Bill Overview
Title: A bill to amend the America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 to modify a provision relating to cost-sharing requirements applicable to certain Bureau of Reclamation dams and dikes, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill requires the federal government to fully fund the costs of dam safety modifications of certain dikes owned by the Bureau of Reclamation. The bill also requires the federal government to fully fund gate replacements or repairs for certain dams for the next 10 years. The bill applies to certain Reclamation-owned dams or dikes completed not later than December 31, 1948 (e.g., the Altus Dam and dikes in the W.C. Austin Project in Oklahoma). Under current law, the federal government is required to fully fund the operation and maintenance costs of certain Reclamation-owned dikes that were completed not later than December 31, 1945. However, current law requires the federal government to fund only 85% of certain dam safety modifications.
Sponsors: Sen. Inhofe, James M. [R-OK]
Target Audience
Population: People in the United States living in areas near Bureau of Reclamation dams and dikes that will receive safety updates
Estimated Size: 2500000
- The Bureau of Reclamation manages water resources and infrastructure projects in 17 western U.S. states, impacting water supply and safety for millions of residents.
- Dams and dikes play a critical role in water supply, flood control, and agriculture, directly affecting farmers, local communities, and ecosystems.
- Modifying cost-sharing to federal funding relieves financial burdens on local and state governments, potentially enhancing public safety more broadly.
- Given the age of infrastructure (pre-1948), communities dependent on these older dams and dikes are likely particularly vulnerable to infrastructure failures.
Reasoning
- The policy targets water infrastructure that impacts communities in the western United States, particularly those near older dams and dikes managed by the Bureau of Reclamation.
- Enhancing funding for dam safety relieves financial pressures on local governments, potentially promoting safer living conditions for affected populations.
- While the policy directly impacts infrastructure, residents may experience changes in their sense of security, safety, and economic stability which might reflect in wellbeing measures.
Simulated Interviews
farmer (Altus, OK)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new funding will help ensure the dam remains safe and the water supply stable, which is crucial for my farming operations.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
engineer (Denver, CO)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support the funding as it stabilizes infrastructure projects I work on and ensures safety for communities downstream.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
school teacher (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I am not directly involved, knowing that there are risks reduced with the dams makes me feel safer about the future water supply.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
environmental scientist (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Upgrading these old dams could prevent environmental damage, which aligns with my work goals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
retired park ranger (Redding, CA)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improvements on the dam will help protect local wildlife habitats connected to the reservoirs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
college student (Boise, ID)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy directly impacts my future career field and provides great case study opportunities.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
community activist (Santa Fe, NM)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Full funding for these safety projects is overdue and relieves community financial responsibility.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
civil engineer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These updates are necessary to secure the long-term usability and safety of our water systems.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
agricultural consultant (Bakersfield, CA)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased federal funding eases the financial burden on local farmers, which should improve security of supply.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
lawyer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 33 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These changes could set precedents for future water law and conservation strategies.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1400000000)
Year 2: $1220000000 (Low: $1020000000, High: $1420000000)
Year 3: $1240000000 (Low: $1040000000, High: $1440000000)
Year 5: $1280000000 (Low: $1080000000, High: $1480000000)
Year 10: $1350000000 (Low: $1150000000, High: $1550000000)
Year 100: $1350000000 (Low: $1150000000, High: $1550000000)
Key Considerations
- The transition from partial (85%) to full federal funding represents an increase in financial responsibility but aligns with safety needs.
- Approximately 4 million people live near eligible dams and dikes, highlighting the potential scale of impact on public safety.
- Comprehensive planning and execution will be crucial to effectively manage expenses and timelines.