Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.

Presidential Executive Order 14094 (Joe Biden, 2023)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.

Executive Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory Review was a presidential executive order issued by President Joe Biden (D) in 2023 to revise the regulatory review process. President Donald Trump (R) revoked E.O. 14094 on January 20, 2025, via E.O. 14148.[1]

E.O. 14094 amended Executive Order 12866 to change the definition of a significant regulatory action to include any action with an annual effect of $200 million or more, as opposed to $100 million or more. It also directed the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) administrator to review all other significant rules (those regarding novel policy issues) and aimed "to promote equitable and meaningful [public] participation" in the regulatory review process, according to the text.[2][3]

Background

See also: Significant regulatory action and Presidential Executive Order 12866 (Bill Clinton, 1993)

Executive Order 14094, titled "Modernizing Regulatory Review," was issued by President Joe Biden (D) on April 6, 2023. E.O. 14094 amended Executive Order 12866, which was issued by President Bill Clinton in 1993 and established principles and processes to govern federal agency rulemaking, regulatory planning, and regulatory review.

E.O. 12866 was designed to guide presidential oversight of regulatory administrative policy. It outlined a rulemaking philosophy for federal agencies, described several processes for coordinating regulatory planning among agencies, and provided for the incorporation of public comments into the rulemaking process and the public release of documents related to the regulatory review process. The order also authorized the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review what it considers all new and preexisting significant regulatory actions.[4][5][6]

E.O. 14094 amended certain provisions of E.O. 12866 to raise the monetary threshold for classifying significant rules and sought to promote public participation in the regulatory review process.[2][3][7]

On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump (R) issued E.O. 14148, revoking E.O. 14094.[1]

Provisions

The following sections highlight key provisions of E.O. 14094.

Revised definition of significant regulatory action

The provisions of E.O. 14094 changed the definition of a significant regulatory action to include any action with an annual effect of $200 million or more, as opposed to $100 million or more. It also directed the OIRA administrator to review all other significant rules (those regarding novel policy issues) and sought to limit the number of actions that require review by OIRA. Unless otherwise indicated, these provisions apply to all U.S. federal government agencies except for those defined as independent regulatory agencies under 44 U.S.C. 3502.[2][3][4]

The order defines a significant regulatory action as "any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:"[2]

“ (1) have an annual effect on the economy of $200 million or more (adjusted every 3 years by the Administrator of OIRA for changes in gross domestic product); or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, territorial, or tribal governments or communities;


(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) raise legal or policy issues for which centralized review would meaningfully further the President's priorities or the principles set forth in this Executive order, as specifically authorized in a timely manner by the Administrator of OIRA in each case.[2][8]

”


Regulatory review

The order also directs the OIRA administrator to amend the process for regulatory review to promote what the order refers to as inclusive regulatory policy and public participation:[2]

“
(a) To the extent practicable and consistent with applicable law, regulatory actions should be informed by input from interested or affected communities; State, local, territorial, and Tribal officials and agencies; interested or affected parties in the private sector and other regulated entities; those with expertise in relevant disciplines; and the public as a whole. Opportunities for public participation shall be designed to promote equitable and meaningful participation by a range of interested or affected parties, including underserved communities.
(b) To inform the regulatory planning process, executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the extent practicable and consistent with applicable law:
(i) clarify opportunities for interested persons to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule under 5 U.S.C. 553(e);
(ii) endeavor to respond to such petitions efficiently, in light of agency judgments of available resources and priorities; and
(iii) maintain, subject to available resources, a log of such petitions received, and share with the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), upon request, information on the status of recently resolved and pending petitions.
(c) To inform the development of regulatory agendas and plans, agencies shall endeavor, as practicable and appropriate, to proactively engage interested or affected parties, including members of underserved communities; consumers; workers and labor organizations; program beneficiaries; businesses and regulated entities; those with expertise in relevant disciplines; and other parties that may be interested or affected. These efforts shall incorporate, to the extent consistent with applicable law, best practices for information accessibility and engagement with interested or affected parties, including, as practicable and appropriate, community-based outreach; outreach to organizations that work with interested or affected parties; use of agency field offices; use of alternative platforms and media for engaging the public; and expansion of public capacity for engaging in the rulemaking process.
(d) The Administrator of OIRA, in consultation with relevant agencies, as appropriate, shall consider guidance or tools to modernize the notice-and-comment process, including through technological changes. These reforms may include guidance or tools to address mass comments, computer-generated comments (such as those generated through artificial intelligence), and falsely attributed comments.
(e) Section 6(b)(4) of Executive Order 12866 establishes a process for persons not employed by the executive branch of the Federal Government to request meetings with OIRA officials regarding the substance of regulatory actions under OIRA review. Public trust in the regulatory process depends on protecting regulatory development from the risk or appearance of disparate and undue influence, including in the OIRA review process. In order to reduce this risk or appearance, the Administrator of OIRA shall, to the extent practicable and consistent with applicable law:
(i) Provide information to facilitate the initiation of meeting requests regarding regulatory actions under OIRA review from potential participants not employed by the executive branch of the Federal Government who have not historically requested such meetings, including those from underserved communities; and
(ii) Implement reforms to improve procedures and policies with respect to OIRA's consideration of meeting requests initiated by persons not employed by the executive branch of the Federal Government regarding the substance of regulatory actions under OIRA review to further the efficiency and effectiveness of such meetings. These reforms may include:
(A) efforts to ensure access for meeting requesters who have not historically requested such meetings;
(B) discouraging meeting requests that are duplicative of earlier meetings with OIRA regarding the same regulatory action by the same meeting requesters;
(C) consolidation of meetings by requester, subject matter, or any other consistently applied factors deemed appropriate to improve efficiency and effectiveness; and
(D) disclosure of data in an open, machine-readable, and accessible format that includes the dates and names of individuals involved in all substantive meetings and the subject matter discussed during such meetings, as required by section 6(b)(4)(C)(iii) of Executive Order 12866, so as to better facilitate transparency and analysis.[2][8]
 ”

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 White House, "Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions," January 20, 2025
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 Federal Register, "Modernizing Regulatory Review," April 11, 2023
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 The White House, "Executive Order on Modernizing Regulatory Review," April 6, 2023
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Federal Register, "Executive Order 12866," October 4, 1993
  5. ↑ Center for Effective Government, "Executive Order 12866," accessed July 20, 2017
  6. ↑ Environmental Protection Agency, "Summary of Executive Order 12866 - Regulatory Planning and Review," accessed July 20, 2017
  7. ↑ The White House, "Strengthening Our Regulatory System for the 21st Century," April 6, 2023
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
v • e
The Administrative State
MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
Pillars
Reporting
Laws
Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Cases
Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
Terms
Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
Bibliography
Agencies
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Presidential_Executive_Order_14094_(Joe_Biden,_2023)&oldid=10362715"