Approved January 10, 1991, by the WEF Executive Committee

Statement of Issue
Federal environmental statutes and regulations are becoming increasingly detailed in nature and scope. In some instances, this trend is having a chilling effect on efforts to address environmental problems by discouraging innovative problem solving, and by diverting limited resources from more to less serious environmental problems.

Background
Congress has been enacting increasingly detailed laws as a reaction to public pressure that not enough is being done to clean up the environment. In order to meet these prescriptive statutory mandates, EPA has, in turn, promulgated regulations which are highly detailed and specific. Some states, ironically, perceive a lack of resolve on the part of Congress and EPA, and have enacted their own prescriptive regulations. Many recent statutes and regulations not only establish the end-point, but also specify how to achieve that end.

WEF Position
Environmental statutes and regulations should clearly articulate, and differentiate between, goals and requirements. Generally, requirements should set flexible schedules and end-points for establishing and measuring compliance. Schedules, when included, should reflect a realistic assessment of the technical and practical feasibility of meeting the requirements and should incorporate flexibility.

To the fullest extent possible, statutes and regulations should encourage innovative and flexible approaches, including the use of economic incentives, to reaching the stated goals and objectives. Whenever possible, the regulated community should be given the latitude to select the methodology or technology used to comply with the statutes and regulations.

Support and Rationale
WEF believes that incorporation of these principles into environmental statutes and regulations will encourage the regulated community to pursue innovative approaches to solving environmental problems. Often, the regulated party is best able to develop solutions which are protective of human health and the environment, and which are cost-effective by being based on conditions which are unique to a particular site or facility.

Providing an end-point but leaving the details to others allows regulators to focus their limited resources on other environmental problems which otherwise might go unaddressed.

In short, WEF believes that in the vast majority of cases, human health, the environment, and the resources of all will benefit from a statutory and regulatory approach which tells the regulated community what to do, but not how to do it.