On September 23, AGC submitted supplemental comments to a July 14, 2009 Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Council notice of proposed rulemaking, which implemented President Obama's Executive Order 13502 to create new FAR contract clauses to be included in federal contracts should an agency choose to require a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) on a particular federal construction project.AGC originally submitted comments on the proposed rule that encourages (not requires) agencies to consider (not necessarily adopt) a PLA requirement on large-scale construction projects (defined as projects with a total cost to the federal government of $25 million or more) on a project-by-project basis where certain criteria are met.AGC's supplemental comments focused on concerns that a requirement for a PLA might be placed after contract award. AGC opposes this ex post facto imposition as it directly interferes with the relationship between a prime contractor and the subcontractors, and causes massive disruption of the procurement process. AGC strongly urged the FAR Councils to clarify in the Final Rule that agencies, contracting officers and their representatives are forbidden from pursuing such course of action.Read more about AGC's Comments and the Proposed Rule here.

With SAFETEA-LU authorization scheduled to expire on September 30, action is necessary to keep the highway and transit programs operating. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) announced his intention to move a 3-month extension this week out of Committee with floor consideration next week.Chairman Oberstar opposes a longer extension because he believes it will undermine efforts to enact a six-year reauthorization bill. The Senate is preparing to bring to the floor legislation to extend the programs for 18 months until March 2011. Senate committees have already passed the needed legislation, including the Finance Committee, which included a $20 billion transfer from the general fund to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent for the eighteen month extension. The Senate is supporting the administration's request to hold off on a multi-year extension until 2011.

This afternoon the Senate passed their FY 2010 Department of Transportation Appropriations legislation by a vote of 73-25.  The $67.7 billion bill funds the Department of Housing and Urban Development and provides $42.5 billion for the federal-aid highway program, an increase of over $1.5 billion from the FY 2009 level, and includes $11.1 billion for transit investments, $480 million above the President's request. The bill also provides $3.5 billion for the Airport Improvement Program, the same amount appropriated for the past two years.The House bill, which was passed in July, provides slightly less funding for highways, transit and high-speed rail improvements. House and Senate negotiators will now begin to conference their respective bills to address the differences in funding levels.

After months of negotiations, the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus (D-Mont.), unveiled the "America's Healthy Future Act" this week. The bill was unveiled without any Republican support and may fail to receive the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster. This bill marks the final major health care reform bill to be released this year. Although three committees in the House passed H.R. 3200, "America's Affordable Health Choices Act" in July, the bills have not yet been meshed together and floor time has not been reserved for a vote by the full House. Meanwhile, the Senate HELP committee passed the "Affordable Health Choices Act," which will ultimately have to be merged with the Finance Committee's bill.  The president hopes to have a final bill to sign into law before the end of the year.The three main bills contain key differences and to date AGC has only opposed the House's "America's Affordable Health Choices Act." The House bill fails to address the root cause of rising costs, will likely eliminate competition and restricts economic growth with punitive penalties for employers. The Finance Committee's bill appears to be the best effort yet to lower health care costs, increase coverage and improve the quality of care. However, the bill includes significant cuts to doctors under Medicare and new tax on employer-provided health care benefits, and it fails to properly address medical malpractice insurance.  AGC hopes that Congress can find a bipartisan bill for health care reform.Comparing the billsSenate Finance Committee: creates co-ops to purchase health care that operate at the regional, state and national level. Insurers cannot reject applicants based on pre-existing conditions or renewals. All individuals are required to have health insurance and it can be purchased through exchanges. The mandate comes with subsides for low income individuals and tax penalties for individuals who fail to purchase coverage. There is no employer mandate. Employers with over 50 employees that do not offer coverage must reimburse the government for each employee receiving health care subsidies.Senate HELP Committee: creates a public plan option to compete with private insurance. Insurers cannot reject applicants based on pre-existing conditions or renewals. All individuals are required to have health insurance and can purchase coverage through exchanges. The bill includes subsides for low income individuals and tax penalties for individuals who fail to purchase coverage. The HELP Committee's plan contains an employer mandate for employers with over 25 employees, and failure to provide adequate coverage results in a $750 penalty for each uninsured full time worker each year. The plan makes tax credits available for small employers to purchase insurance.Tri-Committee (House Bill): creates a public plan to compete with private insurance. Insurers cannot reject applicants based on pre-existing conditions or renewals. All individuals are required to have "acceptable health coverage" that can be purchased through new exchanges and subsides are made available for low income individuals, while tax penalties exist for individuals who fail to purchase coverage. The House bill includes an employer mandate for employers with payrolls exceeding $500,000 and includes a payroll tax penalty ranging from 2 to 8 percent. The plan includes some tax credits for the smallest of employers.

In an address to the AFL-CIO convention on Tuesday, Senator Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) unexpectedly announced that some senators had come up with a "compromise" on the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and that it would pass this year. This announcement remains more wishful thinking on the part of top EFCA supporters as no official compromise has been made and there are not enough votes in the Senate to stop a filibuster at this time. The small group of pro-EFCA senators has been trying to find a compromise to the card check provision, and it is believed that any compromise would still require mandatory arbitration, among other items opposed by AGC.  AGC remains opposed to compromise on this bill as it is likely to be used as a Trojan Horse to pass EFCA in its current form.It is important to continue communicating your opposition to elected officials on the Employee Free Choice Act, any compromise or cloture in the Senate on the bill.  Please use the AGC Legislative Action Center to send a letter to your members of congress in opposition to Card Check or any compromise.The key Senate targets remain:Mark Begich (D-Alaska)Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)Mark Pryor (D-Ark.)Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)Mark Udall (D-Colo.)Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)Evan Bayh (D-Ind.)Mary Landrieu (D-La.)Max Baucus (D-Mont.)Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)Harry Reid (D-Nev.)Arlen Specter (D-Pa.)Mark Warner (D-Va.)Jim Webb (D-Va.)

The fourth and final installment of AGC's summary of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454) explains the major provisions of Title IV (Transitioning to a Clean Energy Economy) of interest to the construction industry. Subtitle A - Ensuring Real Reductions in Industrial EmissionsThe purpose of this section of the bill is to safeguard the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing industries against foreign companies not subject to comparable emissions regulation in two ways.  The first would compensate eligible domestic industrial sectors and subsectors for compliance costs incurred under the bill through an Emission Allowance Rebate Program.  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would determine which facilities should be eligible for rebates through a rule based on an assessment of economic factors, including 1) the energy or greenhouse gas intensity in a sector and 2) the trade intensity in such sectors.  The second would require the president in 2020 to impose on importers a requirement to submit emissions allowances if there is no international agreement in place by 2018 that would ensure globally coordinated reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.  In the absence of an international agreement, the importer allowance requirement could be waived only if Congress passes a joint resolution approving the president's decision to do so.Subtitle B - Green JobsThis section would authorize additional funding for the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Worker Training Program from $125 million to $150 million annually.  It would allow the Secretary of Education to award competitive grants to partnerships for the creation of curricula "focused on emerging careers and jobs in the fields of clean energy, renewable energy, energy efficiency, and climate change mitigation, and climate change adaptation."  The bill would establish a publicly-available, web-based information and resources clearinghouse to assist with career and technical education and job training in the renewable energy sector.  Finally, the bill would establish a Green Construction Careers demonstration project "to promote middle class careers and quality employment practices in the green construction sector among targeted workers and to advance efficiency and performance on construction projects...."Subtitle C - Consumer AssistanceThis section would provide an Energy Tax Credit and Energy Refund Program to compensate low-income households for any reduction in purchasing power due to price increases in energy and other goods and services resulting from the bill.Subtitle E - Adapting to Climate ChangeThis section would create a National Climate Change Adaptation Program within the U.S. Global Change Research Program.  It would establish a National Climate Service within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to develop climate information, data, forecasts, and warnings, and to distribute information on climate impacts to state and local decision makers.  The bill would distribute emission allowances to states for implementation of adaptation projects, programs or measures contingent on the completion of an approved State Adaptation Plan.  Eligible projects include those designed to respond to extreme weather events such as flooding or hurricanes, changes in water availability, heat waves, sea level rise, ecosystem disruption and air pollution.The bill states that it is the policy of the U.S. government to use all practicable means and measures to assist natural resources to adapt to climate change and establishes a Natural Resources climate Change Adaptation Panel, chaired by the White House Council on Environmental Quality, as a forum for interagency coordination on natural resources adaptation.  The Panel would be required to develop a Natural Resources Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, and federal agencies, as well as states, would be required to develop adaptation plans.  The bill would also establish a National Resources Climate Change Adaptation Fund for a variety of adaptation activities consistent with these plans.What Can Members Do?Read the "AGC Looks at Climate Bill H.R. 2454" series, the introduction,Title I summary, Title II summary and Title III summary.Take action and write your Senator using the AGC Legislative Action Center. (AGC, its Chapters and members sent over 2,000 letters to Capitol Hill in response to H.R. 2454).Explore the potential threats and opportunities for the real estate and construction industries in climate legislation.  This is an evolving discussion draft document resulting from AGC's meetings and discussions with representatives of the real estate and construction industries and other related groups.Go to www.congress.gov and search under "H.R. 2454" to read the bill.Read information about greenhouse gas emissions associated with the construction industry.Learn low-cost ways contractors can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from equipment.

AGC member Joel Zingeser (Grunley Construction Co. Inc., Rockville, Md.) today testified before the House Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management regarding contracting with the federal government. Chairwoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) held the hearing in order to examine the small business programs of the Architect of the Capitol, the General Services Administration, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and the Smithsonian Institution.Zingeser's testimony focused on several contracting reform policies that AGC has advocated for including better accounting of subcontractor participation, contract bundling, HUBZones and agency consistency.For more on the hearing, click here.

A rule requiring federal contractors and subcontractors to use the Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' E-Verify system to verify their employees' authorization to work in the U.S. is now in effect.  The rule applies to federal solicitations and contract awards government-wide beginning September 8.   Click here for information on the free webinars DHS is offering on the E-Verify program.The rule applies only to employers with direct contracts with the federal government and, via a flow-down requirement, to their subcontractors.  It does not apply to employers working only on federally funded projects or on other projects not under contract with a federal agency.The rule requires the insertion of a new clause in certain federal contracts and subcontracts.  Prime contracts below the simplified acquisition threshold of $100,000 and those with performance terms of less than 120 days are excluded.  The clause requires the contractor to use E-Verify to confirm employment eligibility of all new employees hired during the contract term and all current employees assigned to work on a federal job within the U.S.  It also allows, but does not require, the federal contractor to use E-Verify to confirm eligibility of all employees, regardless of whether they are assigned to work on a federal job.  Currently, use of E-Verify to confirm anyone other than a new hire (including applicants and current employees) is prohibited. The FAR Council issued the final rule in November 2008.  In response to a legal challenge to the rule and in order to give the new administration time to fully review the matter, the government agreed to suspend the rule on three separate occasions, but, in a July 8 statement, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that DHS will "push ahead with full implementation" of the rule without further delay. Although the litigation continues, we are advising contractors to carefully review all new solicitations and contracts for federal projects and comply with any E-Verify requirements at this time.  AGC will continue to monitor all related litigation and legislation and will report on significant developments.Click herefor the E-Verify Supplemental Guidance for Federal Contractors issued by USCIS on September 8. Click here for DHS's list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's) for Federal Contractors and E-Verify.  Click here for more information about critical components of the rule.  Click here for information about free webinars on the E-Verify program.Further guidance on immigration compliance is available in an MP3 download of a live educational session held at AGC's Annual HR Professionals Conference in June 2008.  An immigration law update will also be provided at AGC's next HR Professionals Conference, which will take place October 27-29, in Atlanta, Ga. Click here for conference details and registration.

Last night the president laid out his priorities for health care reform, many of which are in line with a compromise version being crafted in the Senate Finance Committee.  The speech comes on the heels of the Committee releasing a draft of a framework for legislation - short of actual legislation. The Committee's legislation is expected to be released next week.The Finance Committee draft framework does not mandate that employers provide insurance; replaces a public option with CO-Ops, contains an individual mandate beginning in 2013; includes small business tax credits; and would create state-based health insurance exchanges. Specifically, the draft framework covers: Employer Responsibility - Employers would not be required to offer health insurance coverage.  However, employers with more than 50 full-time employees (30 hours and above) that do not offer health coverage must pay a fee for each employee who receives the tax credit for health insurance through an exchange. The assessment is based on the amount of the tax credit received by the employee(s), but would be capped at an amount equal to $400 multiplied by the total number of employees at the firm (regardless of how many receive a credit in the exchange).Small Business Tax Credits - Similar to the House bill, credits are limited to firms with fewer than 25 employees and average wages below $40,000, and the maximum credit available would be 50%.Individual Responsibility - Beginning in 2013 all citizens would be required to purchase health insurance or receive coverage from an employer with the penalty for failing to obtain coverage being as high as $950 for individuals and a maximum penalty per family of $3,800.Revenue Provisions - Tax high cost plans with a 35% excise tax for plans above $8,000 per individual, $21,000 for family. Additional revenue provisions include taxes on the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry and health insurance industry.Democratic leaders have made September 15 a deadline for the bipartisan group of six senators crafting the Finance Committee plan to reach a consensus, followed by consideration in committee and a vote in the Senate in early October. President Obama hopes to have both the House and Senate pass bills and conference them so that he can sign a bill by Thanksgiving.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) plans to limit the length of an extension of highway and transit program spending authorization in order to press for a multi-year transportation authorization bill. It is unclear at this time how long an extension Chairman Oberstar will support. SAFETEA-LU expires on September 30, and Congress must take action to allow the programs to continue uninterrupted.Prior to its summer recess, Congress passed legislation to transfer $7 billion into the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) to ensure that there would be no slow down in reimbursements to states for ongoing construction projects. Congressional Budget Office projections indicate that HTF revenue, coupled with the general fund transfer, is sufficient to keep the trust fund solvent for several more months.The Senate is expected to soon bring up legislation reported from Committee prior to the summer recess to extend highway and transit authorization for 18 months until March 2011. The Senate intends to include in the authorization extension an addition to a general fund transfer to ensure the HTF remains solvent through March 2011. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) indicated that she intends to continue drafting a multi-year bill during this extension. An amendment to limit the extension in the Senate to less than 18 months is expected.The Obama Administration has called for an 18-month extension for the program, coupled with an additional infusion of general fund revenue to keep the programs at a steady funding level. The president does not appear to be ready to address a long-term program authorization at this time. AGC continues to advocate the need for six-year reauthorization legislation with significantly increased revenues to address the nation's growing transportation infrastructure deficit while working to ensure there is no disruption in program funding in the interim.