Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6896

Bill Overview

Title: RETURN Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires regulations that govern the disposal of narcotics by reverse distributors to be revised so as to allow these entities to open and inspect packages that are received through mail-back programs and to allow them to send the packages offsite for destruction.

Sponsors: Rep. Foxx, Virginia [R-NC-5]

Target Audience

Population: People potentially impacted by improved narcotic disposal regulations

Estimated Size: 331000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Reverse Distributor Manager (Columbus, Ohio)

Age: 46 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This change will make our operations more efficient and secure. We're looking forward to better protocols for managing narcotic disposal.
  • I believe this can reduce some of the stress and confusion that currently exists around disposal processes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Pharmacist (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Efficient narcotic disposal is crucial for our pharmacy to function safely. The new policy should help standardize procedures.
  • I'm hopeful this reduces the burden on our staff when handling returns.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Regulatory Auditor (New York, New York)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having clear guidelines will make our audits more straightforward. It's good for both companies and compliance officers like myself.
  • I'm optimistic this will enhance how we ensure public safety.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 9 8

Hospital Administrator (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This should help improve our hospital's handling of unused narcotics, streamlining our operations considerably.
  • I anticipate fewer complications during disposal phases.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Public Health Administrator (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Reducing access to leftover narcotics could have a big impact on public safety.
  • This should deter narcotic misuse within communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Retired (Atlanta, Georgia)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's good to see efforts being made to keep communities safer from unused narcotics.
  • I don't see a direct personal benefit, but it feels reassuring.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 7

Addiction Counselor (Dallas, Texas)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Anything that restricts access to substances that can be abused is a positive step.
  • While it may not change things overnight, it's a necessary change in the right direction.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Mail Carrier (Denver, Colorado)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm glad to hear these policies are updating. The clarity helps in ensuring proper handling of sensitive packages.
  • Hopefully, it means fewer risks when transporting these items.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Community Center Volunteer (Miami, Florida)

Age: 63 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improving narcotic disposal knowledge and practices is crucial for preventing misuse among young people.
  • I support any regulations that prioritize safety within communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 7

Small Business Owner (Pharmacy) (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This regulation change could potentially reduce the workload associated with compliance.
  • I hope it leads to more robust procedures with better guidance from reverse distributors.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 8 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $40000000)

Year 2: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $30000000)

Year 3: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $30000000)

Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $25000000)

Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)

Year 100: $500000 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)

Key Considerations