The phrase "a less stringent standard" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing criteria or requirements that are not as strict or demanding as others.
Example: "The new regulations will allow for a less stringent standard in the approval process for small businesses."
Alternatives: "a more lenient standard" or "a relaxed standard".
"It is surprising that the E.P.A. is supporting a less stringent standard than another agency," he said.
While many clean water advocates are seeking a standard of three parts per billion, lobbyists for water suppliers, developers and manufacturers have been seeking a less stringent standard.
Other information, often including e-mail addresses, is protected by a less stringent standard that puts the burden on consumers to take action.
The program will compete directly with a less stringent standard recently developed by industry and the federal government that companies and recyclers say makes more economic sense.
The ruling overturns a decision by the Appellate Division of State Superior Court that applied a less stringent standard, that golfers could be held liable for hurting others in the normal course of play.
Under the bill passed on Wednesday, Congress would establish a less stringent standard, saying an impairment qualifies as a disability if it "materially restricts" a major life activity like seeing, hearing, eating, walking, reading or thinking.
Under the current law, some stockbrokers are required to act in a customer's best interest — but that is a less-stringent standard that allows them to sell products that are suitable, but not necessarily in a client's best interest.
A less stringent criterion for producing mappings is therefore appropriate for some users.
Law enforcement agencies can forfeit property based on a mere "preponderance of the evidence," which is a much less stringent standard than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in criminal convictions.
In the half-century following Brown, the Court extended the reach of the Equal Protection Clause to other historically disadvantaged groups, such as women and illegitimate children, although it has applied a somewhat less stringent standard than it has applied to governmental discrimination on the basis of race (United States v. Virginia, 1996; Levy v. Louisiana, 1968 ).
The decision on Wednesday, by Judge Jed S. Rakoff of Federal District Court in Manhattan, has sent citizens' groups, lawyers, administrators and environmentalists at federal and state agencies scrambling to interpret the ruling, and to minimize what they fear could be a rush by shipping operations to apply for dumping permits under the prior, less stringent standard.
