Problem Statement
Define the problem the proposed regulation aims to address. Cite data, incidents, or trends demonstrating the need for regulatory action. Explain market failures or public harms.
4.8
on G2
Free Government Template
Download a free regulatory impact assessment template in Word, PDF, or Markdown. Or bring your notes, PDFs, or a recording and let Docsie AI fill in every section for you.
Generated by Docsie AI. See it turn real videos into finished guides →
Use this template to impact analysis of [proposed regulation].
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Category | Government |
| Owner | [Team or owner] |
| Version | [Version number] |
| Effective Date | [Date] |
| Review Cycle | [Monthly / Quarterly / Annual / Event-based] |
| Status | [Draft / In Review / Approved] |
Define the problem the proposed regulation aims to address. Cite data, incidents, or trends demonstrating the need for regulatory action. Explain market failures or public harms.
| Item | Details | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
[Add context, assumptions, exceptions, evidence links, screenshots, calculations, or reviewer comments.]
Present at least three alternatives: (1) no action, (2) the proposed regulation, and (3) a less prescriptive alternative. Compare their effectiveness, feasibility, and political viability.
| Item | Details | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
[Add context, assumptions, exceptions, evidence links, screenshots, calculations, or reviewer comments.]
Provide a table quantifying costs and benefits for each alternative over a defined period. Include direct compliance costs, administrative costs, monetized benefits (health, safety, environmental), and net present value.
| Item | Details | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
[Add context, assumptions, exceptions, evidence links, screenshots, calculations, or reviewer comments.]
Identify all parties affected by the regulation — regulated entities, consumers, government agencies, and third parties. Describe the nature and magnitude of impact on each.
| Item | Details | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
[Add context, assumptions, exceptions, evidence links, screenshots, calculations, or reviewer comments.]
Assess environmental effects of each alternative. Include projected changes in emissions, waste, water quality, or land use where applicable.
| Item | Details | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
[Add context, assumptions, exceptions, evidence links, screenshots, calculations, or reviewer comments.]
Provide a phased implementation schedule including rulemaking, public comment, final rule, compliance deadlines, and enforcement start. Use tables for quantitative comparisons. Cite data sources. Maintain objectivity.
| Item | Details | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
| [Item or requirement] | [Describe the relevant detail, evidence, or decision] | [Owner] | [Open / Complete] |
[Add context, assumptions, exceptions, evidence links, screenshots, calculations, or reviewer comments.]
Document review conclusions, approvals, unresolved items, and next review date.
| Role | Name | Date | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preparer | [Name] | [Date] | [Notes] |
| Reviewer | [Name] | [Date] | [Notes] |
| Approver | [Name] | [Date] | [Notes] |
Template Structure
Use this government template as a starting point, then customize each section to match your internal workflow, evidence, and signoff needs.
Define the problem the proposed regulation aims to address. Cite data, incidents, or trends demonstrating the need for regulatory action. Explain market failures or public harms.
Present at least three alternatives: (1) no action, (2) the proposed regulation, and (3) a less prescriptive alternative. Compare their effectiveness, feasibility, and political viability.
Provide a table quantifying costs and benefits for each alternative over a defined period. Include direct compliance costs, administrative costs, monetized benefits (health, safety, environmental), and net present value.
Identify all parties affected by the regulation — regulated entities, consumers, government agencies, and third parties. Describe the nature and magnitude of impact on each.
Assess environmental effects of each alternative. Include projected changes in emissions, waste, water quality, or land use where applicable.
Provide a phased implementation schedule including rulemaking, public comment, final rule, compliance deadlines, and enforcement start. Use tables for quantitative comparisons. Cite data sources. Maintain objectivity.
Write a Regulatory Impact Assessment in an objective, analytical government tone. Structure with:
Define the problem the proposed regulation aims to address. Cite data, incidents, or trends demonstrating the need for regulatory action. Explain market failures or public harms.
Present at least three alternatives: (1) no action, (2) the proposed regulation, and (3) a less prescriptive alternative. Compare their effectiveness, feasibility, and political viability.
Provide a table quantifying costs and benefits for each alternative over a defined period. Include direct compliance costs, administrative costs, monetized benefits (health, safety, environmental), and net present value.
Identify all parties affected by the regulation — regulated entities, consumers, government agencies, and third parties. Describe the nature and magnitude of impact on each.
Assess environmental effects of each alternative. Include projected changes in emissions, waste, water quality, or land use where applicable.
Provide a phased implementation schedule including rulemaking, public comment, final rule, compliance deadlines, and enforcement start.
Use tables for quantitative comparisons. Cite data sources. Maintain objectivity throughout.
Agency: State Department of Environmental Quality | Docket: DEQ-2026-WQ-0018 | Analyst: Environmental Policy Division | Date: February 2026
Urban stormwater runoff is the leading source of water quality impairment in the state's rivers and estuaries. Monitoring data from 2020–2025 shows that 67% of urban waterways exceed EPA benchmarks for total suspended solids (TSS), and 43% exceed limits for dissolved metals (copper, zinc). Current permits, last updated in 2015, lack numeric discharge limits and rely on best management practices (BMPs) that have proven insufficient as impervious surface area has grown 22% statewide.
| Alternative | Description | Effectiveness |
|---|---|---|
| A — No Action | Maintain current BMP-based permits | Low — continued degradation projected |
| B — Proposed Rule | Numeric TSS and metals limits with 5-year compliance | High — models project 60% pollutant reduction |
| C — Enhanced BMPs | Require advanced BMPs without numeric limits | Moderate — estimated 30% reduction |
| Category | Alt. A (No Action) | Alt. B (Proposed) | Alt. C (Enhanced BMPs) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Compliance costs (regulated entities) | $0 | $420M | $180M |
| Agency administration | $2M | $18M | $8M |
| Health benefits (reduced waterborne illness) | $0 | $95M | $40M |
| Ecosystem services (fisheries, recreation) | -$60M (loss) | +$310M | +$130M |
| Property value impacts | -$45M (loss) | +$85M | +$35M |
| Net Present Value | -$107M | +$52M | +$17M |
Alternative B yields the highest net benefit despite higher compliance costs.
Under Alternative B, modeling projects the following improvements by Year 10: - TSS reduction: 58–65% in urban waterways - Dissolved copper: 45% reduction, bringing 80% of monitored sites into compliance - Aquatic habitat: 120 stream-miles expected to be delisted from the impaired waters list - Carbon footprint: Green infrastructure requirements offset an estimated 12,000 metric tons CO2e/year through urban tree canopy and bioretention
| Date | Milestone |
|---|---|
| March 2026 | Proposed rule published; 90-day public comment period opens |
| June 2026 | Public comment period closes; public hearings held in 5 regions |
| October 2026 | Final rule adopted by Environmental Quality Commission |
| January 2027 | Phase 1: Large MS4s (population >100,000) — monitoring begins |
| January 2028 | Phase 2: Medium MS4s (population 50,000–100,000) — monitoring begins |
| January 2029 | Phase 1 compliance deadline — numeric limits enforceable |
| January 2030 | Phase 2 compliance deadline — numeric limits enforceable |
| January 2031 | Phase 3: Small MS4s — monitoring begins; compliance by 2033 |
Bring what you already have: meeting notes, an old PDF, a spreadsheet, a walkthrough recording. Docsie AI drafts every section of this regulatory impact assessment template in the structure above, then exports to Word, PDF, or Markdown for review and signoff.
Free to try. The template above was itself generated by Docsie — see it work on real videos at /tutorials/.
Service delivery for [public service]
Emergency procedures for [jurisdiction/facility]
Application instructions for [grant program]
MOU between [agencies]
Requirements for [procurement]
FOIA/public records for [department]
Template FAQ
Common questions about downloading and generating a regulatory impact assessment template.
Q: What is a regulatory impact assessment template?
A: A regulatory impact assessment template is a structured document for impact analysis of [proposed regulation].
Q: Is the regulatory impact assessment template really free?
A: Yes. The regulatory impact assessment template is completely free to download in Word (DOCX), PDF, and Markdown formats. No signup or credit card required to download.
Q: How do I turn a video into a regulatory Impact Assessment?
A: Upload a process walkthrough, training recording, or screen capture to Docsie. The AI analyzes the video and generates a complete regulatory Impact Assessment using this template's structure — every required field auto-filled from the footage.
Q: Can I edit the regulatory impact assessment template after downloading?
A: Yes. The DOCX format opens in Microsoft Word or Google Docs. The Markdown format imports into Notion, Confluence, Docsie, or any markdown editor. Customize fields, add your branding, and adapt to your internal workflow.