The Center for Progressive Reform (CPR) released a report last week titled, “The Hidden Human and Environmental Costs of Regulatory Delay.” The report looks at three case examples, mercury pollution, ship ballast water discharges, and crane and derrick safety.

For each example, the report provides compelling statistics that underscore the importance of timeliness, not just substance, in regulatory decisionmaking.

• Although the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act required the Environmental Protection Agency to write by 2000 regulations curbing power plant mercury emissions, EPA has yet to set a satisfactory standard. Among other potential benefits, mercury regulation “could prevent up to 380 fatal heart attacks and 210 non-fatal heart attacks each year” and “could also prevent as many as 231 children from developing mental retardation every year,” according to studies compiled for the CPR report.
• EPA has also failed to regulate ship ballast water discharges which have introduced non-native invasive aquatic species into American water ways. Two of those species, the zebra mussel and the quagga mussel, “together cost approximately $1 billion annually in losses from clogged water pipes to expensive equipment installed to clean-up and prevent infestations,” according to the report. The ecological impact is severe too, as the zebra mussel is expected to wipe out 140 native species by 2012, the report says.
• For years, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has doddered on a rule that would strengthen protections for crane and derrick workers who face a number of risks during day-to-day operation. OSHA acknowledged the need for the regulation in 1999, but, even with the support of industry, the agency has yet to finalize it. “[E]very year that goes by without the new rule in place another 53 people die and 155 are injured in accidents that could and should have been prevented,” the CPR report says.

The examples CPR cites could be extrapolated to many other regulations that have sat on agency shelves for far too long. (Climate change and food safety spring to mind.)

The report provides good ammunition for advocates in the fight against a common objection of opponents of regulation. They often claim that agencies must wait for a more complete scientific picture to emerge or that agencies should further study the expected economic impacts of regulatory activity. Whether those claims are valid or trumped, they must be weighed against the high cost of regulatory delay.

For more information and to download the report, visit CPR’s website.

Image by Flickr user technicool, used under a Creative Commons license.