Bill Overview
Title: Cumulative Impacts Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine whether issuing or renewing certain permits under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act will have cumulative impacts that will harm the health of the general population, or to any potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation. If the EPA determines that, due to those potential cumulative impacts, there does not exist a reasonable certainty of no harm to the health to such populations, then the EPA must deny the permit application.
Sponsors: Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-13]
Target Audience
Population: People living in regions affected by Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act permits
Estimated Size: 150000000
- The bill targets the general population that lives in areas where air or water permits are required.
- This includes people living near industrial sites, factories, or other polluting enterprises.
- Cumulative impacts suggest the consideration of all potential pollutants rather than individually, which could impact areas with multiple pollution sources more significantly.
- Potentially impacted subpopulations include children, the elderly, and individuals with pre-existing health conditions, who are more susceptible to pollutants.
- The bill has no geographical limit, so it affects populations globally wherever the US environmental standards apply or are influenced by them.
Reasoning
- The policy targets densely populated areas near industrial activities, which means individuals from various jobs and backgrounds might be affected.
- Vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, and people with pre-existing conditions are key to understanding the impact.
- The budgetary constraints indicate a significant, though not limitless, scope for action which will need to focus on high-impact areas initially.
- Environmental quality improvements from denying harmful permits should increase wellbeing in terms of lessened health concerns and increased property values over time.
- There's potential secondary impact on employers and industries due to changed regulatory environments, needing consideration as these could have local economic impacts.
Simulated Interviews
Retired school teacher (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am supportive of the policy if it helps lower pollution levels in my area.
- Air quality affects my daily routine and health due to my asthma.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Chemical plant worker (Houston, TX)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry that stricter regulations might threaten my job security.
- On the other hand, less pollution is good for my kids' health.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Environmental scientist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step towards reducing the health impact of pollution.
- I hope it will influence future policies to consider cumulative environmental impacts more rigorously.
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 | 10 | 6 |
Hospital technician (Baton Rouge, LA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The community can definitely use improvements in air quality; we've seen too many health issues linked to pollution.
- I am worried about how quickly these changes can take effect.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 2 |
Single mother and part-time cleaner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Pollution has been a constant worry especially with my kids' asthma.
- I'm glad there are efforts to address this, but I hope it doesn't lead to more job loss in my area.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Oilfield worker (Midland, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could have direct consequences on my job security and income.
- While less pollution is positive, my immediate worry is financial stability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Professor of Environmental Science (Boston, MA)
Age: 55 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am hopeful that this policy will serve as a model for other jurisdictions internationally.
- By addressing cumulative impacts, there's a potential to significantly improve public health outcomes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Community organizer (Newark, NJ)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Pollution impacts are very real in our daily lives, and I believe this policy is a necessary step.
- It's important that these changes happen quickly and benefit the communities most in need.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 3 |
Auto plant worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to know steps are being taken to manage pollution, which affects us here daily.
- I hope this doesn’t impact the local economy and our jobs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 3 |
Health advocate (Louisville, KY)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for better health outcomes in many vulnerable communities.
- It’s a major plus for health advocacy efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $240000000 (Low: $190000000, High: $290000000)
Year 3: $230000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $280000000)
Year 5: $210000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $260000000)
Year 10: $180000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $220000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Key Considerations
- The primary purpose of the policy is to ensure environmental permits do not cumulatively harm public health, enforcing stricter evaluations of pollution impacts from multiple sources.
- The bill targets populations near existing or potential industrial sites, which may see stricter enforcement of environmental regulations.
- Considerations are needed for industries that may face increased hurdles or delays in obtaining permits due to the enhanced cumulative impact assessments.