In an August 13 letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Â鶹ÊÓƵsays that consistent and transparent cost-benefit analysis can improve regulations and limit arbitrary and capricious decisions. The construction industry is extensively regulated by the agency; and EPA regulations account for most of the annual estimated benefits and costs of all major federal regulations. Â鶹ÊÓƵurges the agency to apply cost-benefit analysis principles to the maximum extent possible under law and consider the full range of costs imposed on small businesses.
Â鶹ÊÓƵhighlights six rulemakings affecting construction where EPA’s cost benefit analysis is particularly troublesome. In these examples: the costs significantly outweighed the benefits; the analysis was performed with deficient data; the agency relied on non-quantified or indirect benefits to justify tighter controls; or the baseline assumptions about industry practices were outdated or ill-informed.
For more information, contact Leah Pilconis at pilconisl@agc.org.