- Put together and publish an analysis of what the critical habitat rule would cost small businesses
- Consider alternatives that would prove less costly to small businesses
The Office of Advocacy is also charged with seeing that other federal agencies comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act. That law requires the agencies to explain the fiscal impact of their proposed rules on small businesses, unless they “certify” that the rule will not have a significant effect on them.
In the case of the pygmy owl, the service went the certification route, and to that the Office of Advocacy took exception.
“The Fish and Wildlife Service is incorrectly measuring the impacts of the rule on small business,” the office said in its comments last month on the habitat designation. Furthermore, “the Fish and Wildlife Service has not explained to the public what benefit the proposed rule would provide for the pygmy owl.”
For years, NAHB has insisted that environmental regulations such as those used to establish habitat under the Endangered Species Act must be clearly justified by good scientific data and formulated with a consideration of their impact on the local economy.
It is refreshing, encouraging and about time to hear that same argument come from an agency of our federal government.
For more information on the Office of Advocacy and its work representing the interests of small businesses in the regulatory process, click here.
For more information on NAHB’s work with SBA's Office of Advocacy, e-mail Bruce Lundegren or call him at 800-368-5242 x8305.
For more information on the pygmy owl critical habitat designation, e-mail Christopher Galick or call him at x8663.
Marty Mitchell is chair of the NAHB Environmental Issues Committee.
| 
