EPA Advocacy Can Add Value to a Manufacturer’s Bottom Line

29 October 2014 Manufacturing Industry Advisor Blog

Whether you’re manufacturing widgets or rubber bands, paper products or cheese, one thing most manufacturers have in common is being subject to various regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Manufacturers often experience regulation as an imposition of new, stringent requirements that drive up operational costs. However, there are opportunities to engage in the regulatory process that allow manufacturers to participate in the development of the rules they must follow. In his book, “Effective EPA Advocacy,” Richard Stoll, elected this year as a Fellow in the American College of Environmental Lawyers, breaks down the processes by which EPA develops its rules and policies. He also outlines how companies can become involved in shaping the regulations and policies that affect their operations and their bottom lines.

Manufacturers can be impacted by rules and policy that are developed in several ways, and Stoll specifically addresses several of these, including “informal” rulemaking and “sub-regulatory” decisions.

Informal Rulemaking

Most manufacturers are familiar with the informal rulemaking process – it is the traditional method by which EPA publishes a draft rule for notice and comment and then incorporates and/or responds to those comments in crafting the final rule. Stoll notes that if a company wants to influence the development of rules through this process, then early and frequent advocacy is key. Working with the agency in the planning phases of a new rule provides manufacturers with a chance to influence a rule that is still being drafted. On the flip side, Stoll also outlines the power of the judicial review process, which allows parties to seek review of final agency decisions.

Sub-Regulatory Decisions

Manufacturers are usually less familiar with the use of sub-regulatory decisions, which is the process by which EPA interprets or clarifies its regulations. Sub-regulatory decisions serve an important role for the regulated community, allowing EPA to provide clarity without utilizing the resources to go through the informal rulemaking process.

Sub-regulatory decisions can be in the form of an interpretive memo intended to be responsive to a specific question or a more conventional guidance document developed in conjunction with a rule to guide implementation and compliance. In the end, Stoll notes that the sub-regulatory decision making process is even more informal than informal rulemaking. Also, although EPA relies heavily on this type of guidance and courts will look to it as informative, Stoll points out that it does not have the force of law like regulations. Its development cannot be challenged in court either. But even though sub-regulatory decisions aren’t enforceable per se, to the extent the EPA relies on them in its decision making process, there is value in working with the agency to help establish reasonable guidance.

The Cost/Benefit Analysis

Ultimately, Stoll acknowledges that whether manufacturers engage in EPA advocacy comes down to weighing the cost of compliance against the cost of engaging in the regulatory process. As manufacturers strive to strike this balance, Stoll identifies a number of practices and factors that should be considered, including the following:

  • Informal rulemaking really is informal – any party can request a meeting with EPA on any issue at any time.
  • Start early, and if possible, even before EPA issues a draft rule – EPA is often considering ranges of options. By the time a draft is issued, EPA has already reduced the options under consideration.
  • Find out what rules EPA is developing – review the regulatory agenda; sign up for email alerts from EPA, industry groups, or both; and review trade press.
  • Coordinate your efforts – pooling resources can be cost effective and smart in the right situation, and there can be strength in numbers.
  • Go beyond EPA if necessary – enlisting the assistance of Members of Congress and making your case to the media can be both cost efficient and effective.

Participating in EPA advocacy may seem daunting, but participation can add real value to a manufacturer’s bottom line.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services

Insights

Do You Know What IMMEX Stands For?
16 July 2019
Dashboard Insights
Does The U.S. Need STRONGER Patents?
16 July 2019
PTAB Trial Insights
California Establishes Fund to Combat Wildfire Threats
15 July 2019
Renewable Energy Outlook
There’s No Place Like Home – But Is That a Reasonable Accommodation?
15 July 2019
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
MAGI’s Clinical Research Conference
29 October 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ