Bill Overview
Title: Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes appropriations through FY2023 for the Federal Maritime Commission and the U.S. Coast Guard, including appropriations for acquiring icebreaker vessels. It also revises a variety of requirements concerning the Coast Guard's personnel, operations, infrastructure, and environmental compliance. For example, the bill revises requirements concerning sexual assault, sexual harassment, foreign workers, vessel safety, navigation, ship construction, shipping cargo, marine mammals, aquatic nuisance species, and oil spills.
Sponsors: Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in maritime activities worldwide
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill affects the U.S. Coast Guard directly, including its personnel and operations.
- Changes to vessel safety and navigation requirements affect maritime operators globally.
- Revisions concerning aquatic nuisance species and oil spills impact the shipping industry worldwide.
- The environmental compliance revisions may have broader implications for international waters, impacting other nations who engage in maritime activities.
Reasoning
- The policy will primarily affect those working directly in maritime industries, such as Coast Guard personnel and maritime operators, due to its focus on operational changes.
- Given that the US Coast Guard employs around 42,000 active duty members and 7,000 in reserves, its personnel will likely see the most direct impact, especially in terms of infrastructure and regulations.
- The policy revisions around vessel safety, sexual harassment, and environmental compliance can potentially improve working conditions and safety, thereby positively impacting wellbeing for those affected.
- Others indirectly impacted include supply chain and logistics workers who depend on maritime operations, although the effect here might be less pronounced.
- There will be a portion of the population that is unaffected, such as those not working in maritime industries or living in non-coastal states.
- The budget and program size limits suggest that while the policy can cover existing operational needs, any novel initiatives would be constrained by the financial allocations.
Simulated Interviews
Coast Guard Officer (Miami, FL)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The changes in regulations feel necessary to adapt to modern challenges.
- I am especially hopeful about the improvements in tackling sexual harassment.
- Infrastructure upgrades are long overdue.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Merchant Marine (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tighter regulations on oil spills is a relief.
- Safety on ships is always a concern, I'm glad to see attention here.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Shipping Company Executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The updates are comprehensive, but I worry about the cost implications for compliance.
- Our fleet already invests in safety, but new rules may mean more expense.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Environmental Scientist (Boston, MA)
Age: 53 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Glad to see attention to invasive species, a critical issue in our waters.
- The Coast Guard's role in environmental protection is vital.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Alaskan Fishery Manager (Anchorage, AK)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We rely heavily on the Coast Guard for enforcement and support.
- Updating policies to reflect current realities is positive.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Retired Longshoreman (Jacksonville, FL)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I won't be directly affected now, but during my working years, the Coast Guard's role was crucial.
- Keeping operations safe benefits everyone involved.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Logistics Coordinator (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Maritime efficiency directly impacts my work, and any improvements are welcome.
- My job stability depends on how smoothly goods move through ports.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Coast Guard Reservist (San Diego, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a reservist, I'm glad there is focus on harassment, it's a concern.
- The additional funding may help expand training opportunities.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Port Authority Manager (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Safety improvements are always a priority, and it's good to see them getting attention.
- This will help maintain our port's operational standards.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Marine Construction Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 35 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm curious about how changes in ship construction requirements will affect my job.
- Regulations may increase workload, but it could also mean more jobs.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $12000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $15000000000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The authorization focuses on fiscal year 2023, impacting cost estimates primarily in the near term.
- Improvements in infrastructure may yield long-term savings that are difficult to quantify at the outset.
- Potential geopolitical impacts if U.S. compliance efforts influence international maritime laws.