Go in depth on the troubles facing multiemployer pension plans, what is being done to address the growing problems, and what it all means for the construction industry and the economy at large on the latest episode of the ConstructorCast

Intensifying its effort to dissuade the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) from interpreting its new recordkeeping regulations to restrict drug testing or safety incentive programs, AGC of America presses for a formal audience with the top OSHA official.

Today, AGC sent a comprehensive comment letter to the IRS in advance of the July 14 public hearing. The letter offered recommendations that would curtail the proposed regulation’s effects on domestic construction companies. The letter is in addition to the comments sent last week asking for a withdrawal of the rules and, at a minimum, an extension of the public comment period and study of the regulations on industries. Visit AGC’s Action Center and urge your members of Congress to oppose the 385 regulations in their current form.

<p>This week, AGC joined a group of construction employer associations in a letter to Congressional leaders calling for multiemployer pension reform. The letter highlighted how imperative it is for Congress to authorize composite plans for multiemployer plans as soon as possible. Composite Plans enjoy strong support from both labor and management in the construction industry stakeholders and we don’t think paralysis should set in because of the Treasury Department’s rejection of the Central States Rescue plan.  In fact, we think it makes a stronger case for action now on Composite Plans.  </p>

<p>Today, the House passed legislation to address the financial crisis in Puerto Rico. The <u><a href="http://http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/agcleg/downloads/2016-05-23%20Puerto%20Rico%20Letter.pdf">AGC-backed bill</a> </u>would create a debt-restructuring process, empower a federal oversight board to supervise the territory’s fiscal affairs and create a redevelopment authority —with no taxpayer dollars used for a bailout— that will help rebuild Puerto Rico’s infrastructure. As it stands, many Puerto Rican government entities are unable to pay contractors for work completed on government construction projects and the public and private construction markets there remain on life support.</p>

<p>A new <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-05-31/pdf/2016-12494.pdf"><u>rule</u> </a>by the Small Business Administration makes several changes to small business contracting regulations. These changes, set to go into effect June 30, are aimed at increasing small-business competition and enabling small businesses to potentially obtain larger contracts without increasing compliance costs.  In April, AGC <a href="http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/agcleg/downloads/AGC%20Comments%20on%20SBA%20Performance%20of%20Work%20Prop%20Rule.pdf"><u>submitted comments</u></a> on the proposed rule.</p>

<p>The U.S. Supreme Court issued a <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/united-states-army-corps-of-engineers-v-hawkes-co-inc/"><u>ruling</u> </a>that will allow landowners to challenge a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determination that a jurisdictional “Waters of the U.S.” (WOTUS) is present on property where they want to build.  A “jurisdictional determination” significantly impacts how land may be used, dramatically raises costs, and often reduces the feasibility of constructing critical infrastructure. AGC submitted a joint “friend of the court” brief in the case, US Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., making a strong case for why it is vital for contractors to know with certainty whether their property contains a WOTUS. The Court’s findings closely track the points AGC argued in <u><a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/15-290-bsac-American-Farm-Bureau-Federation.pdf">its joint amicus brie</a>f</u>.  AGC was the only trade association to advance the commercial construction industry’s interest in the outcome of this case and, once again, AGC has succeeded in changing facts on the ground. This decision will have a material impact on the way that the Section 404 permit program actually functions.</p>

<p>With Senate action already finished, the House Appropriations Committee this week approved the FY 2017 transportation appropriations bill. Both versions of the legislation maintain the funding levels set in the 2015 FAST Act, with highway funding set at $43.266 billion (up 2 percent from last year) and transit formula funding set at $9.734 billion (up 4.3 percent). Both bills include a key, AGC-backed provision that sets restrictions on the use of a U.S. DOT pilot program that enables state or local grant recipients to utilize local or geographical, economic-based, and veterans hiring preferences on federal-aid highway and federal transit projects. While there is still work to be done, inclusion of this provision puts us in a great position to continue the certification requirements in 2017. Both bills also include the truck driver hours of service provision that would retain use of the truck driver 34-hour “restart” without setting specific times when drivers must rest. There was an attempt in the House Committee to strip the restart language from the bill, but AGC was successful in defeating that amendment.</p>

This week, 132 members of the House of Representatives sent a letter to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Texas) and Ranking Democrat Sander Levin (Mich.) in support of fixing the Highway Trust Fund as part of comprehensive tax reform. Thanks to the AGC members who met with their representatives during the TCC Fly-In or contacted their representatives asking them to sign the letter.

<p>This week, AGC delivered a <a href="http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/agcleg/downloads/2016-05-25%20Letter%20on%20Recordkeeping%20Hearing.pdf"><u>letter</u> </a>to the House Education and the Workforce Committee for a hearing that examined the Occupational Safety & Health Administration’s (OSHA) rule on Improved Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses. AGC is concerned the rule will significantly limit how employers are able to enforce policies that have been established to ensure timely reporting of incidents, as well as implement and enforce other safety and health policies. The rule could discourage employers from administering post-accident drug testing, and the rule would also place employer safety incentive programs in jeopardy.</p>