In the late 1990s, the Massachusetts Office of Technical Assistance for Toxics Use Reduction (OTA), a nonenforcement agency of the commonwealth of Massachusetts dedicated to the on-site provision of pollution prevention assistance, developed a sector-based program intended to demonstrate a fast path to a common-sense environmental regulatory system. The program, funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as the Massachusetts Auto Body Project, became known as the Collision Repair Auto Shop Help (CRASH) Course, which was the title given to the training materials and documents produced.¹ The CRASH Course demonstrated a new way of simplifying the many complex rules faced by a small business sector that, like many other small business sectors, had never received very much enforcement attention.² The method of presenting requirements also created a "positive" enforcement context for pollution prevention and other best management practices (BMPs). The chief officials of the relevant environmental enforcement agencies of the state signed a joint letter, distributed with the project's materials, to indicate their united agreement on the approach.³

The Massachusetts Auto Body Project used the concept of "good faith" to produce a simplified version of the rules. The good-faith approach allowed for the inclusion of pollution prevention and other BMPs in a way that made them more than just suggestions. No rule promulgation was performed, yet the simplified version of the rules applies the force of law. This Dialogue recommends broadening the application of good faith to more effectively cover activities of regulated entities before they come in contact with agencies, and sending a clear message to all actors, not just high performers, that the Agency will distinguish between those making an effort to comply and/or reduce their impact, and those who do not evidence responsibility. The Dialogue examines the Massachusetts Auto Body Project and how it demonstrates a methodology for building a regulatory system that makes practical or common sense, and why the concept of good faith is important to the future evolution of our system of environmental governance. The first part of the Dialogue explains the specific use of good faith in the project and other contexts. The Dialogue then applies the concept of good faith to the larger issue of the relationship between government and regulated citizenry.