Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8049

Bill Overview

Title: American Aerospace Supply Chain Resiliency, Innovation, and Advancement Act of 2022

Description: This bill directs the Department of Transportation to establish an Aerospace Supply Chain Resiliency Task Force to identify and assess risks to the U.S. aerospace supply chain and identify best practices and make recommendations to mitigate such risks. The task force must convene for an initial meeting within 120 days after enactment of the bill and at least every 90 days thereafter. It must also report to Congress on the activities it carries out, including recommendations for regulatory, policy, or legislative action to improve government efforts to reduce barriers, mitigate risk, and bolster the resiliency of the U.S. aerospace supply chain. The task force shall terminate upon submission of the report to Congress.

Sponsors: Rep. Graves, Garret [R-LA-6]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals working in the U.S. aerospace supply chain

Estimated Size: 3000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Aerospace Engineer (Wichita, Kansas)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see this policy as essential for securing the future of our industry.
  • It will likely push us to adapt but also protect jobs in the long run.

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 9 7
Year 20 9 8

Supply Chain Manager (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This initiative could streamline processes and reduce bottlenecks.
  • However, some smaller suppliers might struggle to meet new standards.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Logistics Coordinator (Huntsville, Alabama)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improving resilience is great, but I'm concerned about the immediate changes required.
  • Long-term, it should lead to more stable operations.

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 9 7
Year 20 9 8

Materials Scientist (Dallas, Texas)

Age: 41 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The focus on tech advancement will drive innovations in materials science.
  • There might be initial disruption, but it's a step towards sustainability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 7

Technical Consultant (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 56 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Task force recommendations could potentially reinvigorate parts of the industry.
  • A focus on best practices is always beneficial if effectively communicated.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 8 7

Aerospace Machinist (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 33 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If the policy leads to increased orders and job security, it would be beneficial.
  • But changes in processes may require additional training.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 9 7

CEO of a Small Aerospace Components Supplier (Columbus, Ohio)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My business could face new compliance pressures, but it could also lead to growth opportunities if managed well.
  • Resilience is key to long-term success.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Aerospace Data Analyst (Denver, Colorado)

Age: 36 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might increase my workload, but it will enhance data-driven decision-making.
  • It aligns with improving efficiency, which is exciting.

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 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 9 8

Quality Assurance Inspector (Houston, Texas)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There may be enhanced quality checks, ensuring better standards across the board.
  • This policy although demanding initially, could uplift safety and product consistency.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 7

Aerospace Software Developer (Miami, Florida)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see opportunities for innovation in software development as part of this policy.
  • It's an exciting time for tech in aerospace.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1200000 (Low: $1000000, High: $1500000)

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