U.S. Transportation Agency Seeks to Slash Regulations and Costs; Virginia Lawmakers Cautious

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) wants to hear citizens’ ideas on how it may update its rules to cut costs and boost efficiency while keeping the country’s transportation system safe. But some Virginia lawmakers caution that those recommendations should come from safety experts, not the public, and say “arbitrarily” loosening roadway regulations could be harmful to supply chains and the economy.

DOT’s request for information is one way the agency is complying with two executive orders signed by President Donald Trump aimed at maximizing effectiveness and reducing regulations.

According to the request, DOT is seeking public feedback on existing regulations, guidance, paperwork requirements, and other regulatory obligations to assist the agency in identifying how its rules can be modified or repealed without breaking any laws.

As part of this effort, DOT must identify and report to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs on regulations in one or more specific areas. This includes regulations that “are based on unlawful delegations of legislative power” and “that raise serious constitutional difficulties,” as well as ones that impose significant costs on companies and businesses without providing benefits to the public that justify these costs. The agency did not provide examples of current regulations that match these descriptions.

It is unclear exactly how individual states’ transportation systems are involved in this effort.

Marshall Herman, director of communications for the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), said in a statement to the Mercury that the department is aware of the DOT’s request. She said the collection and reviews of information that might be relevant to the request are currently underway.

Comments and information, with the identification of “Regulatory Reform RFI,” are due by May 5 and can be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, by email to transportation.regulatoryinfo@dot.gov with the subject line “Regulatory Reform RFI,” or by mail to U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the General Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590.

The agency offered a list of 12 questions to help guide commenters in completing its request.

One of the dozen questions reads: “Are there regulations, guidance, or reporting requirements that have become outdated, and if so, how can they be modernized to better accomplish their objectives?”

Another question asks, “​​Does DOT currently collect information that it does not need or use effectively?”

Virginia House of Delegates Transportation Committee Chair Karrie Delaney, D-Fairfax, said her office is monitoring the agency’s proposal, but is “troubled” by the administration’s approach to regulation reform.

“There’s definitely room to reconsider rules that get in the way of timely completion of critical infrastructure, but those proposals should come from safety experts, not solicited through an online submission form,” Delaney said.

Besides the safety concerns for drivers and pedestrians, Delaney said “arbitrarily deregulating our roadways will also burden our supply chain and economy beyond the damage we are beginning to see from this administration to trade.”

She said she hopes the White House will work with Congress to make any changes through the “regular process” in order to “properly weigh all considerations” of changing certain rules.

DOT will be required to identify and report to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs on regulations in one or more of the following categories:

– Unconstitutional regulations and regulations that raise serious constitutional difficulties, such as exceeding the scope of the power vested in the Federal Government by the Constitution;

– Regulations that are based on unlawful delegations of legislative power;

– Regulations that are based on anything other than the best reading of the underlying statutory authority or prohibition;

– Regulations that implicate matters of social, political, or economic significance that are not authorized by clear statutory authority;

– Regulations that impose significant costs upon private parties that are not outweighed by public benefits;

– Regulations that harm the national interest by significantly and unjustifiably impeding technological innovation, infrastructure development, disaster response, inflation reduction, research and development, economic development, energy production, land use, and foreign policy objectives

– Regulations that impose undue burdens on small businesses and impede private enterprise and entrepreneurship.

by Nathaniel Cline, Virginia Mercury

Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com.