If the EPA would say: “You are not allowed to build any new buildings in city X, because that will reduce drinking water quality” you have to think about whether this is a power that the EPA should have or shouldn’t have because there are tradeoffs between drinking water quality on the one hand and other public goods.
Having a law that specifies what kind of actions the EPA is allowed to take to improve drinking water quality instead of just letting the EPA to do whatever it wants makes sense.
The company will also contribute to local education and preservation efforts — including preparing a historical context report of the events of the Mexican War and the Civil War that took place in the area as well as replacing missing ornaments on a local historical marker.
With regulations like this, it seems there’s a lot of regulatory overreach and it would be useful to reign it in.
If the EPA would say: “You are not allowed to build any new buildings in city X, because that will reduce drinking water quality” you have to think about whether this is a power that the EPA should have or shouldn’t have because there are tradeoffs between drinking water quality on the one hand and other public goods.
Having a law that specifies what kind of actions the EPA is allowed to take to improve drinking water quality instead of just letting the EPA to do whatever it wants makes sense.
The FAA requires SpaceX to:
With regulations like this, it seems there’s a lot of regulatory overreach and it would be useful to reign it in.