Recent Projects

The Federal Regulatory Energy Commission (FERC) solicited comment from interested parties on how the Commission should structure their Office of Public Participation to facilitate public engagement. We submitted comments highlighting the potential benefits of public participation by environmental justice communities and identifying best practices that FERC’s Office of Public Participation (OPP) should adopt.

The Committee on Regulation of the Administrative Conference of the United States requested input on best practices for agencies in undertaking periodic review of their existing regulations. We submitted comments providing a number of recommendations.

The Committee on Regulation of the Administrative Conference of the United States requested input on how agencies should solicit public input on alternatives to rules under consideration. We submitted comments providing a number of recommendations.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has proposed to retrospectively and prospectively establish an "expiration date" for each of its regulations. Under the proposed rule, regulations would be automatically rescinded unless HHS first completes a restrospective review of the regulation's effects on small entities pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We submitted comments criticizing the proposal, which is neither lawful nor rational.

As the presidential transition begins, the Institute for Policy Integrity has outlined recommended policy priorities for the Biden administration on climate, energy, and environmental policy, and related social equity outcomes. It is crucial that the incoming administration undertake aggressive reforms that are grounded in science and economics. In recent months, we published a series of reports highlighting actionable, near- and medium-term policy recommendations in several key areas.

As the climate crisis intensifies, it is crucial that we effectively contextualize and consider how policies affect our climate. We have worked hard to ensure that governments, regulators, and courts account for the social cost of carbon in policy and decisionmaking—and a string of recent policy outcomes has created positive momentum.

We submitted joint comments to EPA and the chartered Science Advisory Board noting that the proposal is unnecessary and explaining how it breaks from best practices for cost-benefit analysis of regulations in several significant ways.