GAMA identifies early significant action by President Biden
Terminates Trump “two for one” Executive Orders
Knowing the intricacies of the Regulatory a BIG Plus
The men and women, who daily have to grapple with their favorite Federal Aviation Regulations, may find their meaning difficult to figure out. The folks at the General Aviation Manufacturers Association have mastered a most obscure regulatory mechanism, to wit:
- Executive Order 13771 of January 30, 2017 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs),
- Executive Order 13777 of February 24, 2017 (Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda),
- Executive Order 13875 of June 14, 2019 (Evaluating and Improving the Utility of Federal Advisory Committees),
- Executive Order 13891 of October 9, 2019 (Promoting the Rule of Law Through Improved Agency Guidance Documents),
- Executive Order 13892 of October 9, 2019 (Promoting the Rule of Law Through Transparency and Fairness in Civil Administrative Enforcement and Adjudication),
- Executive Order 13893 of October 10, 2019 (Increasing Government Accountability for Administrative Actions by Reinvigorating Administrative PAYGO
These were 6 of the 69 Executive Orders issued by the Trump White House. A Presidents can issue an E.O. without public comment or consent from other branches of government to issue executive orders, as long as the action is supported by a statutory delegation or the president’s own constitutional authority. These Trump E.O.’s set requirements for rules which agencies, like the FAA/DOT, must meet in the OMB reviews of any new proposal. An E.O. has little permanency, in that the next President can revoke orders with the stroke of a pen.
This set of Trump directives was designed to remove regulatory sludge. Under the rubric of “two for one”, if the FAA sought to issue a new NPRM, it must identify two existing rules to be deleted. It observed that this new precondition to OMB approval of a new would slow down new regulations, which under libertarian philosophy were, by definition, restraints on commerce.
This E.O. posed problems for organizations like the FAA, which frequently MUST issue safety requirements on an expedited basis. GAMA’s Mr. Bunce, perhaps actually his General Counsel and Director, Safety & Regulatory Affairs, Lauren L. Haertlein, say the obscure regulatory significance of the Trump “two for one” rule and praised President Biden for his swift termination of these E.O.’s.
Such regulatory acumen, in the long term, results in clearer regulations and useful, relevant interpretations for the women and men who must apply the thousands of FARs on a daily basis.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) President and CEO, Pete Bunce, issued the following statement regarding the U.S. Department of Transportation’s repeal of administrative rulemaking, guidance and enforcement procedures:
“We are appreciative of Secretary Buttigieg’s leadership to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of rulemaking and guidance procedures at the Department of Transportation. While some industries may have welcomed a dramatic slowdown in regulations under the previous administration’s philosophy, we believe the law of unintended consequences applies to the one-size-fits-all approach. The aviation industry relies on technical standards to be routinely updated through rulemaking and guidance to address safety and incorporate evolving technology. What our industry experienced over the last few years with rules and guidance being ‘shelved’ when sent from the FAA to DOT has proved to be a significant barrier to progress. We look forward to working with the Department of Transportation and FAA as the general aviation manufacturing industry works to bring innovation and new safety technology to the nation’s transportation system.”
 The words and plain meaning of the EO’s Section 2 would include all of the above examples within this “Freeze”:
Sec. 2. Regulatory Cap for Fiscal Year 2017.
(a) Unless prohibited by law, whenever an executive department or agency (agency) publicly proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates a new regulation, it shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed.
(b) For fiscal year 2017, which is in progress, the heads of all agencies are directed that the total incremental cost of all new regulations, including repealed regulations, to be finalized this year shall be no greater than zero, unless otherwise required by law or consistent with advice provided in writing by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (Director).
(c) In furtherance of the requirement of subsection (a) of this section, any new incremental costs associated with new regulations shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations. Any agency eliminating existing costs associated with prior regulations under this subsection shall do so in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable law.
 Lauren received her B.A. in biology and political science from Tufts University and her J.D. and M.A. (in philosophy – with a focus in bioethics) from Duke University. Prior to law school, she worked in clinical research in Massachusetts. Before moving to Washington, DC, Lauren clerked for the Honorable James A. Wynn, Jr. on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Lauren is an instrument-rated commercial pilot (airplane single-engine and multi-engine land).
Share this article: