Bill Overview
Title: EPA Transparency Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with respect to any major EPA-promulgated rule or rulemaking, to make publicly available an analysis of any environmental harm and any economic harm to small businesses.
Sponsors: Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: Global population dependent on environmental resources and small business economy
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The bill requires transparency in EPA's rulemaking processes.
- The analysis must include environmental harm, which affects communities dependent on environmental resources.
- The analysis must include economic harm to small businesses, directly impacting small business owners and employees.
- Increased transparency might influence future policy decisions impacting the general population.
Reasoning
- The target population includes small business owners, employees, and communities dependent on environmental resources.
- Increased transparency should ideally improve decision-making and public trust, impacting wellbeing positively in the long term.
- The budget allows for comprehensive analysis and reports, helping the affected directly or indirectly understand policy impacts.
- Some individuals may not perceive a change in their day-to-day life, representing the diversity of experiences.
- A policy of this scale will more directly impact individuals closely involved with small businesses or environmental issues.
Simulated Interviews
Small Business Owner (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I welcome more transparency from the EPA.
- Understanding the economic impact could help me plan better for my business.
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 | 4 |
Environmental Scientist (Houston, Texas)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This move towards transparency can enable better informed scientific research.
- Having access to environmental harm data helps drive advocacy work.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Truck Driver (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this transparency will affect me directly, but it might help my employers make better policies.
- I'm mainly worried about rising costs.
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 | 4 | 4 |
Small Business Employee (Miami, Florida)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to know what impact businesses have on the environment.
- Better transparency might drive consumer choices and affect my job indirectly.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Farmer (Des Moines, Iowa)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this transparency helps protect farms and the environment our community depends on.
- We've seen too many rules made without understanding their local impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
Recent Graduate / Job Seeker (New York City, New York)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transparency might open more jobs in environmental policy analysis.
- It could also mean more data to study and work with.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Developer (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am indirectly affected as I support policies that protect the environment.
- Transparency is always good for informed decisions by everyone.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Restaurant Manager (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any insights on economic impacts from EPA might help us manage costs better.
- Our menu and sourcing are affected by regulation.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
High School Teacher (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy can provide great real-world examples for my students.
- Educating about transparency and its effects strengthens their understanding of real-world commerce and environment.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Freelancer (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If EPA's transparency improves, more businesses might seek environmentally friendly practices, increasing demands for my work.
- It could expand my client base and assure me of ethical practices.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 3: $51000000 (Low: $41000000, High: $61000000)
Year 5: $52020000 (Low: $42020000, High: $62020000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The need for EPA to develop or adopt new methodologies and tools for performing the analyses.
- Potential for significant learning and adaptation curves in the initial years, stabilizing over time.
- Impact on small businesses could be positive if they can better anticipate regulatory impacts.
- The law's influence on future environmental policies can't be directly monetized but remains significant.