Bill Overview
Title: Port of Brunswick Navigation Channel Improvement Act
Description: This bill authorizes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to carry out the Brunswick Harbor Navigation Project in Brunswick, Georgia, in accordance with the plans for navigation channel modifications and improvements laid out in the report issued by the Chief of Engineers on March 11, 2022. The report recommends plans to widen the current authorized channel in three locations.
Sponsors: Sen. Ossoff, Jon [D-GA]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals relying on the operations and output of the Port of Brunswick
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The Port of Brunswick is a key harbor in the U.S., primarily for imports and exports of vehicles and heavy machinery.
- This project aims to improve navigation channel dimensions, which implies increased capacity for larger ships and more traffic.
- It will directly affect the logistics and shipping industries by allowing larger freights to pass, therefore impacting workers in these sectors.
- Local communities around Brunswick may also be impacted due to potential economic growth or environmental changes caused by increased shipping traffic.
- The project will have implications for businesses relying on port logistics, potentially benefiting companies involved in the automotive and machinery sectors.
- Indirect effects might extend to retail markets, inland transportation industries, and consumers who rely on imported goods.
- Since it's a bill enacted by the U.S. government, the main direct impacts will be seen in the United States, specifically around the southeastern region where Brunswick is located.
- Brunswick is one of the busiest ports in Georgia; thus, local businesses and employment might experience growth.
Reasoning
- The Port of Brunswick Navigation Channel Improvement Act mainly affects people associated with the logistics, shipping, and related industries. Therefore, a significant focus is on people in such sectors and those residing near Brunswick, Georgia.
- Given the budget and the target population of affecting up to 2,000,000 people, including direct workers in logistics, indirect workers in manufacturing and retail relying on imports, and surrounding communities, the impact on wellbeing should consider economic and environmental factors.
- Some individuals will see significant benefits through job growth and economic stimulation, while others, potentially unaffected personally by these changes, might see negligible change in their wellbeing.
- The impact on wellbeing will differ based on individual's proximity to the industry and location, with southeastern U.S. likely seeing more direct effects compared to individuals in unrelated industries.
- Given the project's scale, the 10 interviews involve diverse backgrounds, some with high, medium, low, or no impact to showcase a full spectrum of effects.
Simulated Interviews
Port Logistics Manager (Brunswick, Georgia)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic about the improvements. It could mean more jobs and better infrastructure for our port.
- However, I'm concerned about environmental impacts if not managed properly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Environmental Scientist (Savannah, Georgia)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Port expansion projects are a double-edged sword. Economically beneficial but could pose risks to the local ecosystems.
- I believe this project needs a stronger focus on environmental protection measures.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Automotive Supplier CEO (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The project is beneficial—it streamlines logistic channels enhancing our import capabilities.
- Any delay in receiving imports currently costs us time and money.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retail Associate (Jacksonville, Florida)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how this project might affect me directly.
- It could reduce costs for goods at stores, but that's hard to say for certain.
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 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Freight Truck Driver (Miami, Florida)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's potentially lucrative if the logistics industry grows.
- More shipments could mean more work, but also more time away from family.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Supply Chain Analyst (Charlotte, North Carolina)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could offer new data sets to utilize in optimization models.
- If success metrics are shared, it could enhance regional logistics efficiency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired (Brunswick, Georgia)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Brunswick has seen many changes, some good, some bad.
- I hope this brings more good than harm to our community's wellbeing.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Customs Agent (Savannah, Georgia)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Customs processes may become smoother with more clearly defined logistics.
- Potential for increased workload, though, which is a double-edged sword.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
University Student (Brunswick, Georgia)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the project's environmental impact assessments are thorough.
- This project might influence my future research direction.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retail Business Owner (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Despite being far, supply chain improvements anywhere can trickle over here.
- Doubtful about feeling a direct impact from Brunswick developments.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $120000000)
Year 2: $120000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $140000000)
Year 3: $100000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $120000000)
Year 5: $80000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $90000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Environmental impact assessments and mitigation strategies will be critical to project success, potentially affecting timelines and costs.
- Coordination with state and local governments will be essential, particularly regarding infrastructure modifications near the port.
- Potential resistance or concerns from local communities may need to be addressed, particularly issues related to increased traffic and environmental changes.
- The long-term competitiveness of the Port of Brunswick compared to other regional ports might influence traffic projections and economic benefits.