Overview
Title
An Act To require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to approve or deny spend plans within a certain amount of time, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 5103, the “FISHES Act,” is a plan to make sure that when fish areas have big problems, people in charge have to look at fix-it plans quickly, without causing extra delays. This is to help get money to those who need it faster.
Summary AI
H.R. 5103, known as the “FISHES Act,” aims to streamline the process for approving or denying fishery spend plans by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The bill specifies that after a fishery resource disaster, a requester must submit a spend plan to the Secretary within 120 days, which should include objectives, a statement of work, and budget details. The Secretary has 10 days to review and determine if the plan is complete. Additionally, funds must be made available to grantees within 90 days after receiving a complete plan, with OMB having the opportunity to review the plan concurrently without causing any delays.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the Bill
The legislation, known as the "Fishery Improvement to Streamline untimely regulatory Hurdles post Emergency Situation Act" or the "FISHES Act," seeks to enhance the efficiency of handling spending plans related to fisheries' resource disasters. By amending the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the bill establishes strict timelines for the submission, review, and funding of spending plans. Its aim is to address emergencies more swiftly and effectively, ensuring that financial resources are allocated in a timely manner to those affected.
Summary of Significant Issues
Despite its well-intended goals, several issues arise from the bill's provisions. First, the term "affirmative fishery resource disaster determination" lacks a clear definition, which could lead to varied interpretations and potential legal challenges. This ambiguity might create inconsistency in applying the law. Additionally, the prescribed timelines for submission (120 days) and review (10 days) of spend plans may not consider the complexities involved in developing and assessing such detailed documents, possibly imposing unrealistic expectations on stakeholders.
Moreover, the criteria for identifying an "incomplete spend plan" require more precise guidelines to avoid delays in funding. The role of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in reviewing spend plans, without having the authority to delay the process, requires further clarification. This vagueness could potentially lead to misunderstandings about their role and influence in expediting or hindering the availability of funds.
Potential Public Impact
For the general public, the bill promises a streamlined response to fisheries' emergencies, which could ensure quicker recovery for affected communities. By hastening the process of fund allocation, the FISHES Act could minimize the economic impact on fisheries-dependent regions, thus preserving jobs and sustaining local economies. However, the success of these benefits hinges on the clarity and feasibility of its implementation terms.
Impact on Stakeholders
Positive Impact:
Fishery stakeholders, including fishermen and related businesses, could greatly benefit from this legislation by receiving the necessary financial support with reduced bureaucratic delays. This prompt response not only aids recovery but also reinforces stability within their industries.
Negative Impact:
Conversely, the stringent timelines may place excessive pressure on governmental agencies tasked with reviewing and approving spend plans. Lack of clear definitions and guidelines also poses a risk of inconsistent application, potentially leading to disparities in how emergencies are managed across different regions.
In conclusion, while the FISHES Act aims to expedite the financial relief process for fisheries experiencing disasters, challenges arising from vague definitions and tight deadlines could hinder its effectiveness. Addressing these issues would be crucial to ensure that the Act achieves its intended outcomes and serves the public and stakeholders efficiently.
Issues
The definition of terms such as 'affirmative fishery resource disaster determination' in Section 2 may lead to misinterpretation, as these are not clearly defined in the provided text, leading to potential legal disputes or public misunderstanding.
The specific timelines for submission (120 days) and review (10 days) of spend plans in Section 2 may not be realistic for all parties involved, raising concerns about the feasibility of meeting these deadlines and potentially delaying emergency responses.
The lack of clarity around what constitutes an 'incomplete spend plan' as mentioned in Section 2 might lead to confusion and inconsistency in the review process, possibly delaying fund allocation and hampering timely assistance to affected parties.
The role of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget in the spend plan review process under Section 2 is somewhat vague, which might create ambiguity regarding their influence over fund availability and could potentially slow down the process without clear responsibilities outlined.
The long and complex title of the Act (FISHES) in Section 1 might make it challenging for the public to understand or remember, potentially hindering public engagement and awareness of the legislation.
The acronym 'FISHES Act' in Section 1 does not clearly convey the purpose of the legislation, which might lead to confusion among stakeholders and the general public regarding the Act's focus and goals.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section specifies the short title of the Act, which can be called the "Fishery Improvement to Streamline untimely regulatory Hurdles post Emergency Situation Act" or "FISHES Act."
2. Spend plans Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act by outlining the process for requesting and reviewing spend plans related to fishery resource disasters. Requesters must submit a detailed plan within 120 days of notification of available funds, and the Secretary must review it quickly; funds should be made available to grantees within 90 days once a plan is deemed complete.