Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/2693

Bill Overview

Title: Salton Sea Projects Improvements Act

Description: This bill provides the Bureau of Reclamation with additional project authorities for the Salton Sea research project in Southern California and reauthorizes a Department of Interior pilot program in the Colorado River Basin. Specifically, the bill authorizes Reclamation to provide grants and enter into contracts and cooperative agreements to carry out projects (e.g., construction activities and dust suppression projects) to improve air quality, fish and wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities, and water quality in the area of the Salton Sea. To carry out these projects, Reclamation may enter into partnerships with state, tribal, and local governments; water districts; joint powers authorities, including the Salton Sea Authority; nonprofit organizations; and institutions of higher education. The bill also reauthorizes Interior to fund or participate in pilot projects to increase Colorado River System water in Lake Mead and the Colorado River Storage Project reservoirs through FY2026. The bill further requires Interior to submit an updated report to Congress by the end of FY2027 on the effectiveness of the pilot projects and a recommendation on whether to continue the program.

Sponsors: Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals affected by Salton Sea and Colorado River Basin projects

Estimated Size: 500000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Farmer (Indio, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy will improve air quality, which has been affecting my crops.
  • Better water management could help in reducing salinity, affecting agricultural output.
  • Skeptical about seeing quick results given past inaction.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 4

Environmental Scientist (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy enables larger scale projects and real impact analyses to be conducted.
  • I'm optimistic about the collaboration with educational institutions, enhancing research capabilities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Travel Guide (Blythe, CA)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improvements in the Salton Sea's condition could greatly enhance local tourism.
  • There's potential for new eco-tourism initiatives leveraging policy-backed projects.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 4
Year 10 8 3
Year 20 7 3

Water Resource Manager (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Projects that support water storage and management directly influence my work.
  • Sustaining Lake Mead levels is crucial for maintaining water supply chains.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired Teacher (Salton City, CA)

Age: 68 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Air quality improvements can significantly influence our health.
  • I'm looking forward to seeing better recreational spaces in our community.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 7 4
Year 20 8 4

Policy Analyst (Denver, CO)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The success metrics defined in the policy can guide future legislative efforts.
  • Cooperation with local governments will be key in achieving tangible outcomes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Casino Manager (Las Vegas, NV)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Future of the tourism industry is linked with sustainable water levels.
  • Any reduction in water costs supports economic stability.

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 6 5

High School Teacher (Salt Lake City, UT)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Including youth in these projects through educational programs could heighten environmental awareness.
  • I'm optimistic about curriculum materials that can emerge from partnerships within academia.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Wildlife Conservationist (Ehrenberg, AZ)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill could enhance our habitat restoration efforts.
  • Long-term impacts on bird populations can indicate overall ecosystem health.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 9 7
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 4

Tribal Leader (Yuma, AZ)

Age: 47 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Engagement in these projects strengthens our position in water rights negotiations.
  • Community advancement tied to the policy's success. Requires vigilant accountability and transparency.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 8 4

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 2: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 3: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 5: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Key Considerations