Bill Overview
Title: National Wildland Fire Risk Reduction Program Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the President to establish a National Wildland Fire Risk Reduction Program to achieve major measurable reductions in the losses of life, property, and natural resources from wildland fires. This program shall coordinate federal efforts to improve the assessment of fire environments and the understanding and prediction of wildland fires, associated smoke, and their impacts; develop and encourage the adoption of science-based and cost-effective measures to enhance community resilience to wildland fires, to prevent and mitigate wildland fire and associated smoke impacts and to restore natural fire regimes in fire-dependent ecosystems; and improve the understanding and mitigation of the impacts of climate change, drought, and climate variability on wildland fire risk, frequency, and severity and inform the other goals described here. Not later than 90 days after enactment of this bill, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) shall establish an Interagency Coordinating Committee on Wildland Fire Risk Reduction to oversee the planning, management, and coordination of the program. The committee shall submit a strategic plan for the program to Congress. The Government Accountability Office shall submit a report to Congress on the progress and performance of the program. Further, the bill sets forth the responsibilities of NIST, the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Energy with respect to the program.
Sponsors: Sen. Lujan, Ben Ray [D-NM]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by wildland and forest fires
Estimated Size: 40000000
- The bill aims to reduce the risk and impact of wildland fires, which tend to occur in areas prone to such fires such as the western United States.
- Wildland fires not only affect people living in fire-prone areas but also have broader environmental impacts, affecting air quality and climate worldwide.
- Firefighters and emergency services personnel will be directly affected by the outcome of the bill as it could potentially alter operational procedures and resource allocation.
- Communities that are near fire-prone forests or grasslands are at immediate risk from wildland fires, so they are a primary target for protection through this legislation.
- The bill involves multiple federal agencies that will need to coordinate their efforts, impacting federal employees within those agencies.
Reasoning
- The policy is primarily aimed at mitigating the risks associated with wildland fires, which predominantly occur in Western United States where the climate, vegetation, and topography increase wildfire risk.
- Budget allocations are significant but must be dispersed across multiple agencies such as NIST, NOAA, and NASA, among others, to develop more integrated fire forecasting systems and community training.
- The target population includes people living near fire-prone areas, such as the urban wildland interface, which comprises approximately 40 million Americans, as well as individuals affected by smoke far beyond the immediate fire zones.
- The policy will also have indirect effects on individuals living far from wildland zones due to air quality improvements and reduced atmospheric pollution from smoke, affecting the entire-country generally.
- The policy must prioritize initiatives that maximize impact within the set budget, like creating better early warning systems and community-based fire prevention strategies.
Simulated Interviews
Firefighter (Santa Rosa, California)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a firefighter, any program that provides more resources and understanding of wildland fires is crucial. We often face resource limitations and could benefit from advanced prediction tools and strategies.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Ecologist (Bend, Oregon)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The program could significantly assist in restoring natural fire regimes, crucial for maintaining healthy ecosystems. However, it needs to balance long-term ecological goals with immediate human interests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Software Engineer (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even though I live in the city, smoke from fires greatly affects my health. This policy would likely improve air quality monitoring and alert systems.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Public Health Official (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving the public's understanding of how to cope with smoke and fire-related stresses will enhance community resilience. This is crucial for long-term health impacts.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
College Student (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am concerned about climate change and wildfires. This program, if effectively implemented, could prevent future catastrophes and align with my career interests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Federal Worker (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Coordination between agencies under this program will likely enhance our response capabilities and resource management effectively.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired Teacher (Redding, California)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Wildfires have become more frequent around Redding. This policy could bring much-needed support and air quality solutions to our community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Construction Worker (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'd welcome any efforts to stabilize climate conditions and reduce wildfire risks, as they could prevent work stoppages due to extreme weather.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Climate Scientist (San Francisco, California)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a vital legislative effort. It recognizes the interplay between climate change and wildfires, offering a structured roadmap for intervention.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Urban Planner (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While not directly affected by wildfires, I see the benefits in terms of air quality and potential lessons that can be applied to urban areas.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $250000000 (Low: $210000000, High: $310000000)
Year 3: $260000000 (Low: $220000000, High: $320000000)
Year 5: $270000000 (Low: $230000000, High: $330000000)
Year 10: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $600000000)
Key Considerations
- Coordination across multiple federal agencies and levels of government will be complex but is crucial to the program's success.
- The ability to adapt and implement science-based solutions efficiently in a wide range of environments, from urban areas to remote wilderness, is vital.
- Potential changes in state and local regulations to accommodate new fire management techniques and technologies may influence overall effectiveness.