CONFUSING rules from US federal agencies under the Clean Water Act (CWA) are hurting the transport construction sector's ability to fulfill the goals of the landmark Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), according major construction industry lobbies.
Overregulation serves only to delay critical infrastructure improvements and increase costs without providing any environmental benefits, said the brief to the US Supreme Court from American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA) and National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (NSSGA) .
In the joint brief ARTBA and the NSSGA say existing regulations are 'impacting the ability to efficiently supply the materials needed for and to build the infrastructure projects'.
That is if they must follow the rules attendant to the new Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, as well as increasing the costs of public works across the country, reports the American Journal of Transportation.
In Sackett v EPA [Environmental Protection Agency], ARTBA and NSSGA are asking the high court to determine the extent of the federal government's regulatory powers under the (CWA). The associations contend that the methods the EPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers use to determine the CWA's scope should be abandoned.
Currently, the test used by the EPA and Corps have 'no inherent limiting principles' and empower the agencies to assert federal jurisdiction 'well beyond the limits set by Congress,' according to the associations.
A major issue is the EPA's definition of what constitutes 'waters of the United States' (WOTUS) under the CWA. The agency has advocated for a broad definition of WOTUS to encompass virtually any wet area.
ARTBA and NSSGA have maintained that reading WOTUS in such an expansive way improperly creates permit obligations for features such as roadside ditches, which serve the necessary safety function of collecting water during and after rain events.
'The transportation construction industry needs regulatory clarity to deliver economic benefits from record new federal highway investment,' said ARTBA president and CEO David Bauer.
'The court has the opportunity to end decades of unpredictable agency decisions, deliver clarity and help us demonstrate that infrastructure improvements and environmental stewardship need not be conflicting objectives,' Mr Bauer said.
Said NSSGA president and CEO Michael Johnson: 'For too long, our members have spent countless hours and dollars navigating an unclear and often punitive permitting system that arbitrarily will consider dry land a federally regulated water. We need clarity from the court.'
The court is expected to hear arguments in late October, with a decision expected in the first half of 2023.
SeaNews Turkey
Overregulation serves only to delay critical infrastructure improvements and increase costs without providing any environmental benefits, said the brief to the US Supreme Court from American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA) and National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (NSSGA) .
In the joint brief ARTBA and the NSSGA say existing regulations are 'impacting the ability to efficiently supply the materials needed for and to build the infrastructure projects'.
That is if they must follow the rules attendant to the new Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, as well as increasing the costs of public works across the country, reports the American Journal of Transportation.
In Sackett v EPA [Environmental Protection Agency], ARTBA and NSSGA are asking the high court to determine the extent of the federal government's regulatory powers under the (CWA). The associations contend that the methods the EPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers use to determine the CWA's scope should be abandoned.
Currently, the test used by the EPA and Corps have 'no inherent limiting principles' and empower the agencies to assert federal jurisdiction 'well beyond the limits set by Congress,' according to the associations.
A major issue is the EPA's definition of what constitutes 'waters of the United States' (WOTUS) under the CWA. The agency has advocated for a broad definition of WOTUS to encompass virtually any wet area.
ARTBA and NSSGA have maintained that reading WOTUS in such an expansive way improperly creates permit obligations for features such as roadside ditches, which serve the necessary safety function of collecting water during and after rain events.
'The transportation construction industry needs regulatory clarity to deliver economic benefits from record new federal highway investment,' said ARTBA president and CEO David Bauer.
'The court has the opportunity to end decades of unpredictable agency decisions, deliver clarity and help us demonstrate that infrastructure improvements and environmental stewardship need not be conflicting objectives,' Mr Bauer said.
Said NSSGA president and CEO Michael Johnson: 'For too long, our members have spent countless hours and dollars navigating an unclear and often punitive permitting system that arbitrarily will consider dry land a federally regulated water. We need clarity from the court.'
The court is expected to hear arguments in late October, with a decision expected in the first half of 2023.
SeaNews Turkey
