PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to House Oversight and Government Reform
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 28, 2010
Congressional Office of Regulatory Analysis Creation and Sunset and Review Act of 2010 - Establishes a Congressional Office of Regulatory Analysis. Transfers to the Director of such Office the Comptroller General's responsibilities for the congressional review of agency rules. Requires the Director's report on a major rule to include an analysis of the rule, including potential benefits and costs and an analysis of less costly alternatives. Requires the Office to: (1) conduct an assessment and analysis of any non-major rule upon request by a congressional committee or Member; and (2) issue an annual report including estimates of the total costs and benefits of all existing federal regulations.
Amends the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 to transfer to the Director the responsibilities of the Director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to: (1) compare agency and CBO estimates of costs of regulations implementing an Act containing a federal mandate; and (2) receive agency statements to accompany significant regulatory actions.
Sets forth requirements for agencies to review their significant rules to determine whether they should be continued without change, modified, consolidated with another rule, or terminated (sunset review). Defines a "significant rule" as one that the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) determines: (1) results in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; (2) is a major rule; or (3) was issued pursuant to a significant regulatory action. Provides for the sunset review of a rule that is not a significant rule upon petition by a person adversely affected or at the request of a congressional committee or a majority of the majority or non-majority party members of such a committee.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Administrator to: (1) inventory existing rules; (2) publish a list of covered rules and deadlines for their sunset review within seven years; (3) prioritize rules for review based on specified criteria, including the rule's cost to those regulated and the burden of reviewing it; (4) group related rules for simultaneous review; (5) provide guidance to agencies on conducting sunset reviews; and (6) provide feedback to agencies on sunset reviews and results. Requires new significant rules to be reviewed within three years after taking effect.
Requires each agency to: (1) designate a Regulatory Review Officer; (2) conduct a sunset review of its significant rules; (3) publish a sunset review notice, consider public comments, and issue a preliminary report; and (4) issue a final report recommending that a rule be continued without change or that it be changed or discontinued, in which case the agency shall conduct a rulemaking to modify, consolidate, or terminate such rule.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to House Oversight and Government Reform
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Judiciary
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.6223 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.6223 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.6223 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.6223 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.