Bill Overview
Title: To require the Secretary of the Army and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a study analyzing the cost to permit applicants and permit holders of complying with sections 402 and 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill requires the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency to study compliance costs for applicants and holders of certain permits for the discharge of pollutants or dredged or fill materials into waters.
Sponsors: Rep. Rouzer, David [R-NC-7]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals related to permit applications and holdings under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act sections 402 and 404
Estimated Size: 300000
- The bill targets applicants and permit holders under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, specifically sections 402 and 404.
- These sections regulate discharges of pollutants into waters and the discharge of dredged or fill materials into waters.
- Permit applicants and holders likely include industrial entities such as factories, wastewater treatment facilities, agricultural operations, and construction companies.
- As the EPA is involved, the rule would apply to the United States but could impact entities with international operations that have branches in the U.S.
- The bill is focused on compliance costs, which primarily affects enterprises' financial strategies and planning.
Reasoning
- The policy is likely to impact companies required to obtain permits for discharging pollutants more than individuals, but individuals working in relevant industries may feel secondary effects.
- Consideration needs to be given to the size of businesses involved; larger corporations might absorb compliance costs differently than small businesses.
- Geographic distribution can vary; regions with heavy industrial activities or large agricultural operations may be more affected.
- Typical individuals involved are employees in environmental compliance departments, consultants, or industrial operators.
Simulated Interviews
Environmental Compliance Manager (Houston, Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our company has a large team specializing in compliance to navigate these environmental regulations.
- The policy's analysis on compliance costs will help identify inefficiencies and potential savings.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Farmer (Des Moines, Iowa)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The process for securing permits is cumbersome and costly.
- Any study that could potentially reduce these costs is beneficial, though I'm skeptical of changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Project Manager (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our projects are often delayed due to permitting issues and compliance costs.
- I'm hopeful this policy might simplify things for smaller operators like us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Environmental Consultant (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional studies on compliance cost are a step in the right direction, but implementation is key.
- Clients might benefit from clearer cost structures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Graduate Student (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a valuable learning opportunity to see governmental response to compliance costs.
- As a student, observing these proceedings is purely academic but insightful.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Corporate Lawyer (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Clients often find compliance costs puzzling and restricting.
- If this policy helps standardize or reduce costs, it could be significant for corporate clients.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Factory Owner (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Compliance costs are a constant challenge for our operations.
- Studying these costs might reveal inefficiencies that can be addressed.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Policy Analyst (Miami, Florida)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The regulatory focus on compliance costs is necessary and can lead to more efficient policy design.
- This policy could set a precedent for more transparent government studies.
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 | 7 | 6 |
Vice President of Operations (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our operations budget heavily factors in compliance costs.
- Policy insights from this study could aid strategic adjustments company-wide.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Regulatory Affairs Specialist (Kansas City, Missouri)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We pay substantial fees for permits across various lines of business.
- This policy's study might lead to more streamlined procedures, reducing indirect business costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $5000000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The capability and current workload of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the EPA to conduct such a study within existing structures.
- The potential need for external contractors or experts if internal resources are insufficient.
- The detailed scope of the study, which may affect the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the cost estimates.
- Possible future regulatory changes that may be informed by the study's findings on compliance costs.