A Study on the Actual Status of Cost Measurements:  Focusing on Regulatory Impact Analysis

Brief Review of Accreditation Policy For X-Ray Compliance Testing Laboratory The Compli¬ance Test Program has been Implemented Since 2011 and The Updated Regulation was in 2018. According to the implementation progress, adjustments are needed to the dynamics of the problems that arise. In 2021, it is planned to prepare a draft amendment to BAPETEN Regulation Number 2 of 2018; therefore, an analysis of the implementation profile of the regulation is carried out to identify existing obstacles. One of the problems identified is the polemic of the urgency of accreditation obligations for the Compliance Testing Laboratory, which is the institution appointed by the Head of BAPETEN to carry out compliance tests and issue compliance certificates. Currently, 78% of laboratories are not accredited, most of which are importing companies. Therefore, it will have implications for reducing laboratory availability and constraining the compliance test process in health facilities. This paper aims to identify aspects that can hinder the application for laboratory accreditation, especially for importing companies, and the proposed solution that can recommend. This paper uses a regulatory impact analysis approach. The study results show that laboratory accreditation is essential to maintain the quality of services, competencies, and outputs of the laboratory so that four options that LUK can take are proposed in dealing with obstacles in applying for accreditation. This paper can provide contributions in preparing the draft amendments to BAPETEN Regulation Number 2 of 2018.

Download Full-text

Options for Integrating Competition Assessment into Regulatory Impact Analysis

OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform - Regulatory Impact Analysis ◽

10.1787/9789264067110-4-en ◽

2009 ◽

pp. 121-148

Author(s):

Keyword(s):

Impact Analysis ◽

Regulatory Impact Analysis ◽

Regulatory Impact

Download Full-text

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards: Co-Benefits and the Courts in U.S. Cost-Benefit Analysis

Case Studies in the Environment ◽

10.1525/cse.2018.001263 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

pp. 1-10

Author(s):

Arik Levinson

Keyword(s):

Environmental Protection Agency ◽

Power Plants ◽

Impact Analysis ◽

Cost Benefit Analysis ◽

Cost Benefit ◽

Recent Change ◽

Mercury Pollution ◽

Regulatory Impact Analysis ◽

Regulatory Impact ◽

The U.S

In April 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington DC agreed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to delay indefinitely a lawsuit over the Agency’s regulation governing mercury pollution from power plants. Lawyers for the EPA argued that they needed time to evaluate the status of the lawsuit, due to “the recent change in Administration.” The case, Murray v. EPA, centers on the Agency’s analysis of the benefits of reducing mercury pollution. Key to that litigation is the EPA’s treatment of co-benefits—the incidental reductions to pollutants aside from mercury. As of this writing, the Agency has still not decided how to proceed. This case summarizes the EPA’s 2011 Regulatory Impact Analysis at the heart of the legal dispute.1

Download Full-text

Regulatory Process, Regulatory Reform, and the Quality of Regulatory Impact Analysis

Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis ◽

10.1017/bca.2016.20 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 7 (3) ◽

pp. 523-559 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Jerry Ellig ◽

Rosemarie Fike

Keyword(s):

Economic Analysis ◽

Impact Analysis ◽

Regulatory Reform ◽

Executive Branch ◽

Regulatory Process ◽

Quality Analysis ◽

Regulatory Affairs ◽

Regulatory Impact Analysis ◽

Regulatory Impact

Numerous regulatory reform proposals would require federal agencies to conduct more thorough economic analysis of proposed regulations or expand the resources and influence of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which currently reviews executive branch regulations. Such reforms are intended to improve the quality of economic analysis agencies produce when they issue major regulations. We employ newly gathered data on variation in current administrative procedures to assess the likely effects of proposed regulatory process reforms on the quality of agencies’ regulatory impact analyses (RIAs). Our results suggest that greater use of advance notices of proposed rulemakings for major regulations, advance consultation with regulated entities, use of advisory committees, and expansion of OIRA’s resources and role would improve the quality of RIAs. They also suggest pre-proposal public meetings with stakeholders are associated with lower quality analysis.

Download Full-text