Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9463

Bill Overview

Title: SAT Streamlining Act of 2022

Description: This bill directs the Federal Communications Commission to revise its regulations that govern licenses and grants of U.S. market access (and renewals and modifications of such licenses and grants) for geostationary and nongeostationary orbital satellites. Geostationary orbital satellites maintain a stationary position in orbit while nongeostationary satellites move in relation to the Earth's surface. These satellites may be used to provide broadband and other telecommunications services. Matters that must be addressed in the regulations include deadlines for decisions regarding the licenses or grants of market access, space safety and orbital debris, and sharing of the electromagnetic spectrum band by licensees and grantees.

Sponsors: Rep. McMorris Rodgers, Cathy [R-WA-5]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals who rely on or are employed within the satellite telecommunications sector

Estimated Size: 300000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Farmer (Rural Tennessee)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this policy will help improve our internet service because it's crucial for managing our farm operations efficiently.
  • Right now, the service we have is pretty slow, and any improvements would be hugely beneficial.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Tech Startup Entrepreneur (San Francisco, California)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Streamlining satellite license regulations could significantly enhance our ability to innovate and bring solutions to market faster.
  • I'm particularly interested in how this will affect competition and collaboration globally.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Middle School Teacher (Minneapolis, Minnesota)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't know if this will affect my internet service, but I'm hopeful for more affordable and reliable connectivity, especially for my students.

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 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Telecommunications Consultant (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The streamlining process should aid our clients significantly in navigating the complex regulatory environment.
  • I expect this to facilitate quicker adaptation to new market trends and needs.

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 10 6
Year 20 9 6

Environmental Engineer (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 32 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am concerned about the space safety measures and hope these regulations enforce stricter controls on debris.
  • This could significantly reduce risks in our field.

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 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 5

Digital Marketing Specialist (New York, New York)

Age: 24 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am optimistic that policy changes may lead to better broadband pricing and connectivity.
  • Faster, more reliable service would streamline digital marketing work greatly.

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 7
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Retired (Rural Iowa)

Age: 72 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful that any changes will make things cheaper or offer more consistent service.
  • Currently, our service is pretty expensive.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

CEO of a Telecommunications Company (Austin, Texas)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm keenly interested in how these streamlined processes might save us time and money, and how they could introduce new competition.
  • Anything that cuts bureaucratic red tape is welcome.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 10 6

College Student (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 18 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Faster and more affordable internet would be fantastic. It's something I heavily rely on for my studies and social interactions.
  • Satellite tech is extremely fascinating, and any policy that supports its growth could create new learning opportunities.

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

Software Developer (Boston, Massachusetts)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More efficient satellite regulations will likely hasten the advancement of tech and applications I work on, which is exciting.
  • From a consumer's perspective, it could foster innovation and maybe improve service quality.

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 8 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $45000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $55000000)

Year 2: $47000000 (Low: $37000000, High: $57000000)

Year 3: $49000000 (Low: $39000000, High: $59000000)

Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations