Regulatory Reform Act of 1995

Regulatory Reform Act of 1995 - Amends Federal law to define various terms relating to Federal rulemaking. Defines "major rule" as a rule or a group of closely related rules that the proposing agency, the Director (Director) of the Office of Management and Budget, or a designee of the President determines is likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more in reasonably quantifiable direct and indirect costs or that is determined to meet certain criteria set forth in this Act. (Sec. 3) Authorizes a rule to be designated a major rule if it is likely to result in: (1) a substantial increase in cost or price for wage earners, consumers, individual industries, nonprofit organizations, Federal, State, local, or tribal government agencies, or geographic regions; (2) significant adverse effects on wages, economic growth, investment, productivity, innovation, the environment, public health or safety, or the ability of enterprises whose principal places of business are in the United States to compete in the domestic or export market; (3) a serious interference with another agencies action; (4) the material alteration of the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs; or (5) a significant impact on a sector of the economy or disproportionate costs to a class of persons with severe consequences for the class. Excludes from the meaning of major rule under this Act any rule: (1) involving the internal revenue laws; (2) authorizing the introduction into commerce or recognizing the marketable status of a product; (3) which is exempt from notice and public comment procedure requirements of Federal law; or (4) relating to certain monetary policy or banking matters. Requires each Federal agency, before publishing notice of a proposed rulemaking, to determine if the rule is a major rule. Authorizes such a determination also to be made by the Director or a designee of the President. Requires the agency to issue at the time of the notice of proposed rulemaking a preliminary regulatory cost- benefit analysis, summarized in such notice, with specified contents. Requires issuance of a final cost-benefit analysis with the publication of a final major rule. Allows judicial review of an agency determination of major rule status, but not of such a determination by the Director or designee of the President. Prescribes certain requirements relating to agency rulemaking, including statutory deadlines, agency review of rules, and public participation. Requires covered agencies to prepare: (1) a risk assessment for each proposed major rule relating to human health, safety or the environment; and (2) for each such proposed or final rule, an assessment of incremental risk reduction or other benefits associated with each significant regulatory alternative considered by the agency in connection with the rule. Exempts from such requirements emergency situations; certain screening analyses; health, safety, or environmental inspections or individual facility permitting actions; or food, drug or other product labels. Limits covered agencies to: (1) the Environmental Protection Agency; (2) the Department of Labor; (3) the Food and Drug Administration; (4) the Consumer Product Safety Commission; (5) the Department of Transportation; (6) the Department of Energy; (7) the Department of Agriculture; (8) the Department of the Interior; (9) the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; (10) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; (11) the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and (12) other agencies designated by the President. Sets forth principles of risk assessment, risk characterization, and risk communication. Requires that scientific findings and best estimates of risk be distinguished from other considerations. Requires each covered agency to: (1) issue guidelines to implement risk assessment and risk characterization principles; (2) publish, within 18 months after enactment of this Act, a plan to review and revise any risk assessment published before the end of such 18-month period if the agency determines that significant new information or methodologies are available that could significantly alter the results of the prior risk assessment; (3) develop a systemic program for independent and external peer review of any risk assessment or cost-benefit analysis that was the basis of a major rule by such agency; and (4) regularly evaluate risk assessment research and training needs. Requires the Director, in consultation with the Office of Science and Technology Policy, to: (1) survey periodically how each covered agency is conducting risk assessment; (2) make recommendations to the President and the Congress based on such surveys; (3) establish interagency mechanisms to promote coordination among agencies conducting risk assessment and promote use of state-of-the-art assessment practices; (4) establish mechanisms between Federal and State agencies, including periodic meetings, to communicate state-of- the-art risk assessment practices and assess Federal- State cooperation; and (5) convene meetings with representatives of Federal and State agencies and with others to assess the effectiveness of risk assessment. Requires the President to appoint National Peer Review Panels to review risk assessment practices. (Sec. 4) Requires each agency promulgating a final major rule to submit such rule to the Congress along with a statement of the basis and purpose for it. Sets forth the procedure for considering such major rule, including congressional veto and presidential override provisions. (Sec. 5) Directs the Administrative Conference of the United States to study and report to the Congress on the operation of the risk assessment requirements of this Act. (Sec. 6) Urges covered agencies to set priorities and to use their resources to address human health, safety, and environmental risks considered most serious and which can be addressed in a cost- effective manner. Sets forth general criteria for determining the most serious risks, with review of agency determinations by the Director. Requires the incorporation of such risk-based priorities into budget and planning activities. Requires the Director to enter into arrangements with an accredited scientific body to conduct: (1) a study of the methodologies for using comparative risk to rank dissimilar human health, safety, and environmental risks; and (2) a comparative risk analysis according to specified criteria. Requires a report to the President and the Congress on such study. Exempts agency compliance or noncompliance from judicial review. (Sec. 7) Requires the President to submit to the Congress biennial accounting statements estimating the cost of Federal regulatory programs and corresponding benefits over at least the next five fiscal years. Prescribes the general contents of such statements. Requires the Director to provide guidance to agencies on how to standardize cost and benefit measures and how to format accounting statements. Requires the Director of the Congressional Budget Office to make recommendations to the President for improving such statements and reports.