Bill Overview
Title: Spectrum Innovation Act of 2022
Description: This bill specifies a process for auctioning a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum between 3100 megahertz (MHz) and 3540 MHz for nonfederal use, shared federal and nonfederal use, or a combination of those uses. Most wireless technologies (e.g., mobile communication) rely on the electromagnetic spectrum to transmit signals. Specifically, the Office of Management and Budget must transfer funding from the Spectrum Reallocation Fund to federal entities for planning related to the reallocation. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Executive Office of the President must oversee the planning. Informed by the planning, the Department of Commerce must identify at least 200 MHz of spectrum for reallocation. In identifying the spectrum, Commerce must consult with the Department of Defense, the Office of National Science and Technology Policy, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC must (1) adopt rules authorizing the use of the identified spectrum in consultation with the NTIA, and (2) auction licenses for the identified spectrum within seven years of the bill's enactment. Additionally, the President must modify or withdraw (subject to certain limits) current federal assignments of the identified spectrum to increase nonfederal use. The FCC must allow for opportunistic uses (i.e., allow devices to opportunistically identify and transmit on unused spectrum without infringing on the rights of the spectrum license holder) of a withdrawn or modified assignment. An allowed opportunistic use must cease after the auction if the use is inconsistent with the rights of the licensee that obtains its license through the auction.
Sponsors: Sen. Lujan, Ben Ray [D-NM]
Target Audience
Population: Global wireless communication users and service providers
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The act pertains to the allocation and usage of the electromagnetic spectrum, particularly between 3100 MHz and 3540 MHz, which is critical for wireless communication technologies like mobile communications.
- The wireless communications industry, including companies involved in mobile networks, will directly be impacted as they rely on spectrum availability for expanding and upgrading their services.
- Consumers who use wireless communication services and devices will indirectly be affected as changes in spectrum allocation can influence service quality, coverage, and pricing.
- Federal agencies currently using the designated spectrum will be impacted due to potential reallocation or shared use initiatives.
- Technology companies involved in the development of devices and services that utilize wireless technologies may also be impacted.
- Governments must ensure the spectrum management is efficient and meets both commercial and federal needs, affecting regulatory and administrative operations.
Reasoning
- The Spectrum Innovation Act will impact different stakeholders to various extents based on their reliance on the wireless communication spectrum between 3100 MHz and 3540 MHz.
- Telecommunications companies directly involved in spectrum management will experience a noticeable impact, potentially affecting their business operations and costing sizeable sums for acquiring new spectrum licenses.
- Consumers, who represent a large segment of the American population, might experience subtle changes in service quality and cost over time. This population is vast but the individual impact on each person's well-being will likely be low to medium.
- Federal agencies currently occupying these spectrum frequencies will face changes in operations and resource allocation that could moderately affect their functions and personnel.
- Budget constraints of $70 million in the first year and $525 million over ten years restrict large-scale implementations or significant compensations, necessitating a strategic focus primarily on critical areas of impact.
- The policy is international in scale but these simulations are focused on direct and indirect effects within the U.S., particularly concerning expected improvements or maintenance of current service levels and innovations.
Simulated Interviews
Telecom Network Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will provide much-needed spectrum space for telecoms, enhancing capability arenas.
- Planning and implementation could initially strain resources but offers future potential growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Mobile App Developer (New York, NY)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If spectrum efficiency improves, it will enhance app performance and user experience.
- The uncertainty during the auction phase could affect short-term planning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Government Employee in Communication Regulation (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reallocation requires careful coordination to avoid downtime in federal services.
- It could foster better public-private sector collaboration in telecoms.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Software Engineer (Austin, TX)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Potential for increased IoT device performance if spectrum options grow.
- The disruption during reallocation could delay product rollouts.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Retired Military Officer (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reallocation must balance military and public communications needs.
- The auction could complicate military communications frequency usage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
College Student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think anything that improves internet speed and mobile data reliability is positive.
- The act seems complex, with outcomes I can't fully predict.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Tech Startup CEO (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More spectrum availability drives innovation opportunities.
- The cost of spectrum acquisition might be prohibitive for startups.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Regulatory Analyst (Denver, CO)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The complexity of this transition requires nuanced analysis to balance commercial and federal interests.
- The results might improve technology regulation frameworks overall.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Wireless Service User (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Spectrum management might influence service quality or cost, which I care about.
- I just want consistent and reliable service.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Environmental Science PhD Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Broader spectrum access could improve smart city projects I'm interested in.
- The policy specifics are hard to predict in terms of environmental impact.
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 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $70000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 2: $70000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 3: $70000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 5: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Efficient spectrum management is crucial for balancing the interests of federal and nonfederal entities.
- The legal and regulatory frameworks established by this act are intended to foster fair auctioning and post-auction spectrum management.
- Long-term economic benefits are expected to exceed initial costs due to enhanced technological capabilities and expanded communication services.