NAHB Weighs in as EPA Considers Changes to its Regulatory Development Process

Filed in Codes and Standards, Environment by on August 24, 2018 3 Comments

gearsAs part of the Trump Administration’s ongoing regulatory reform efforts, EPA has requested public comments on how it can be more transparent concerning the scientific data it relies upon to establish new federal environmental regulations. The Agency also aims to be more consistent when evaluating the costs and benefits of proposed rules.

NAHB encouraged EPA to make all scientific data supporting a regulatory action available for public review and to use a more consistent method for evaluating costs and benefits of proposed rules.

In its comments, NAHB asked EPA to extend the scientific data transparency proposal to proposed rules as well as Agency guidance documents.

While EPA is already required to consider the costs and benefits of proposed rules, underlying federal environmental laws vary considerably in how economic costs are considered during the federal rulemaking process.

NAHB urged EPA to develop a consistent methodology for conducting cost-benefit analyses during the federal rulemaking process. NAHB also requested that EPA perform a cost-benefit analysis of regulations during the required retrospective reviews of existing regulations to ensure those regulations are still cost-effective and functioning as intended.

Finally, NAHB asked EPA to perform cost-benefit analyses on federal permits as well. NAHB has long objected to EPA’s failure to perform cost-benefit analyses on federal permits.

For additional information about the scientific data transparency comments, contact Tamra Spielvogel; for information about the cost-benefit comments, contact John Kosco.


Comments (3)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Jan Scott Rowland says:

    How about including the identity of the lobbyist (s) pushing the various actions/decisions?

  2. Lamar Turk says:

    There needs to be a fine tuning of the requirement on water retention ponds of residential subdivisions in order to limit use of them to a standard more manageable. Overkill comes to mind, all from designing building and maintaining. Too much water remains behind long after the last rain within them and all it does is breed more mosquitos and cause constant vegetation maintenance!! Sergstone and silt fencing should be adequate under most circumstances to clean the majority of the run off without getting stupid about a little bit of silt which has never been proven to kill anyone!! Get real after about 18 years of proof that the aftermath of a retention ponds is more harmful than releasing in areas they have been running through for a million years!!

Leave a Reply to Lamar Turk Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *