[Federal Register: April 1, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 63)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 18134-18136]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01ap11-34]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION
29 CFR Chapter XL
Reducing Regulatory Burden; Review Under E.O. 13563
AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
ACTION: Request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) is reviewing
its regulations in response to the President's Executive Order 13563 on
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. The purpose of this review
is to make PBGC's regulatory program both more effective and less
burdensome. We are starting by identifying regulations for possible
modification, streamlining, or repeal, which will be incorporated into
a preliminary regulatory review plan. For now, we are asking the public
for ideas and information--to suggest candidate regulations for review,
alternative approaches, etc.--to help prepare the preliminary plan.
There will be additional opportunities for public comment after the
preliminary plan is developed and approved.
DATES: PBGC requests that written comments and information on
developing the preliminary plan be submitted by April 20, 2011. PBGC
will take into consideration comments received after that date to the
extent feasible.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine B. Klion, Manager,
(klion.catherine@pbgc.gov), or Daniel S. Liebman, Attorney,
(liebman.daniel@pbgc.gov), Regulatory and Policy Division, Legislative
and Regulatory Department, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005, 202-326-4024. (TTY/TDD users may
call the Federal relay service toll-free at 1-800-877-8339 and ask to
be connected to 202-326-4024.)
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by ``Regulatory Review'', may be
submitted by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the web site instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: reg.comments@pbgc.gov.
Fax: 202-326-4224.
Mail or Hand Delivery: Legislative and Regulatory
Department, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20005-4026.
Comments received, including personal information provided, will be
posted to http://www.pbgc.gov. Copies
[[Page 18135]]
of comments may also be obtained by writing to Disclosure Division,
Office of the General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,
1200 K Street, NW., Washington DC 20005-4026, or calling 202-326-4040
during normal business hours. (TTY and TDD users may call the Federal
relay service toll-free at 1-800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to
202-326-4040.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PBGC protects the pensions of about 44
million people in about 29,000 private defined benefit plans. PBGC
receives no funds from general tax revenues. Operations are financed by
insurance premiums, investment income, assets from pension plans
trusteed by PBGC, and recoveries from the companies formerly
responsible for the trusteed plans.
To carry out these functions, PBGC issues regulations interpreting
such matters as the termination process for defined benefit plans,
establishment of procedures for premium payments, reporting and
disclosure, and assessment and collection of employer liability.
Regulatory objectives and priorities are developed in the context of
PBGC's statutory purposes:
To encourage voluntary private pension plans;
To provide for the timely and uninterrupted payment of
pension benefits; and
To keep premiums at the lowest possible levels.
PBGC's intent is to issue regulations that implement the law in
ways that do not impede the maintenance of existing defined benefit
plans or the establishment of new plans. PBGC attempts to minimize
administrative burdens on plans and participants, improve transparency,
simplify filing, provide relief for small businesses, and assist plans
to comply with applicable requirements. PBGC is committed to issuing
simple, understandable, and timely regulations to help affected
parties.
On January 18, 2011, the President issued Executive Order 13563,
``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' to ensure that Federal
regulations seek more affordable, less intrusive means to achieve
policy goals, and that agencies give careful consideration to the
benefits and costs of those regulations. Among other things, the
Executive Order directed agencies to develop and submit a preliminary
plan within 120 days that will explain how they will periodically
review existing significant regulations to identify any regulations
that can be made more effective or less burdensome in achieving
regulatory objectives. In the spirit of the Executive Order, PBGC is
applying the retrospective review to all of PBGC's existing regulations
(not only significant regulations).
PBGC is taking several immediate steps to launch this review of
existing regulatory requirements. Consistent with its commitment to
public participation, PBGC is soliciting views from the public on how
best to conduct its analysis of existing PBGC regulations and how best
to identify those regulations that might be modified, streamlined,
expanded or repealed. PBGC promulgates regulations in accordance with
applicable laws and based on best available information, analyses of
different alternatives for agency action, and public participation and
input. However, important information as to the consequences of a
regulation, including its costs and benefits, comes from practical,
real-world experience (both on the part of the public and on the part
of the agency) after the regulation has been implemented. Regulated
entities and members of the public affected by or interested in PBGC's
regulations are likely to have useful information and perspectives on
the benefits and burdens of existing regulatory requirements in light
of experience since the regulations were issued. Interested parties may
also be well-positioned to identify those rules that are most in need
of review. PBGC would find such input helpful as it considers how to
prioritize and properly tailor its retrospective review process for
PBGC's regulations. In short, engaging the public in an open,
transparent process is a crucial step in PBGC's review of its existing
regulations.
Although PBGC expects to eliminate regulations that are no longer
warranted, PBGC will also consider strengthening, complementing, or
modernizing regulations where necessary or appropriate--including, as
relevant, undertaking new rulemakings. PBGC reminds the public that
this review is for existing regulations and not proposed regulations
and asks the public not to use this process to submit comments on
proposed rules.
PBGC intends for its preliminary plan to include an initial list of
candidate regulations for retrospective review.
Questions for the Public
Below is a list of preliminary questions, the answers to which will
assist PBGC in its efforts to develop a preliminary plan for the
retrospective review of its existing regulations and to identify those
regulations that may benefit from a retrospective review. In addressing
these questions, commenters should identify, with specificity, the
regulation at issue, providing the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR)
cite where available. PBGC also requests that commenters provide, in as
much detail as possible, an explanation why they believe a regulation
should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed, as well as
specific suggestions of ways PBGC can better achieve its regulatory
objectives. Particularly where comments relate to a rule's costs or
benefits, comments will be most useful if there are data and experience
under the rule available to ascertain the rule's actual impact.
Commenters might also address how PBGC can best obtain and consider
accurate, objective information and data about the costs, burdens, and
benefits of existing regulations and whether there are existing sources
of data that PBGC can use to evaluate the effects of its regulations
over time.
PBGC encourages the public to emphasize those rules that have been
in effect for a sufficient amount of time to warrant a fair evaluation.
In providing comments, please keep these key considerations in
mind:
Retrospective review does not allow PBGC to contravene
requirements of its various statutory mandates. In addition, where
PBGC's discretion has been limited by law, PBGC's ability to modify,
streamline, expand, or repeal regulations is similarly constrained.
PBGC's plan will be tailored to reflect PBGC's resources,
rulemaking history, and the volume of regulations at issue.
These questions are not intended to be exhaustive. Commenters may
raise other issues or make suggestions unrelated to these questions
that they believe would help PBGC develop better regulations.
(1) How can PBGC identify those rules that can and should be
changed, streamlined, consolidated, or removed? What factors should
PBGC consider in selecting and prioritizing rules for review? PBGC
encourages those submitting comments to include a proposed process
under which such a review could be regularly undertaken.
(2) Does PBGC have rules or guidance that are duplicative or that
have conflicting requirements with other agencies? Does PBGC currently
collect information that it does not need or use effectively to achieve
regulatory objectives?
(3) Are there regulations that have become unnecessary and can be
withdrawn without impairing PBGC's regulatory programs?
[[Page 18136]]
(4) Are there rules that are ineffective and if so, how can they be
made effective?
(5) Are there rules that are not tailored to impose the least
burden on the public? What are some suggestions that PBGC can use to
reduce the burden on such rules as well as suggestions that generally
assure that PBGC's regulations promote and achieve its mission in ways
that are efficient and less burdensome?
(6) Are there rules that have become outdated and, if so, how can
they be modernized to better accomplish their regulatory objectives?
(7) Are there rules that are still necessary, but which have not
operated as well as expected such that a modified, stronger, or
slightly different approach is justified?
(8) Are there regulations, or regulatory processes that are
unnecessarily complicated or could be streamlined to achieve regulatory
objectives more efficiently?
(9) Are there any technological developments that can be leveraged
to modify, streamline, or repeal any existing regulatory requirements?
(10) How can PBGC best obtain and consider accurate, objective
information and data about the costs, burdens, and benefits of existing
regulations? Are there existing sources of data PBGC can use to
evaluate the effects of regulations over time?
(11) Are there regulations that are working well that can be
expanded or used as a model to fill gaps in other PBGC regulatory
programs?
PBGC notes that this Request for Comment is issued solely for
information and program-planning purposes. The agency will give careful
consideration to the responses, and may use them as appropriate during
the retrospective review, but does not anticipate providing a response
to each comment submitted. However, all submissions will be made
publically available on http://www.regulations.gov. Responses to this
Request for Comment do not bind PBGC to any further actions related to
the response.
Issued in Washington, DC, on this 29th day of March 2011.
Joshua Gotbaum,
Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2011-7805 Filed 3-31-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7709-01-P