New Regulations.gov Features

That's a brilliant idea. I mean because most people like me would stay longer in a page if its easy to navigate. I suggest that it would be better if you would create a forum here.
outbound telemarketing | webthesurfi rugs webdesign | Cebu City | Living Cebu

One of the issues that will reduce wide participation may be that users first have to find the docket or NPRM or whatever they're interested in. If regulations.gov became a tool instead of its own website, agencies would use it on their own sites to manage their rulemakings. This would provide the appearance and functionality of a topic-dedicated site.

I'd like to suggest that it be possible to support a dialogue on each individual provision or "slice" of an issue. That way, people could find just the aprt of a new regulation that they care about, and make a suggestion there. This will help focus the feedback and encourage wider review and replies to comments. Instead of having to read comments on topics you don't care about, you'll be able to find just the stuff you do care about.

Remember that Regulations.gov Exchange will no longer accept posts after Tuesday, July 21st. So far your contributions have been excellent, and we have been thrilled with the quantity and substance of your recommendations! Using your feedback, we hope to modify and improve Regulations.gov with your preferences in mind.

Please know that all contributions are welcome regardless of your familiarity with the rulemaking process! After all, our goal is to simplify the current system and increase public participation!

Shanita, eRulemaking Program

The video indicates that the new "submit a comment" button will produce a filtered list of items that are accepting comments. My recollection is that some agencies accept comments even after the final date: someone who asks the agency may be able to submit, while someone who simply uses the list will not. Has this issue been addressed? (If not, there is a problem in any case, but the button will add emphasis.)

If you truly want a transparent and democratic system, the most effective way is to integrate a simple voting mechanism for upcoming regulations. The vote ("yay" or "nay") will not directly matter one way or the other except to encourage a constructive, open debate among individuals who come visit the site. In a similar fashion, each comment could be voted for or against. The top voted comments for those in favor and those against should be displayed on the front in a side-by-side fashion, which will create a much more informative and interesting page at a glance. At the end of the day, you are allowing the community to interact at a much more constructive level on important matters.

Regulations.gov should manage a website with a non .gov URL, e.g., eRulemaking.us. The use of a non .gov domain would distinguish the site from the formal APA dockets on Regulations.gov.

The website would contain IPDs categorized by agency and issue.

eRulemaking.us would:

l. Provide a listing of the URLs of IPDs dealing solely with regulations identified in the Unified Agenda.

2. Be interactive, accepting comments on how to improve the site and on the comments of other stakeholders.

3. Be linked to the listing of particular rulemakings on regulations.gov.

4. Make explicit that the IPDs do not necessarily represent the views of a federal agency.

5. Contain only those IPDs which allow for opposing points of view.

The way I get to these these reports involves:
1. Go to Regulation.gov home page,
2. Click on 'Advance Search' (very small type),
3. Click on Reports tab, upper right corner,
4. Click on "Click here to access Agency Statutorily Mandated Reports" bottom left corner,
5. Click on the report that I want.

It doesn't appear possible to bookmark any of these pages (beyond the home page).

Is there a better way of getting here? Thanks in advance

On any document for which public comment is requested in response to specific questions, the questions should be listed prominently on the page for that document, rather than forcing the user to go through the whole Federal Register PDF to find the specific questions being asked. If additional questions are added by the agency, those questions should be added to the top list of questions also. Each question could open up to create a thread of comments related to that question.

I just happened to come across this site today for the 1st time, and am very interested. First off, thank you for the opportunity! I am wondering how "common" people/voters such as myself can become more informed and aware about these Government sites? Any suggestions are welcome.

1) Keyword searches. Is this search based on the executive summary of the document or the document content itself? I imagine a summary would not be nearly as complete.

2) Keyword searches: Allow autofilling for keywords. Similar to a Google search where one enters a partial search, the system can suggest more particular words. This could also be available in the Advanced Search, but this feature is very typical on internet searches.

3) Add hyperlinks to the Results grid's Documents/Document ID column that users can go to view or download the actual document.

4) It appears that users can subscribe to a particular document in the Results grid's Action column, but how would one go about subscribing to the general topic or related topic areas? This would include email, RSS, etc.

5) Also, add a URL link back to the site we are commenting on.

The government should establish a process whereby they provide links to non-governmental e-rulemaking websites such as http://www.thecre.com/blog/ and http://www.thecre.com/creipd/.

The USG should continue their excelent work on e-rulemaking but should also encourage actions by the private sector to improve regulatory transparency.

the FAQ says to go to the "comment or submission" section of the home page, but there is nothing on that page labeled as such. the closest label is "search documents." that is not at all the same thing as submitting comments!

I am not sure that I am interpeting the video on the new design correctly but I hope you are going to do this, particularly for large dockets.

Navigating through a large docket like EPA's mercury rulemaking for coal fired utility boilers is difficult because of the number of total documents. It would be useful if the docket had subfolders. One folder would include agency documentation prior to the NPRM. The second could be the Federal Register documentation. The third folder could be comments and the fourth could be the materials that the agency generates in responding to comments.

Relying soley on keyword searches is a dicey proposition. Empirical research has long shown that NO ONE is as good a keyword searcher as he or she thinks. Browsing is often a necessary supplement and this feature would make this easier.

The PACER docket system has a rudimentary hyperlink folder system; I doubt if this is too difficult.

I like the design of the new site. It makes good use of white space and seems less confusing. But I fail to see the reason for prominently displaying a feature that allows users to search the system by comment ID. I can see a Docket ID number search but not a comment number search.

I do a lot of searches that seek information in dockets, both regulatory and judicial. I cannot imagine that individuals approaching regulations.gov often come with a known Commment ID number that they want to retrieve. A docket ID retrieval would be far more common.

I would be deeply surprised if your statistics on the public side show that items are often retrieved by document ID as opposed to docket ID. Return users to a docket will often move on to a new comment etc.

Finally, it is much easier to remember a docket ID number because it is shorter.

Just over the weekend, we posted an entry to the Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP) blog on Whitehouse.gov to gain even more feedback on "Improving Online Public Participation in Agency Rulemaking." In this expanded discussion, we have seen excellent discussions around six topics:

-Regulatory education
-Public involvement
-Understanding the substance of proposed action
-Institutional change
-Increasing public access
-Feedback on exchange

Visit http://blog.ostp.gov/2009/06/12/improving-online-public-participation-in... to join the discussion and tell us what you think! Again, thank you for your great ideas and participation.

Shanita, eRulemaking Program

Some users may notice that their posts are no longer on Exchange. While we are excited to see that the public is participating in the rulemaking process, we ask that all comments for specific regulations be withheld from these discussion topics. In order to have your comment considered on your specific issue, you will need to go to www.regulations.gov to find the corresponding regulation and submit your comment to the federal agency issuing the rule.

Regulations.gov Exchange's purpose is to gather feedback for improvements, and so far we are impressed with your suggestions.

Jeff, eRulemaking Program

I find it frustrating to have to know how to find a rule by the date it was published in the FR. I often want to know the individual changes to a rule, so looking up the most recent version on the "electronic code of federal regulations" isn't helpful. It also doesn't give the background info for the regulation. This is often more important when trying to understand how to enforce a regulation.

As a regulator, I often know the name of the regulation, so searching by topic isn't helpful. If I could search or be notified of all changes to the FR as it relates to the CAA or a specific reg, that would be extremely helpful. I am better at my job when I fully understand a rule. Knowing its history is part of that, as many of them are controversial.

How should we know when a rule has been vacated by a court decision? For example, 40 CFR 63 Supart DDDDD was vacated but it still exists in the electronic code of federal regulations. Shouldn't this information be flagged? Even more importantly, 40 CFR 63 Subpart B has one specific item that has been vacated. How is the general public suppose to know about this?

Also, maybe search results should be powered by google. The current search engine sucks.

I see little advantage in creating 10 new websites for the President and his administration to collect input from individuals when he'll be extremely selective about it. Case in point he purports to be the most transparent administration to date. Nothing could be further from the truth. Prove me wrong: allow free access to all his past records, medical, academic, travel, friendships, jobs and post them, let every single citizen group demanding them see them....doesn't he always talk about preaching by example? i.e. "if we disarm, the whole world will disarm"....
-Or perhaps we could effectively get the time allotted normally to discuss, view and review what Congress is passing whether it's a unanimous vote or not.
-How about: we could stop characterizing everything the President wants to [pass without scrutiny as an impending-crisis-coming-if-not-solved kind of issue...such as healthcare.

I think it would be great to add a public forum where citizens and officials could discuss various regulations and policies. The process would not only give the administration some insight as to what the people think, but it would also allow people to learn more about various topics from each other. People could learn why others feel the way they do about various subjects, potentially opening minds and expanding understanding.

You should provide a page listing new proposed regulations from our federal and states governments, that we can offer our voted opinion on each of these issues. I would like my opinion seen and heard on the internet and back at the federal and state government level. Thanks.

Video not loading completely....

I like the basic functions on my igoogle page. Is it possible to allow users to create a page that can be updated and incorporates adding features, changing themes, advanced search preferences, video features, threaded discussions, and gadgets? There is no sense reinventing the wheel. One button at the top of the browser page will allow users to access their page more easily and be able to check for updates without going through too many hoops.

Folks should be able to sign up to get advance notice on planned regulations, opportunities to comment on them and final regs issued--similar to the Google Alerts feature.

Currently, users can see a sort of "master listing" of the comments/comment letters submitted for regs when they do a general search. However, there is no outward identifier regarding what organization or individual submitted the comments, leaving users to have to click through each submission (since the master list only includes a generic name) to find the relevant ones they are looking for. I would highly suggest that some sort of identifier (preferably the organization/individual name) be used to better designate the comments submitted as part of this master listing/search results. Thanks.

One of the problems of the current system, which I suspect will continue with the revised system, is the rigidity of even the advanced search option. It's one of the hazards attendant to web-based forms. The advanced search will undoubtedly be nice, but even better for more advanced users might be a third option, maybe distinguished from the advanced web search form by a title such as "expert search," that would be modeled after the kinds of search options available to users of Westlaw and Lexis-Nexis -- to allow Boolean logic, proximity searching, and truly "advanced" searches.

I second Matt Madia's suggestion that the eRulemaking team refer to the ABA report on "Achieving the Potential: The Future of Federal E-Rulemaking;" it provides excellent guidance on making substantial renovations to Regulations.gov. Another task force report released last year that contains useful principles for improving Regulations.gov is "Transparency and Public Participation in the Rulemaking Process," available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1292911 (see especially pages 11-14). These and other reports, studies, and resources on e-rulemaking can be found at e-rulemaking.org.

Very interesting. Finally a way to reach the public on their views. Great page!

Instead of spending time with a forum, why don't you spend the time getting regulations.gov to actually work? Right now, it's a crapshoot whether or not one can actually access the site. Usually, you have better odds at winning the lottery.

Very useful and eligible design
Congratulations
Sarah James
Financial Manager

Clearly, you've figured out how to use commented threading on regs.gov/exchange for pages like this. That's awesome. Threaded comments would be extremely valuable for comments on regulations. That way, people could build off of one another's suggestions and not beat a dead horse.

Comments threads could be available for any given docket and every official comment (ie. document). You'll see that commented threading is very widely used throughout the Web now for constructing useful feedback to the writer of an article. Similarly, it would be very helpful if this feature were available for the authors of regulations.