Bill Overview
Title: Fire Department Repayment Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires standard operating procedures for reciprocal fire suppression cost share agreements. The Departments of Agriculture, the Interior, Homeland Security, and Defense shall establish standard operating procedures relating to fire suppression cost share agreements established under the Reciprocal Fire Protection Act; and with respect to each agreement in operation on one year after enactment of this bill, review each agreement and modify it as necessary to comply with the standard operating procedures. The standard operating procedures shall include a requirement that each fire suppression cost share agreement be aligned with each of the cooperative fire protection agreements applicable to the entity subject to such fire suppression cost share agreement. The standard operating procedures shall also include a requirement that the departments, to the maximum extent practicable, complete reviews, including second-level reviews of a fire suppression cost share agreement, as soon as practicable after a wildfire related to the area covered by such cost share agreement is contained; and a requirement that in completing such reviews, the department concerned consults with state and local fire suppression organizations.
Sponsors: Rep. Harder, Josh [D-CA-10]
Target Audience
Population: People living in fire-prone areas and affected by fire suppression efforts
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill focuses on reciprocal fire suppression cost-sharing agreements which involve multiple federal departments including Agriculture, Interior, Homeland Security, and Defense.
- It aims to standardize operating procedures across the board for cost-share agreements concerning fire suppression efforts.
- Fire departments at the state and local levels will be impacted, especially those involved in cost-sharing agreements.
- Communities situated in fire-prone areas will indirectly be impacted as this bill could affect the efficiency and cost associated with firefighting efforts.
- The bill has implications for financial and resource management during fire emergencies.
Reasoning
- When selecting the individuals for these interviews, I considered that the bill primarily targets fire departments across various states, particularly those in fire-prone areas like California, Texas, and Florida. These locations frequently deal with wildfires, and any improvement in operational efficiency could impact the firefighting efforts significantly.
- By focusing on a variety of individuals ranging from fire department workers, local politicians, to residents in fire-prone communities, we capture a holistic view of the policy's implications.
- The budget implies a limited immediate rollout but with potential broader impacts over a decade. This means immediate effects might be subtle, with more significant changes observed in the long term as the procedures become fully integrated.
- To reflect realistic scenarios, some of these interviews include individuals who would feel minimal to low impact from the policy due to either their jurisdiction not being primarily fire-prone or their occupational roles not being directly related to fire suppression.
Simulated Interviews
Firefighter (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Standardizing fire suppression cost share agreements will help streamline operations during wildfires.
- Timely reviews after fire events will aid in learning and applying best practices efficiently.
- Consultation with local fire suppression organizations ensures ground realities are considered.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Local Government Official (Austin, TX)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Aligning agreements with cooperative fire protection agreements simplifies financial and resource management.
- Frequent reviews and consultations will enhance the decision-making process.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Climate Scientist (Miami, FL)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Standardized procedures across agencies could aid in more cohesive climate change mitigation.
- Long-term monitoring and adaptation are crucial for effectiveness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Fire Chief (Denver, CO)
Age: 56 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 9.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The consistency in agreements is a positive step for future fire suppression strategies.
- Engaging with state and local bodies adds practicality to policy making.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Volunteer Firefighter (Sacramento, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bill seems to offer more structured support, which is good for volunteer operations.
- More timely reviews could improve volunteer training.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Indirect influence, potentially beneficial as more efficient firefighting could reduce smoke impacts.
- Aligned agreements might enhance response times.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Environmental Lawyer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Integrating reviews and consulting state bodies makes the policy sound.
- Needs more emphasis on preventive measures and cross-agency collaboration beyond cost sharing.
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 | 8 | 6 |
Retired Park Ranger (Portland, OR)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Standard operating procedures are beneficial for clarity.
- It’s important the policy remains flexible to incorporate local ecology characteristics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Insurance Adjuster (San Diego, CA)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved fire suppression efforts could reduce claims severity over time.
- Better coordination can positively impact risk assessment models.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Forest Service Worker (Las Vegas, NV)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While not directly involved in fire suppression, conservation efforts align with the broader goals of efficient wildfire management.
- Cooperation with federal departments can help advance ecological preservation goals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000 (Low: $750000, High: $1250000)
Year 2: $1000000 (Low: $750000, High: $1250000)
Year 3: $1050000 (Low: $787500, High: $1312500)
Year 5: $1100000 (Low: $825000, High: $1375000)
Year 10: $1200000 (Low: $900000, High: $1500000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3750000, High: $6250000)
Key Considerations
- The involvement of multiple federal departments could complicate initial implementation, potentially increasing initial costs.
- The effectiveness of standardized procedures will heavily rely on inter-departmental coordination and state and local participation.
- Given the variability in fire frequency and intensity, actual cost impacts may deviate from initial estimates.