Bill Overview
Title: Delaware River Basin Conservation Reauthorization Act of 2022
Description: This bill reauthorizes the Delaware River Basin Restoration Program and increases the federal cost share for certain grant projects. Specifically, the bill extends the program through FY2030 and increases the federal cost share of a grant project that serves a small, rural, or disadvantaged community to 90% of the total cost of the project. However, the federal share may be increased to 100% of the project's total cost if the grant recipient is unable to pay, or would experience significant financial hardship if required to pay, the nonfederal share. The bill also repeals the prohibition on the use of program funds for the acquisition by the federal government of any interest in land.
Sponsors: Sen. Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE]
Target Audience
Population: Residents of the Delaware River Basin
Estimated Size: 8000000
- The Delaware River Basin includes portions of Delaware, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.
- The reauthorization of the Delaware River Basin Restoration Program suggests ongoing and potentially expanded activities in the region focusing on environmental restoration.
- The program primarily targets communities within the Delaware River Basin, which consists of small, rural, or disadvantaged communities that require federal assistance for environmental projects.
- People living in the basin are likely to benefit from improved environmental conditions as well as economic opportunities provided through project funding.
- The extended funding period through FY2030 guarantees continued investment and benefits for the basin's residents.
Reasoning
- The policy specifically targets the Delaware River Basin, which impacts areas in Delaware, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.
- It aims to provide financial assistance for environmental restoration projects, especially benefiting small, rural, and disadvantaged communities.
- The reauthorization ensures continuity of these benefits through FY2030, alleviating project costs for communities unable to meet non-federal share requirements.
- Different individuals within the basin will experience varying levels of impact based on their proximity to restoration projects, involvement in related economic activities, or personal reliance on environmental health.
Simulated Interviews
Farmer (Pennsylvania)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this program improves water quality, it will really help us out, especially during dry spells.
- I hope the funding will cover enough projects to ensure full impact for farming.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Environmental Scientist (New Jersey)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The reauthorization gives our projects a sustained lifeline.
- It supports not just the environment but also job stability for many in my field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired Teacher (New York)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Involving local communities can promote a sense of ownership and pride.
- I'm optimistic that improved water quality will contribute to our health and recreational spaces.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Small Business Owner (Delaware)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better river management policies boost business by attracting more tourists.
- Expanded grant coverage can also mean faster project completions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 1 |
Community Organizer (Pennsylvania)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reauthorization can push for more targeted initiatives to help disadvantaged areas.
- It's crucial to engage local voices in the planning phases to ensure the right projects are prioritized.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Retired (New Jersey)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about long-term impacts of neglect if funding wasn't in place.
- Continued and increased support is essential for preserving our natural resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Student (New York)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a great framework for practical learning and field experience.
- Secured funding means more opportunities for young professionals in this field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Nurse (Delaware)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The program provides a buffer against health risks related to poor water quality.
- Focus on disadvantaged communities aligns with my concerns about health equity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Local Government Official (Pennsylvania)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Federal funding is critical for sustainability and allowing us to tackle more comprehensive projects.
- A 100% cost coverage is a big relief for financially strapped municipalities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
Civil Engineer (New Jersey)
Age: 31 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Long-term restoration plans help stabilizing and improving infrastructure projects.
- We might see challenges but overall benefits outweigh the costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $18000000, High: $22000000)
Year 2: $21000000 (Low: $19000000, High: $23000000)
Year 3: $21500000 (Low: $19500000, High: $23500000)
Year 5: $22500000 (Low: $20500000, High: $25000000)
Year 10: $25000000 (Low: $22000000, High: $27500000)
Year 100: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Key Considerations
- The ongoing nature of project funding through FY2030 requires consistent and predictable federal budget allocations.
- Increased federal cost share burdens must be balanced against long-term benefits of improved basin conditions.
- The potential uses of program funds now include federal land acquisitions, which may increase spending beyond original projections.