HR67-119

Reported

Modernizing Retrospective Regulatory Review

119th Congress Introduced Jan 3, 2025

Summary

What This Bill Does

Modernizing Retrospective Regulatory Review requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, acting through the Administrator of OIRA and consulting the Director of the Government Publishing Office, the Archivist, and the Director of the Federal Register, to report to Congress within 180 days. The report must assess federal progress in making agency regulations publicly available in machine-readable format and discuss recognition of the eCFR maintained by the Federal Register Director and GPO Director as an official legal edition of the Code of Federal Regulations.

Within 18 months, OMB acting through OIRA must issue guidance on how agency heads can identify, procure, and use technology, including algorithmic tools and artificial intelligence, to conduct retrospective reviews of existing regulations more efficiently, cost-effectively, and accurately. The guidance must cover tools for finding obsolete, ineffective, insufficient, excessively burdensome, redundant, erroneous, inaccurate, contradictory, or overlapping regulations and for training agency personnel to use the technology.

Who Benefits and How

Regulated businesses benefit if agencies use better tools to find obsolete, redundant, or excessively burdensome regulations. AI and regulatory technology vendors benefit from federal guidance encouraging procurement and use of review tools. Public legal-data users benefit if machine-readable regulations and eCFR legal-edition status improve access to federal rules. Congressional oversight committees benefit from the 180-day report on machine-readable regulatory progress. Agency regulatory review teams benefit from guidance on technology procurement and personnel training.

Who Bears the Burden and How

OMB OIRA staff must write the congressional report and issue guidance within statutory deadlines. GPO staff must consult on machine-readable regulations and eCFR legal-edition questions. National Archives staff and Federal Register staff must support the report and eCFR recognition discussion. Federal agency heads must evaluate technology procurement and train personnel for retrospective review. Agency regulatory offices must use tools to find obsolete, ineffective, burdensome, redundant, erroneous, contradictory, or overlapping rules.

Key Provisions

  • Requires a 180-day OMB report on machine-readable federal regulations.
  • Requires the report to address recognition of eCFR as an official legal edition of the Code of Federal Regulations.
  • Directs OMB through OIRA to issue retrospective-review technology guidance within 18 months.
  • Provides for use of algorithmic tools and artificial intelligence in regulatory review.
  • Requires guidance on identifying obsolete, ineffective, insufficient, excessively burdensome, redundant, erroneous, contradictory, or overlapping regulations.
  • Requires guidance on training agency personnel to use retrospective-review technology.

Evidence Chain:

This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.

At a Glance

What This Bill Does

Requires OMB, acting through OIRA and consulting GPO, the Archivist, and the Federal Register Director, to report on machine-readable federal regulations and eCFR legal status within 180 days, then issue guidance within 18 months on using technology, algorithmic tools, and artificial intelligence for retrospective regulatory review.

Key Policy Areas

Regulatory Review, Federal Data, Artificial Intelligence, Administrative Law

Primary Purpose

Requires OMB, acting through OIRA and consulting GPO, the Archivist, and the Federal Register Director, to report on machine-readable federal regulations and eCFR legal status within 180 days, then issue guidance within 18 months on using technology, algorithmic tools, and artificial intelligence for retrospective regulatory review.

Policy Domains

Regulatory Review Federal Data Artificial Intelligence Administrative Law

House resolution provisions

Identified Gains
  • Regulated businesses
  • AI regulatory technology vendors
  • Public legal-data users
  • Congressional oversight committees
  • Agency regulatory review teams
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: ih
Regulated businesses:
Public legal-data users:
Agency regulatory review teams:
AI regulatory technology vendors:
Congressional oversight committees:
Identified Costs
  • OMB OIRA staff
  • GPO staff
  • National Archives staff
  • Federal Register staff
  • Federal agency heads
  • Agency regulatory offices
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: ih
GPO staff:
OMB OIRA staff:
Federal agency heads:
Federal Register staff:
National Archives staff:
Agency regulatory offices:

Legislative Progress

Reported
Introduced Committee Passed
May 21, 2025

Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 24 …

May 21, 2025

Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held

Jan 3, 2025

Mr. Biggs of Arizona (for himself and Mr. Crane) introduced …

Jan 3, 2025

Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Jan 3, 2025

Introduced in House

Stakeholder Effects

cui bono?

How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.

Media & Entertainment
2 mentions across 1 clause
-2 negative

Federal Register staff, GPO staff

Regulatory Review
1 mention across 1 clause
-1 negative

OMB OIRA staff

Government
1 mention across 1 clause
-1 negative

Agency regulatory review teams

Technology
1 mention across 1 clause
+1 positive

AI regulatory technology vendors

Regulated Businesses
1 mention across 1 clause
+1 positive

Regulated businesses

Professional Services
1 mention across 1 clause
+1 positive

Public legal-data users

1/2
sections analyzed
Full impact breakdown

Bill Structure & Actor Mappings

Who is "The Secretary" in each section?

Domains
Regulatory Review Federal Data Artificial Intelligence Administrative Law
Actor Mappings
"gpo"
→ Government Publishing Office
"omb"
→ Office of Management and Budget
"nara"
→ National Archives and Records Administration
"oira"
→ Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs

We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.

Learn more about our methodology