2025 Trenchless Technology Editorial Roundtable – Insights from Industry Associations

Eideberg

From our perspective, it’s important to stress that ours is a global industry. Thirty percent of all equipment made in the U.S. is destined for exports. Our supply chains for which we have spent decades establishing are truly global. So, any time you have a policy that fundamentally alters or forces you to rethink how you conduct business in a global economy, it’s going to have an impact. In the case of tariffs, they are taxes on American businesses, they are taxes on American farmers, on American contractors, American households, and they are ultimately going to drive up cost of making equipment in the United States.

We know from the first tariff wars of 2018, 2019, when we primarily saw tariffs on steel and aluminum, as well as imports from China, it drove up the cost of making equipment in the U.S. between 7 to 10 percent, depending on the type of equipment. Ag equipment was 7 to 8 percent, construction was 8 to 9 percent and mining was 10 percent. That’s not an insignificant percentage. You are talking about big pieces of equipment.

Tariffs made it more expensive to make equipment in the United States and again, those tariffs are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what we are potentially facing this time around, with not only tariffs on steel and aluminum and imports from Canada and Mexico but possibly double-digit tariffs on the imports from around the world, whether it’s Europe, Japan, Korea, etc.

So, this is obviously something we have already seen the cost of making equipment go up. One example, portable generators. The cost of making portable generators in the U.S. has already gone up between 10 to 15 percent already because of tariffs on steel, aluminum and some components coming in from overseas. This has resulted in a price increase of 7 to 10 percent for customers.

Manufacturers already try to absorb as much of the cost increases as they can. But they can only absorb so much, so ultimately some of these increases will be pushed down to the end user.

If you are a municipality and you have already planned for a construction project, you’ve locked that project in and have applied for a matching grant from the federal government and have your contractor in place and you know what your costs are going to be. Now, all of a sudden, the contractor’s costs may go up because they are renting some of the equipment or had to buy new equipment for that project.

What happens to that project? It’s been budgeted, it’s been approved and so it will have a highly disrupted impact on the end-users, in this case, contractors but all end-users. It’s bad news upon bad news upon bad news.

We can get into the fact that tariffs are inflationary, we can get into the uncertainty. I can tell you that all of the member companies that I have been talking to, the CEOs, they all have been doing the same thing. They are adjusting production downward because of the very bearish market conditions, they are putting R&D on hold, they are delaying hiring, they are just buckling down.

And none of that is good news.

2021-2023 were good years for our industry. We ended 2024 year-to-year down and 2025 is not looking particularly great.

Carlson

Kip was right on about the issues that he raises. Contractors are just like manufacturers and suppliers. They want clarity and they also want to have predictability for the next six, 12 or 18 months, especially as our communities are planning projects out that far.

In addition to the tariffs, the way this administration is not very clear, that’s it’s very day-to-day as to what is going on and that disrupts the attitude of the market. Nobody knows prices.

A lot of our contractors are trying to put language in their bids and contracts to protect them. It’s going to be a challenge for the next few years. We also have something else to take into consideration.

There a lot of the IIJA dollars that are still making their way into the market. We still have a lot, for federal projects, we have Buy American provisions that were enacted, which are also raising costs and trying to get materials in from other countries. It’s a double-down effect and it’s going to affect us all.

White

You guys have nailed it on the head. There is a lot of whiplash around whether tariffs “would be enacted, won’t be enacted” and businesses trying to plan for that. It’s very difficult to plan both ways, right?

One of the other pieces that Kip highlighted that is important is that tariffs for these utilities are already on top of a lot of inflationary pricing that has been in effect for the last few years. So, it has really increased those costs and takes away dollars from projects and future planning to maintain this infrastructure.

One of the things that we see interesting from NASSCO’s members, is around some of the relationships just going across the border to Canada. It’s generally been the norm for these countries to utilize contractors and companies within their borders.

What we are now seeing are a lot of these cities, especially in Canada, are saying ‘let’s hold off’ using any U.S. contractors at all. And even though there has not been any proverbial law or executive order saying you must use Canada contractors, we are seeing a lot of these cities and municipalities saying, “we don’t know what’s actually going to happen and we don’t want to be on the wrong side of it, so we are going to push back and not use any of these U.S. contractors”. So, they are not going to be able to cross the border and assist on these infrastructure projects.

Wyman

There are significant impacts to the natural gas pipeline industry from President Trump’s new tariffs, such as increased costs for essential materials like steel and aluminum.

Earlier this month , a 25 percent tariff was imposed on all steel and aluminum imports. The idea is to bolster domestic production but there is increasing concern about disruptions to the supply chain and increased project costs.

While I haven’t heard enough to speak with certainty about what industry is doing to mitigate these impacts, I’ve heard suggestions about diversifying the pool of suppliers, adjusting contracts to include flexible pricing, force majeure provisions, and other policies to allow for adjustments in response to these tariffs.

Izzard

Tariffs have definitely caused some headaches in the trenchless industry, mainly by increasing the cost of materials and equipment. Many of our members are looking for alternative suppliers, both locally and internationally, and trying to better plan ahead to avoid surprises. We also see more collaboration across the supply chain to keep projects moving forward.

Carlson

NUCA was very involved and engaged in this bill and crafting it. It actually passed two days after our annual Washington Summit in Washington, D.C., so we were all excited about that. The problems that we have seen over the last few years are the implementation of the act.

The Biden administration did, in our view, a poor job in getting the money out to the different agencies. A lot of rules, regulations and policies involved and the way they implemented the Buy American provisions, there wasn’t a lot of clarity. And we are still seeing that.

But now we are at the tip of starting to see some of that money really going into the communities; however, the problem that we are seeing is that a lot of the money is going to the front end of projects. Communities plan projects12 or 18 months out and when they go to implement the project, the money is not there.

It’s been a big challenge, and we are trying to, when this bill ends in 2026, re-authorize the act in the upcoming Congress, which will be a challenge.

White

NASSCO was similarly instrumental in the IIJA and some of the programs that came through that funding mechanism. The implementation was definitely rocky, especially around Build America, Buy America Act (BABA).

A lot of our members had no idea where to start and were looking to us on how to figure out, how to solve this. We had to go back and say, “we don’t know (the details) either”. We can only provide what was heard and seen but there was nothing really defining those guidelines for our members, these contractors and manufacturers.

That rollout was really shaky, even around the funding mechanisms and money actually getting out to these utilities. We’re just now seeing all the money from fiscal year 2024. No projects for fiscal year 2025 have been funded yet.

Granted, the continuing resolution was just passed (in March) which carries over the $2.6 billion from fiscal year 2024, but there are still a lot of projects that need to be implemented and in a timely manner.

Fiscal year 2026 will be interesting. Republicans control all parts of Congress and the Administration, so they have an opportunity to pass a real budget and what happens with FY2026 will be really interesting and to see whether that full $2.6 billion actually gets approved for these projects.

It’s fortunate that a lot of the states have an SRF funding program, and they have money to sustain some of these projects for the next few years. I do think there’s been a slow roll in how to get that funding out to these projects and certainly some concern around environmental justice and DEI programs; where with any initiative or any project with those initiatives that funding may or may not be pulled.

I do think that IIJA as a whole was instrumental, though, and we are seeing a lot of projects come to our members.

Eideberg

Talking about the infrastructure projects that could be under way or the ones that we are waiting on, our industry, we looked at this just a few weeks ago so it’s a timely question. We are only tracking in terms of 50 percent, and that’s a generous number, of the funds that were included in the IIJA that are currently deployed or in the pipeline to be deployed.

We have a huge opportunity in terms of making sure that the promise contained in that bipartisan piece of legislation and what it will do for our nation’s infrastructure that is actually put to good use. We are obviously concerned with the speed with which it is moving. It’s not fast enough. Some of the regulatory challenges that were brought up earlier that are slowing this down.

Not only do we need the infrastructure investment in order to compete in the global economy, we have member companies that manufacture equipment all across the country. And if you are, for example, building pavers in Columbia, South Carolina, not only do you obviously need infrastructure projects to sustain your business, but you need good infrastructure to get those products to customers, not only around the country but around the world.

Right now, our infrastructure just isn’t there to meet the needs of businesses and consumers alike. There is a concern over the speed that this is moving. I think one thing that is not getting enough attention is what is going to happen next year.

There is a huge infrastructure fatigue in Congress right now. No one wants to talk about it right now. If you look at what is on Congress’ plate this year in terms of what they got to navigate in terms of spending bills, not only do they have to deal with the massive tax package that the Administration has made a priority, which is going to cost a whole lot of money, they ideally have to pass a farm bill, which is also going to cost a lot of money.

There is a lot of pushback, particularly among conservatives in the House, on how you make all of these big, large bills budget neutral. And then, in 2026, the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) is up for re-authorization again, which is a high priority for everyone.

It is not to be confused with the package that was passed and signed into law by President Biden. If you talk with members of Congress right now, they are looking at you with this blank stare, as if to say, what do you mean you want more money for infrastructure — I thought we solved this a few years ago?

So, we are concerned not only with implementation of the current bill, but what the challenge will be for all of us next year when we got to go back to Congress and say that the HTF needs to be reauthorized, again. I think that’s going to be a massive fight that we all are going to have to roll up our sleeves for, because we are going to encounter a lot of thoughtful and maybe not so thoughtful folks on the Hill who say, we just gave you a gazillion dollars a few years ago, and you want more?

That’s the biggest concern from our perspective because obviously the two are different and if we can’t keep the HTF solvent and sustainable in terms of sustainable funding for the long-term, our infrastructure and every job that depends on infrastructure, albeit a manufacturer or contractor or utility, we’re all going to be in deep trouble.

Wyman

Unfortunately, there were not many “opportunities” for the natural gas distribution industry in terms of investments in the IIJA. In fact, there were many efforts to restrict access to natural gas through over-the-top climate policies included (although more in the Inflation Reduction Act than IIJA).

However, expansion of the 45Q tax credit offers promise to pipeline construction. 45Q is a federal incentive designed to support infrastructure investment in carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) projects. Specifically, 45Q offers financial incentives to entities that capture and either store or use carbon dioxide instead of releasing it into the atmosphere.

Overall, the 45Q tax credit acts as a catalyst for infrastructure investment in the CCUS sector, helping scale up carbon capture technologies and supporting a lower-carbon economy. Much of this will require significant pipeline construction, so we’re excited about this important tax incentive.

In terms of challenges, project permitting continues to be the leading impediment to pipeline construction. While some reforms have been made, there is much left to be done.

All of these issues are not directly related to IIJA, but the harmful impacts of permit delays are certainly touching infrastructure projects in other sectors funded with IIJA resources.

Also, requirements under BABA continue to impede important energy projects. While the concept of “Buy American” is nothing new and a laudable goal, enduring problems with finding all equipment, parts and materials domestically is challenging, to say the least.

Challenges include increased costs, constraints on supply chains, uncertainty with regard to the waiver process, and of course workforce capacity challenges. Increasing demand for domestic manufacturing at a time when we already don’t have enough workers seems to exacerbate an already daunting problem.

Izzard

The IIJA has been a big positive for our industry. It’s put a spotlight on underground infrastructure — like water, sewer, and broadband — which is exactly where trenchless technology shines. We’re seeing more projects funded and more interest in methods that minimize disruption.

Of course, there’s still a learning curve for some municipalities and challenges in navigating the funding process, but overall, it’s a major opportunity for growth.

White

There certainly is an uphill battle ahead about how we get the funding that is technically already authorized for fiscal year 2026 for IIJA, fully funded. One of the biggest influential factors for this current Administration is around how to pay for these tax cut extensions. What we are seeing is coming through regulation rollback. One of the big initiatives is the 10-1 rule, which means for every new regulation or initiative that gets put out there, 10 have to be taken away. Trying to balance all of these regulations being rolled back along with cuts from the EPA as far as reduction in workforce from some of the state and local government levels, it definitely poses a significant issue for a lot of NASSCO members where enforcement and compliance of these regulations often drives a lot of the projects that we work on. So, enforcement and compliance are taken away, coupled with this reduction of workforce, it often leaves cities and utilities struggling or essentially the work not being done that needs to be done. I know ASCE has just put out another lovely infrastructure report card and we didn’t change; we’re still a D+…We just did this whole IIJA infrastructure package and we did a lot of work, yet here we are still not making a move upward. That quite simply sums up what we are looking at, we are not investing enough and clearly not doing enough. But the conversation back to the Administration here, we have to continue to push forward and continue talking about the importance of it.

Eideberg

It’s a thankless task to advocate for infrastructure spending because it’s something that everyone takes for granted. It’s not sexy. The best thing we can do, in my mind, for infrastructure as a policy priority is to go back to the days of the earmarks. That’s when it worked. A Congressman or Senator could go back home and say look, I got you this new bridge or new stretch of road or this new utility or we’re burying the power lines to make them more resilient. The days of the earmarks are largely gone. I think we as an industry, we have to be relentless in our advocacy for infrastructure and keep at it. It’s not something lawmakers are getting calls on from their constituents. Forgetting that the first 10 different calls they are getting are going to be on issues not related to policy and then once they get calls about policy, it’s going to be about the border, fentanyl, immigration and nothing to do with infrastructure. It’s probably the very last priority. So, we have our work cut out for us on this. Infrastructure is certainly something that every single American should care about whether they know it or not. I think that instead of coming at it from just roads and bridges but maybe power utilities, energy extraction, shipping. Everything is infrastructure when you think about it. Maybe that’s the way to change the narrative because I’m not sure people care about better roads, or bridges. They should but I don’t think they do.

Carlson

I think we have all been talking about the same challenges we have, especially with this Administration and the changes that it is making. We also need to start thinking outside the box. NUCA recently had the opportunity for our past chairman Dan Buckley with Garney Construction to testify a few weeks ago before the water transportation subcommittee on the SRF funding. You could just feel in the room from all the legislators that there were other funding mechanisms available. Something that NUCA has fought for a number of years and brought to the table, was that we need to remove the cap on private activity bonds. Just like they have for roads, we need to have that for water infrastructure. There are a lot of different ways to fund wastewater treatment plants such as private public partnerships, that aren’t always using the traditional SRF method or going to the federal government for the major funding source. We need to look at thinking outside the box, it’s something NUCA and our members are really pushing for is lifting that cap.

Wyman

This is important, not so much for the gas pipeline construction industry, but certainly stakeholders in other markets should be concerned about cuts to federal funding. Examples include water infrastructure. The EPA is facing proposed 65 percent in cuts, and the Clean Water and Drinking Water SRF programs will likely be hardest hit. IIJA provided an unpreceded $55 billion for water and sewer improvements, which is a good start but not a panacea for a trillion-dollar problem. Cutting funding is a horrible idea but this is what many on the Republican side are looking to do. Also, broadband deployment. The IIJA provided $42-plus billion to the states for broadband deployment. Several Republicans believe this is too much money to send to states, especially with ongoing growing skepticism about FCC maps intended to identify ‘unserved’ and ‘underserved’ areas. These disputes often put a bullseye on the back of programs supported by government funding (especially this government). The second Trump administration means a lot of good things for the construction industry, especially regarding natural gas and pipelines, which have been under constant attack for years. However, agencies with oversight over other important infrastructure markets are at risk, and we need to be ready to respond to that. Some of us already are.

Izzard

The current leadership continues to focus on infrastructure, and that’s good news for us. There’s growing interest in sustainable and resilient infrastructure, which trenchless methods support. That said, political shifts can bring uncertainty, so we’re staying engaged to make sure underground infrastructure remains a priority.

Eideberg

I feel like I’m like Debbie Downer. In some ways it’s pretty easy, and I’m not the first person to make this observation. It’s pretty easy to know what the President is going to do because he tells us about it all, whether we listen or not. As concerned as we are about these tariffs, he’s been talking about this since the 1980s. He’s not talking about infrastructure. Period. That tells me that it’s not a priority. He’s also not talking about the Farm Bill. That’s not a priority for him. What is he talking about? He’s talking about fundamentally altering the way the global economy works and the rules of global trade. Immigration, that’s a priority. We would do well as infrastructure stakeholders to adjust our expectations but not to give up. To continue to push the Administration on the need for continued investment in infrastructure. As you recall, President Trump talked about a big, beautiful infrastructure bill way before Congress passed one on President Biden’s watch. President Trump had a much bigger number in mind. There is an opportunity there to remind him that this was his idea all along and to get him to refocus on that. But I think that’s probably the second half of this Administration. The Administration’s priorities the first two years are not going to be on infrastructure. Our job is to remind him of the critical role that infrastructure plays in moving the economy forward and creating family-sustaining jobs in ensuring that we are the most competitive country in the world. That we can continue to attract foreign-direct investment but spur homegrown investments, entrepreneurship, job creation, etc. I think there is an opportunity, but I don’t think it’s in the short-term. We really need to be laser-focused on making sure the Administration doesn’t lose sight of the fact that the job is not done and hopefully get them to pivot toward that in the second half of the Administration.

Carlson

I’ll double-down on those comments in that his goal or mission is for long term manufacturing comeing back to the United States. As we all know, manufacturers looking to build plants here, the first thing they look at is what is in place with the infrastructure, what are my roads to get my product out, what is the water that I need, what is the power that I need, what is the manpower? So, this all does go hand-in-hand with his objectives to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. And Kip is right, we need to remind him of that. It all starts with the HTF bill and the reauthorization of SRF funding. Those are things that NUCA is going to be pushing for.

White

You all are absolutely right. The idea of continued conversation on the importance of this infrastructure is vital. The thing I find interesting is that some of these programs are already set for at least the end of 2026. We need to ensure that the funding follows through. The other thing that I think is a worthwhile conversation when we talk about infrastructure funding is something that NASSCO has been talking about for some time. If you don’t actually want to put more funding forward then why don’t we require asset management plans associated with the infrastructure that’s being put in place. This requires that the utilities and the owner have to have a plan to be able pay for and sustain it for a long period of time. It doesn’t require extra funding, it just requires some proper planning and asset information gathering. Let’s look at this long-term vs. “Yes, we got it in the ground and check the box for how we did it”. That asset management piece is a huge component of what we have been leveraging and talking about within our member group. The importance of being able to meet compliance needs and other regulatory needs all gets derived from the asset management program.

Eideberg

Since the IIJA was passed and signed into law, questions we keep getting are where’s the money, when do we know the money is going to be spent, how do we track it, how do we get ahead of it, how do we plan for projects in the pipeline or have been greenlit to go on line and so on. In the context of making the government more efficient and more responsive, which is what this Administration cares a lot about, I’m not sure they are focusing on that. And that’s the one thing we keep hearing about from our members, the manufacturers, their dealers and their dealers’ customers. That they simply don’t know how to plan ahead because they don’t know where the projects are going, how much money has been earmarked, when it will be allocated, when the permitting process will be done. And that to me, seems like a big opportunity for us, to work on that efficiency. I think there is a lot of time wasted there. Wouldn’t it be great if there was a portal somewhere in the federal government, you can go in and look at every single dollar that’s been allocated, which county or municipality is bidding on projects, how much they are putting in.

Wyman

I’d have to say we shouldn’t expect much more than level funding for most funding programs, such as surface transportation, but again, agencies like EPA can expect proposals to cut funding for at least the next four years. In terms of opportunities, tax incentives for energy production offer promise to the energy sector. As for other markets, proposing regular cuts in funding does open the door for opportunities for private investment in public infrastructure. Increased use of private activity bonds and other vehicles to spur public-private partnerships related to water/sewer projects might stand a better chance than in past years.

Izzard

We expect strong demand to continue, especially in water and broadband sectors. But we’ll need to be ready for challenges like inflation, workforce shortages, and possible policy shifts. As an industry, we have to keep showing the value of trenchless solutions and work together through events such as No-Dig Show and No-Dig North.

Carlson

That’s a broad question but the gas industry is probably going to fare pretty well, just because of all the standards, regulations that go along with gas that are pretty non-negotiable in the way of regulation. Manufacturing coming back to the U.S., it all starts with infrastructure at the very beginning. You need roads, water, sewer, power, broadband all in place for a manufacturer to consider going into a location. We see the Highway bill as a tipping point of where this funding is going to happen and the fight that is going to happen over that. We have to make sure that will be fully funded.

White

I can only speak to the water and wastewater world. It’s an interesting set up because we have always been out of sight, out of mind. That’s the term that gets thrown around and I do see that continuing. One of the things I do find interesting through conversations with representatives, that even though the terms like ‘disadvantaged’ or ‘DEI’ or ‘environmental justice’ are more or less going away, we have found some re-working of those terms, like being ‘financially disadvantaged’. What I mean by this is that we have seen some technical assistance programs come up that have not always been in place or are now run at a state level. This is certainly a big avenue for some of those more rural utilities by not only having a path to get that funding but the resources to be able assist with the administrative side to get those projects completed. I don’t see a significant change for how the underground world is going to fare moving forward but I do see some small shifts within that underground world, especially toward some of these financially disadvantaged, rural communities. We are also seeing a lot of state-run programs or states developing the guidelines and their own enforcement for being able to meet the needs that federally aren’t being met. A great example is in Florida. They passed a senate bill that said all these utilities need to be able to inspect anywhere from 15 to 20 percent of their system over the next 5 years and provide that information, not only to the DEP but to the governor, as well. This means inspection and a long-term plan for how to maintain the infrastructure. We are obviously very excited about that initiative, and we are seeing other states pick up on that in terms of asset management or technical assistance. I think that is what we will be seeing a lot in the next four years: states picking up the brunt of this to make sure underground assessments is a vital component.

Eideberg

Looking at our industry, let’s go back nine months. The segments are doing the best by far currently is anything to do underground — energy extraction, mining. To the extent that how our industry is doing is a barometer of the success of the Administration’s policies or at least the focus of taking on infrastructure. That’s where I see the opportunity because that’s where our manufacturing members, those who are in those segments, they are doing significantly better or seeing significantly better market conditions vs those who are in general construction, road building and general infrastructure projects. I think it’s energy, energy, energy, as well as anything underground.

Wyman

Under the Trump administration, I’d have to say gas and oil pipeline is looking pretty good under the “drill baby drill” doctrine. Efforts to overturn Biden-era climate regulations through the Congressional Review Act (CRA) are ongoing. There is something like 30 to 40 Biden regulations expected to face CRA resolutions by the end of April. The notorious “methane fee” is all but rescinded, and the House just moved to throw out over-the-top efficiency standards for commercial and walk in refrigerators and freezers. All this bodes well for the natural gas industry. Broadband is another one, although there are some things to think about there. If the FCC can get its act together with regard to broadband maps, the resources dedicated to broadband deployment in the IIJA ($42-plus billion) could make a real difference. However, keep in mind that our industry generally supports installation of fiber-optic technologies, while those offering satellite broadband service are already tapping into federal spending vehicles. For example, it was recently announced that NTIA’s BEAD program will be revamped to “take a tech neutral approach” so states can provide internet service at the lowest cost. This opens the door for satellite service. So, proponents of fiber broadband construction have their work cut out for them.

Izzard

Right now, areas like water systems, clean energy, and broadband are getting a lot of attention and funding. That’s great for trenchless because our methods are ideal for installing and upgrading these systems with less disruption and lower environmental impact. Underground infrastructure might not always grab headlines, but it’s getting steady support.

Eideberg

I think every new administration is an opportunity, more so than anything else. It’s a clean slate and a chance to build relationships, to align around shared priorities, identify areas where we can work together to advance policies that will help not only our industry but the country as a whole. In some ways, there’s no great difference at the beginning of any new administration. To the extent that there is, are you playing offense or defense? Hopefully you are playing more offense than you are playing defense. When it comes to AEM and our posture toward the current administration, we’ve always been fiercely bipartisan, that goes for our work at the state level, federal level and our work in Canada. We see our job as being relentless advocates for our industry, regardless of the way the political winds are blowing. Currently, with this administration, we are working vigorously to advance all of our shared priorities. We are going to negotiate in good faith and compromise when it is necessary and we’ll fight back just as vigorously when we disagree. Tariffs are one example of that. Taxes, tax policy, permitting reform would be example of the former where we have a lot of alignment. Our job is to represent our members and reflect our members’ priorities and to be a strong voice for them. Sometimes that means we are not always going to agree with the President and that’s ok. What’s the old saying, ‘You can agree without being disagreeable.’ We firmly believe in that. We wouldn’t be doing our job as an association if we were just agreeing with whomever it was, the president, Congress, a governor. We are squarely on the side of our members. As long you approach anything in good faith and are willing to compromise, then you will get more so than not, better outcomes for everyone. The biggest pain point for frustration for our members right now, particularly with compromise is that they compromise every day. They compromise with their vendors, they compromise with the dealers and suppliers, their customers, local government. They compromise, compromise, compromise. And seems to be the one thing that Congress does not seem interested in. We have 1,100 companies in our membership and they look at Congress, and say it if they run their business the way they run theirs, we’d be out of business. Why can’t they compromise?

Carlson

We can talk all day about permitting reform or deregulation of policies and procedures and so forth, but our members want that stability. They want to be able to plan 12, 18 months out and right now it’s in a volatile world right now with this administration. But with any Administration there is also hope and he’s looking toward the future. I think one of the big things that aside from the water infrastructure and funding, one of the things our members are excited to see for this Administration as opportunities is the business tax policies that might be implemented. I was pleased to see and visit the President when he had the one-year anniversary of his tax policies in his first term. We went around the room and he asked us all what our members did with the tax cuts, one of our members said we bought an 18-wheeler and we outfitted it for training all over the country. Another said he gave his workers $2,000 bonuses, another bought new equipment. The tax policies during the Trump first term, if we can get those passed in this term, it’s something our members are really looking forward to.

White

There’s always a lot of big questions that come through when there is a new administration. How much is funding going to be increased or decreased? How do the tax policies affect some of that funding or looking at some of the private activity bonds and caps associated with them. NASSCO often revisits our policies. Every year we take a look at what we need to be focusing on. Similar to what Kip said, we are not going to agree on everything. But identifying those key areas where we can agree, let’s go fully support that because that clearly has your attention. Hopefully, we can find a way to make it known the things that are really impacting, such as tariffs and everything else, that do impact our cities and communities where we live.

Wyman

When it comes to the natural gas and pipeline construction industry, we’ve already enjoyed a lot of President Trump’s “Day One” actions, many of which addressed our priority issues. Examples are executive actions requiring agencies to do everything possible to remove bureaucratic hurdles that currently impede construction of energy infrastructure. The focus  has been on permit reform which is sorely needed in the energy sector. Trump’s approach (and reliance on) tariffs to pay for lofty tax policy goals is concerning because of impacts on various industries, as already discussed. The difference between Trump and other presidents is that you really don’t need a crystal ball to predict what this president might do – he campaigned on all of this and won big. Traditionally, you look at the incoming president’s past experience and where he’s landed on key issues to your organization, talk to your allies, and go from there. The Trump era presents a whole new ball game.

Izzard

Every administration brings changes in policy and priorities. Our concern is always making sure trenchless technologies continue to get the attention and funding they deserve. We stay proactive — educating stakeholders, and keeping our members informed. At the same time, we look forward to new opportunities to grow and improve how infrastructure is delivered.

Carlson

We are a member-driven association, consensus-driven association. We have our key group committee for governmental affairs that meets monthly to ensure our policies are representative of the membership. We’re pretty much on the same page 90 percent of the time. Every once in a while when it comes to a labor issue, we’ve got union and nonunion members, so there are times there are issues we are not going to engage with.

White

We are also member-driven. We are C6 status, which means that people are coming together and are setting aside their individual company grievances but also looking at this as how do we better the industry and how we better the work of all of our members. Similarly to NUCA, our governmental relations committee meets monthly as well as our Canada work group. We meet to talk about the big changes from the federal side and regulatory side, as well as giving the opportunity to our members to speak up. I certainly recognize that we are not going to agree with every member, we’re not always going to get full consensus support, but we are certainly trying. I will say that one of the big pieces that we enact and want to be there and I think this is a big initiative in NASSCO is that we want to be a resource for these members. This policy may not be to your best advantage as an individual but for the larger industry, this is what we are looking at. Being able to have an opportunity to voice their opinions or go get those resources or have the conversation about what can I do in my situation. Being able to be that resource and provide those materials and that data and say this is what can be done from an individual or company standpoint, this is what NASSCO is going to do as a whole.

Eideberg

I agree with all these points. We are also member-driven, consensus-based. We have 1,100 member companies. Certainly, there are lots of associations that have more members than we do, some have fewer. We are not going to get every single company to agree with the positions that we take but we are also of the opinion that sitting out these big policy battles are not in the best of interest of our industry. If we did so, we would not be doing our jobs. We are fortunate as an association to usually have near unanimous consensus on issues, whether it’s tax policy, infrastructure, energy, workforce and even trade. Obviously, the current environment and some of the policies that this Administration is pursuing, they are almost personal to some people. You mentioned some of the feedback. We don’t have all 1,100 member companies standing shoulder to shoulder on this this or that issue but I’m confident that if I told you that I had 99 percent of them standing shoulder to shoulder that I would be in the ballpark of being right. I don’t believe we would be acting in the best interests of our industry if we said, well, if we don’t have 100 percent unanimity among 1,100 companies so we’re not going to do anything, I think that would be to the detriment of our industry. We would not be doing our job. So, yes, we take great care in dialoguing with those members who voice a different opinion and try to explain to them, where we are and why we are taking the position that we are.   Hopefully they will at least see that we are acting in good faith and on behalf of the vast majority of our members. There are certainly lots of powerful, influential industry groups that are sitting out the trade battle and I’m not sure that that’s the best course of action either. I think you want to be engaged, you want to have a robust dialogue. We have a great working relationship with this Administration even though we disagree on a few things. I think they appreciate our candor and honesty. Won’t let a few issues stand in the way of the fact that we agree on a lot of other issues and we are going to do good work together on those issues.

Carlson

One thing, I think that all of our associations are involved in, are the coalitions that are built in Washington DC. NUCA is part of 4 or 5 coalitions for water, construction. They come together and work together and they are important.

Wyman

If there is an issue(s) that present a divided position among association members, the first thing to do is get people talking. How big a deal is this issue? How strongly does each side feel about it? Is it an issue that could result in a loss of association members if a position is taken? Once you get a sense of where the members stand, you try to craft a position where both sides agree. If that’s not possible, taking a “sideline” position (in other words, not taking a position at all) is sometimes the only way to keep everybody happy and involved. This is rare, I haven’t had to do that many times going on 15 years and conducting dozens of fly-ins. For example, in the case of labor issues in the energy industry, for the most part both union and non-union contractors want to build pipelines, so we take a sideline approach on only the stickiest of issues.

Izzard

NASTT focuses on education and promoting the benefits of trenchless technology, not on taking sides in political debates. Our members may have different views on things like tariffs, but we’re here to help everyone understand how those policies affect our industry and to support them with information, training, and tools to adapt.

White

Our fly-ins are our biggest outreach as far as advocacy goes. We’ve seen increased involvement from members year over year, which is really great. We’ve instituted some timely virtual fly-ins with key Congressional committee members. The fly-ins, I think, give our members an opportunity to make known the work that they do every day, not just from their own company, but to their state and local regions with the representatives of those areas really goes a long way. To be able to showcase the need and showcase the work that has been done. These representatives and senators of Congress, obviously know their territories and areas so when you can point to that work and say this is what went well and this is what didn’t work and they can understand the immediate impact of that. These fly-ins do work. We were very influential in the IIJA, much like everyone here. NASSCO was very involved during COVID to make sure that water and wastewater operators were considered essential personnel so that we could continue doing what we do every day. So, we know that they do listen. It gives a lot of our members not only the opportunity to talk about what they do but also gives them an educational opportunity – where their previous engagement with the legislative or government process was purely through voting, every two or four years. Being able to go out and make their voice heard or showcase how they make their voice heard with these representatives is really crucial. These fly-ins end up being the first time that a lot of these members actually get to engage in that process and talk about the importance of the water and wastewater industry.

Eideberg

For us, we do a slightly smaller fly-in. Ours is about 50 CEOs. It’s the impact that you have, it’s the conversations, it’s showing up and demonstrating to lawmakers that issues are important enough that you are coming to Washington, D.C. and have a sit down with them. Perhaps even more so important for us is the collaboration between companies that are fierce competitors in the marketplace but are setting aside that for the greater good of the industry. The camaraderie that it fosters within in the industry and association, spending a few days on the Hill, walking around. We’ve all done these fly-ins and it’s not always that great — can be hot, can be raining, meetings cancelled and rescheduled. There is a ton of value and you would never not want to do them. It’s bringing the industry together. I am always amazed by the conversations they have not related to the policy asks or the priorities. They’re talking about business operations, they’re exchanging tips on hiring practices or sourcing or suppliers, etc. That value is often lost. That piece doesn’t get as much attention as it deserves. As an association, our job is to bring people together and I think the fly-ins do that too on a level not related to policy or lobbying.

Carlson

Ditto, ditto, ditto, ditto. The lawmakers and their staffs hear from us all the time. They use us as resources but it’s that personal relationship that a member brings to the table when they come to D.C. They are friends of a legislator, they help fundraise for them, kids went to the same schools, so it adds a totally different dynamic to the issue that we are raising with them. Also builds relationships back in the district, too. We ask them to come on jobsites. Congressmen love to come on jobsites and that relationship was built from the fly-in. Our fly-ins are also a little different. This year we instituted a working group fly-in and we brought in our executive committee members and our working group from governmental affairs. And rather than meeting with all of our legislators, we actually met with the agencies and the freshman legislators to educate them on who NUCA is. It was different and a little more impactful. When you are meeting the agencies and the staff that are writing the bills and writing the legislation, you get a different feel than what the Congressman knows are is getting pushed. Very effective and necessary. Our member involvement probably increases by 10 percent every year.

Wyman

For lobbyists, at least for me, fly-ins are probably the most work-intensive yet most productive and rewarding part of association advocacy. This is when you get to test the messages and materials you’ve prepared for your members, and put them in front of their elected representatives. You know pretty quickly if your messages are resonating, whether you prepared your members well enough, and if your ‘asks’ are realistic and possible. Fly-ins also open the door to ‘real-life’ advocacy, and allow members to tell their story personally to their lawmakers. I have to say in years of putting dozens of these events on, the vast majority have enjoyed the experience. The biggest value to an association’s government relations program is in the relationships that are fostered, and hopefully maintained. If an enthusiastic member hits it off with a lawmaker and/or his/her staff during a visit, there is now a name (and a face) that lobbyists can point to when they follow up. So, when the lobbyist is following up, they can remind staff about that meeting and the request(s) presented by that association member. All in all, Washington fly-in events offer an opportunity to have as many voices as possible relaying the right messages to the right people, all at the same time.

White

Tying in another component to this, even with some of the fly-ins that I have done, we’re the experts at what we do. That’s why the education is so important. We go in assuming positive intent, but I do believe when we can bring these NASSCO members in and showcase what they do, there is a relationship and trust that is built. I think that is a really important factor for our members to bring, but also for our legislative members to hear. To know that they have these resources to be able to say,’ We are trying to put something together. Give us your thoughts.  

Carlson

They see that a lot of the major projects that our members work on, the money comes from the federal government though SRF funding, so they know we need to sit down and what are we doing so that [funding] is secure and not getting cut. That is where they see that direct value. NUCA is a little unique from other associations in that we have chapters in all the different states. We’re also working at the state level, and the state level is working with the federal level so there is that connectivity. They are asking for data, what are we working on and what are regulations or tariffs going to effect us. Our members always want us to be reactionary, giving them information and telling them what is going on.

White

We always get questions and that’s why we have these monthly work groups. Anybody can show up. One of the bigger components that NASSCO has been pushing for a while, and came out of feedback from our engineers, utilities and contractors, was around asset management and technical assistance and how to set up these programs. We said, “Let’s go find the individuals responsible from state and federal levels and have the conversation with them.” Let’s figure out how to get funding tied to long term planning for this infrastructure vs building the shiny, new thing and say “we did it” (simulates checking the box). Being able to be an open door for our members to ask these questions so we can figure out whether it’s something we should adopt or look into putting into our policy initiatives or goals in the coming years.

Eideberg

We are headquartered in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, we have an office in Washington, D.C., and we’ve had a presence in Canada for some time. But we are a North American based trade association, so our focus is not just on the U.S. We keep hearing from our member companies, many of which are Canadian-headquartered companies. Canada is an important part of our industry. We have heard them loud and clear. So, part of our efforts this year we are putting an additional focus on Canada. I’d like to think that we had the foresight to know that this was going to be the kind of year it is and we are focusing on Canada. But no. It’s been member-driven and has nothing to do with the current trade and tariff environment but it’s fortuitous in many ways. Our members want us to be more active outside the United States. We are looking to Canada on how we can beef up our presence in Canada. How can we be a bigger, more influential voice for our member companies in Ottawa and in provincial capitals. How we can leverage partnerships that we can with sister associations around the world to drive change for our industry globally. We have a team heading to Bauma in Munich. Having meetings with sister organizations in Asia and Europe, talking about issues that unite us all. We are listening to our members and going in many ways where they are leading us and this case, they are leading us to outside the U.S. focus. Also heard from them, rooted in their frustration in the slow pace of Congress for the past decade, so we are beefing up our capabilities at the state level, expanded advocacy efforts at the state level. You have to listen to your members and be heading in the direction they want you to go. Our efforts have to reflect their priorities.

Wyman

We’ve received positive feedback on most issues, but you have to keep asking the membership if the advocacy agenda is on track. At DCA, we’re restructured our committee meetings in a way that encourages a lot more interaction and member participation. We end every government relations committee meeting with “What are we missing? Are there other issues we should be addressing?” We’ve also established what we call Regional Advocacy Teams where members from the same states or regions were formed. We’re holding several regional, targeted fly-ins throughout the year, which has been a good way to keep a constant presence in front of Congress, not just from professional lobbyists but from the “real people,” who are the ones who really make a difference.

Izzard

Our members tell us they want more support with training, workforce development, and access to funding. We’ve responded by growing our education programs, expanding our online resources, and increasing outreach to public agencies. We’re also proud of how our events—like the No-Dig Show in the U.S. and No-Dig North in Canada—bring the community together to learn, network, and stay ahead of industry trends.