CBP Compiling 'Inventory' of Possible Deregulatory Actions; Ruling Process Changes Underway

CBP is developing a repository of possible deregulatory actions that could serve as offsetting actions for regulatory proposals considered "significant" by the Office of Management and Budget, said Alice Kipel, executive director of CBP's Office of Regulations and Rulings (OR&R), during a May 8 interview. Federal agencies, under a January executive order, are required to repeal two regulations for each new regulation seen as "significant" by OMB (see 1702070048). So far, though, OMB has not flagged any trade-related CBP regulations as "significant," Kipel said. "At this time, with respect to the regulations that CBP has in the interagency review process, I am not aware of any trade regulation that has been deemed 'significant' by OMB and offsetting regulations would not be immediately" necessary if it hasn't been deemed significant, she said.

There's "at least one [Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act] regulation that may be in the interagency review process," Kipel said. Regulations with statutory deadlines, such as the drawback provisions in TFTEA, are treated somewhat differently under the executive order, she said. The agencies are exempt from proposing deregulatory action at the time the regulations are published, but are required to identify two deregulatory actions "as soon as practicable," Kipel said. An amendment to CBP's regulations on forced labor imports that follows the repeal of the "consumptive demand" exemption in TFTEA (see 1603010043) "has been drafted and is under review," she said.

Even though there's no immediate need for offsetting regulations, "we in CBP, and specifically in Regulations and Rulings, are evaluating the regulations on which we are working to consider the costs and other implications of those regulations and to identify potential candidates," Kipel said. The agency is also "evaluating all of our current regulations, regardless of whether we're working on them, to see where there may be potential cost savings. At this point we are in the, I would say, pre-decisional, deliberative process stage in terms of developing what I call an inventory of possible deregulatory actions."

To help build that inventory, "we are reaching out to internal and external stakeholders," including the Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC), "and we are making the issue a regular part of communication with stakeholders," Kipel said. This will be an ongoing effort also in consideration of a February executive order for "departments and agencies to take a serious look at regulatory reform on a broad basis," she said. CBP would look to pursue deregulatory actions "regardless of whether they are offsetting a specific regulation," though it's also useful to have an "inventory available for us," she said. The "agency will need to set priorities" for both regulatory and deregulatory actions.

Some work remains before CBP issues a final rule for Enforce and Protect Act regulations, which were issued as an interim final rule last year (see 1608190014), Kipel said. CBP is still waiting until it has "enough experience where we can analyze the comments that we've received and say 'Yes, we should tweak this procedure,' or 'No, this is working really.'" After that, CBP will move forward with a final rule, she said.

Changes to Rulings Processes Underway

CBP is working to streamline a number of areas within the rulings process, Kipel said. For example, as of April 30, the Tariff Classification and Marking Branch within OR&R "has temporarily been split into three branches," she said. The three branches are the "Electronics, Machinery, Automotive and International Nomenclature" branch, the "Chemicals, Petroleum, Metals, and Miscellaneous Classification" branch, and the "Food, Textiles and Marking" branch, she said. Each of the branches has between four and six lawyers "to each supervisor" and was something that CBP proposed in early 2016, Kipel said.

Kipel is "personally very excited about the improved supervisor-to-attorney ratio" and is "hopeful that this will help us get rulings out on a more timely basis," she said. "Whether it can become permanent is dependent on the effectiveness of the split and funds being available for new supervisory positions," she said. The COAC made several recommendations for improving the rulings process at the most recent meeting (see 1703020026).

CBP also began a "comprehensive effort to modernize our case management system" at the end of 2016 that should help toward providing status updates on ruling requests, she said. "Those efforts are ongoing and we are very excited about the prospects," Kipel said. The agency is also "evaluating the feasibility of a pilot project whereby the" National Commodity Specialist Division "might be able to accept electronically ruling requests that are accompanied by a sample," Kipel said.