Press Release
December 8, 2020
Examining Federal Agencies’ Use of Interim Final Rules
The Trump Administration has recently finalized three controversial regulations as interim final rules (IFRs), bypassing the normal notice-and-comment process and rushing the rule through. By law, IFRs are intended to be temporary and followed by a finalized, permanent version of the rule, but AAF’s Director of Regulatory Policy Dan Bosch finds that their use differs substantially from their design: 61 percent of significant IFRs since November 1993 have remained in place, indicating agencies view IFRs as a way to shortcut the traditional rulemaking process.
An excerpt:
Recent IFRs highlight how the practice, intended for use in emergencies, can be subverted as a way to shortcut the regulatory process. Research into nearly 30 years of significant IFRs shows that most IFRs are never made permanent, and instead remain as technically interim. Because of a lack of incentives for agencies to make IFRs permanent, Congress would need to increase its oversight on IFR usage and consider a legislative fix.