OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) oversight
🔹 What is OIRA?
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is a sub-agency within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), created by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. OIRA operates under the Executive Office of the President and serves as the gatekeeper for significant federal regulations.
🔹 Key Functions of OIRA
Reviewing Significant Regulations
Under Executive Order 12866, OIRA reviews regulations deemed economically or politically significant before they are published in the Federal Register.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
OIRA ensures agencies perform proper cost-benefit analyses and that rules are cost-justified.
Paperwork Reduction Act Enforcement
OIRA must approve all federal information collections to avoid unnecessary paperwork burdens.
Regulatory Coordination and Conflict Resolution
OIRA resolves interagency disputes about overlapping or conflicting rules.
Regulatory Planning
OIRA oversees the Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, which outlines upcoming regulations.
🔹 Authority Basis
Paperwork Reduction Act (1980)
Executive Orders 12866 (Clinton), 13563 (Obama), 13771 & 13777 (Trump), 14094 (Biden)
OIRA authority is executive not statutory, but courts consider it part of the President's regulatory coordination power.
📚 Case Law Involving or Affecting OIRA Oversight
While courts rarely directly review OIRA’s actions, many cases touch on its indirect influence, interagency review conflicts, or procedural impacts on agency rulemaking.
✅ 1. Public Citizen v. Office of Management and Budget (D.C. Cir., 1984)
Facts:
Public Citizen challenged OIRA’s refusal to disclose documents related to its review of agency rules under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
Issue:
Are OIRA’s interagency communications and drafts subject to FOIA?
Judgment:
The court held that OIRA's regulatory review documents are exempt under the deliberative process privilege.
It found that OIRA’s internal communications with agencies are part of the presidential decision-making process.
Significance:
Cemented OIRA's role as part of the President's confidential regulatory apparatus.
Made it harder for public interest groups to access OIRA's influence on rulemaking.
✅ 2. Sierra Club v. Costle (D.C. Cir., 1981)
Facts:
Environmental groups challenged EPA's changes to Clean Air Act regulations, claiming last-minute White House and OIRA pressure caused the agency to weaken protections.
Issue:
Can political influence during OIRA review invalidate a regulation?
Judgment:
The court ruled that political involvement, including OIRA’s, is not inherently improper unless it violates statutory mandates.
EPA retained legal responsibility and judgment over its rule.
Significance:
A foundational case legitimizing White House (and by extension, OIRA) involvement in agency rulemaking.
Shows that unless political influence forces an unlawful result, it’s permissible.
✅ 3. Missouri Public Service Commission v. FERC (D.C. Cir., 2005)
Facts:
FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) delayed a rule due to OIRA objections about economic impacts.
Issue:
Was the delay improper if it stemmed from OIRA intervention rather than agency judgment?
Judgment:
The court emphasized that OIRA cannot force agencies to act or not act — the final decision must rest with the agency.
If an agency delays a rule at OIRA's request, courts will examine whether the statutory deadlines were violated.
Significance:
Clarified that agencies cannot use OIRA as a shield for inaction.
Suggested OIRA involvement must not override statutory timelines.
✅ 4. Center for Biological Diversity v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) (9th Cir., 2007)
Facts:
NHTSA's fuel economy rule was challenged for failing to assess the climate change impacts of vehicle emissions.
Issue:
Did OIRA’s cost-benefit emphasis lead NHTSA to unlawfully underweight environmental harms?
Judgment:
The court held that the rule was arbitrary and capricious for failing to monetize the value of carbon emissions.
Criticized the agency’s blind reliance on OIRA’s economic analysis without adequate environmental consideration.
Significance:
Warned that OIRA’s cost-benefit influence must not trump statutory environmental duties.
Implied that agencies must balance OIRA input with their own mandates.
✅ 5. California v. Bernhardt (N.D. Cal., 2020)
Facts:
The Department of the Interior rescinded an Obama-era environmental rule after OIRA review and pressure from industry.
Issue:
Was the rescission lawful, or did OIRA’s intervention skew the agency’s legal reasoning?
Judgment:
The court ruled that the rescission was arbitrary and capricious under the APA.
Highlighted that OIRA-led economic justifications must be transparently reasoned, not retroactively imposed.
Significance:
Reinforced that OIRA review cannot substitute for agency-specific statutory reasoning.
Agencies can’t hide behind OIRA's economic priorities when ignoring legal duties.
✅ 6. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA (D.D.C., 2019)
Facts:
EPA delayed publication of a chemical safety rule after OIRA review. NRDC sued for unreasonable delay.
Issue:
Can OIRA-related review delays amount to unlawful withholding under the APA?
Judgment:
The court found the delay unreasonable and compelled EPA to finalize the rule.
Noted that OIRA’s oversight cannot be a blanket excuse for missing rulemaking deadlines.
Significance:
Shows courts will compel agencies to act if OIRA's review causes unjustified delays.
Affirms that judicial review can pierce the OIRA veil when statutory timelines are at stake.
🧾 Summary Table
| Case | Year | Key Issue | Ruling | Importance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Citizen v. OMB | 1984 | FOIA & Deliberative Process | OIRA docs exempt | Shielded OIRA's internal role |
| Sierra Club v. Costle | 1981 | Political influence | Allowed | Affirmed OIRA’s advisory role |
| Mo. PSC v. FERC | 2005 | Delays via OIRA | Delay can't breach statute | Agencies retain final responsibility |
| CBD v. NHTSA | 2007 | CBA bias | Rule invalidated | Must include environmental harms |
| California v. Bernhardt | 2020 | Economic analysis misuse | Rescission invalidated | OIRA can't override legal reasoning |
| NRDC v. EPA | 2019 | Delay due to OIRA | Delay unlawful | Courts can compel agency action |
📌 Conclusion
OIRA is a powerful executive tool, but its influence is legally bounded:
OIRA’s review is not judicially reviewable directly, but its effects are if they cause an agency to violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), ignore statutory duties, or delay required action.
Courts uphold OIRA’s role as part of executive coordination, but they insist agencies maintain independent legal responsibility.
Excessive reliance on economic analysis over statutory purpose — especially in environmental or health contexts — can invalidate rules.
RELATED Blog
0 comments