eCFR Section Scrutiny Dashboard

Deregulation opportunity signals based on restrictive language, discretion, and complexity

Scrutiny Score Distribution

Top Contributors to High Scores

How to Read These Metrics

Scrutiny score (0–100): Composite signal of potential review priority. Higher scores generally indicate language patterns associated with tighter constraints, heavier dependencies, or drafting complexity. E.g., if a section is both restrictive and discretionary its score will be much higher and it may be a policy that leads to runaway costs and departmental overreach.

Restrictive terms: Counts words and phrases such as "must", "shall", and "may not". Semantically, these indicate mandatory obligations or prohibitions that may increase cost or compliance burden.

Discretionary terms: Counts language such as "may", "at the discretion of", and similar qualifiers. Semantically, these indicate room for agency or operator judgment which may lead to inconsistency, scope creep, or overreach.

Cross-references: Counts references to external legal sources (for example, other CFR titles, U.S.C., or Federal Register citations). Semantically, these increase dependency on external authority and increase reviewer cognitive load which may lead to a higher preponderance of unintended side effects.

Long sentences: Counts sentences above the configured length threshold. Semantically, these often correlate with dense drafting and higher parsing burden for implementers and reviewers.

Sections

Title Chapter Section ID Heading Score (0-100) Word Count Restrictive Count (density) Discretionary Count (density) Cross-reference Count (density)