrians could be injured by a vehicle that they can’t hear coming. Under the 2010 Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act, NHTSA must conduct a safety standard rulemaking to establish an “alert sound” for hybrid and electric vehicles. The act requires that the noise made by a hybrid or electric vehicle could allow a pedestrian, especially a sightimpaired pedestrian, to identify the direction of the vehicle. NHTSA is also operating under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, which requires NHTSA safety standards to “be performance-oriented, practicable, and objective, and meet the need for safety. In addition, in developing and issuing a standard, NHTSA must consider whether the standard is reasonable, practicable, and appropriate for each type of motor vehicle covered by the standard.”