Overview
Title
To require the reopening of covered recreation sites closed due to a natural disaster, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The ROUTES Act is a plan that says when parks or fun places get closed because of a big storm or other natural disasters, they should be reopened within three years, even if it means skipping some steps that usually protect nature. If they stay closed, reports have to be sent to Congress to explain why.
Summary AI
H.R. 6994, known as the “Restoring Our Unopened Trails for Enjoyment and Safety Act” or the “ROUTES Act,” directs the reopening of recreation sites that have been closed due to natural disasters. It mandates that federal authorities reopen these sites within three years after any natural disaster and submit periodic reports to Congress if they remain closed. The bill also establishes a categorical exclusion, waiving certain environmental review processes for activities aimed at repairing and restoring damaged sites. Additionally, it defines key terms such as "covered recreation site,” “hazard tree,” and specifies the responsibilities of the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture concerning different federal lands.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, known as the "Restoring Our Unopened Trails for Enjoyment and Safety Act" or the "ROUTES Act," aims to ensure the timely reopening of recreational sites that have been closed due to natural disasters. Under the bill, the relevant government officials must reopen these sites within three years after the natural disaster's conclusion. If they fail to meet this deadline, the officials are required to submit regular reports to Congress detailing the obstacles preventing the reopening. An important element of the bill is the establishment of a categorical exclusion for specific restoration activities, which means these activities would not require extensive environmental assessments as typically demanded by federal law.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several issues arise with this bill, primarily due to ambiguities and omissions in its provisions. Firstly, the bill lacks details about funding, posing the risk of overspending or inefficiencies without clear financial oversight. Additionally, the lack of explicit criteria for determining the end of a natural disaster could lead to delays in reopening the sites. Furthermore, the guidance on handling "extraordinary circumstances" in environmental exclusions is vague, potentially leading to varied application and inconsistency. Another concern is the broad definition of "hazard tree," which might result in differing interpretations about which trees should be cleared for safety. These issues could lead to administrative burdens and challenges rather than streamline the reopening of these sites.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the bill aims to benefit the public by mandating the reinstatement of access to recreational areas affected by natural disasters, which are significant for outdoor activities and tourism. The three-year timeframe set for reopening could ensure timely access and support local economies dependent on recreational tourism. However, the lack of clarity around funding and reporting could lead to taxpayer money being used inefficiently, possibly causing a backlash if delays and overspending occur.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For government agencies like the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, this bill might increase administrative obligations significantly. The need to submit frequent reports if sites remain closed could strain resources and detract from practical efforts to reopen areas.
On the positive side, stakeholders such as local businesses and tourism operators who rely on these sites would benefit from their timely reopening. These businesses might see increased customer flow as restored recreational sites become available once again. Conversely, environmental advocates may have concerns about the potential bypassing of environmental assessments, albeit under certain “extraordinary circumstances,” which could impact environmental safeguards and lead to ecological degradation if not managed vigilantly.
Overall, while the bill's objectives are clear in seeking to restore access to important recreational areas, its execution could be problematic due to the issues mentioned, potentially affecting both public and stakeholder expectations and the effectiveness of the legislation in achieving its goals.
Issues
The bill does not specify any budget or funding sources for the reopening and restoration of covered recreation sites, which may lead to overspending or lack of accountability in spending. This financial oversight could impact the efficiency and effectiveness of the bill's implementation. (Section 2)
There is no clear guidance on how the 'extraordinary circumstances' procedures will be applied to the categorical exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act. This could lead to inconsistent application, potentially affecting environmental compliance and oversight. (Section 2(b)(4))
The bill does not define what constitutes the 'end' of a natural disaster, leaving it to the discretion of the Secretary concerned. This could cause ambiguity and delays in determining when sites should be reopened, leading to potential legal or administrative challenges. (Section 2(a)(1))
The requirement for the Secretary to submit reports if sites remain closed could create an administrative burden without necessarily ensuring that the necessary actions are taken to reopen the sites. This may result in bureaucratic inefficiencies rather than practical outcomes. (Section 2(a)(2))
The broad definition of 'hazard tree' may lead to varied interpretations and inconsistency in identifying which trees require removal for public safety, property protection, or site access. This could raise legal and operational challenges. (Section 2(e)(2))
The processes and timelines for compliance with environmental regulations under categorical exclusions might be too vague, potentially resulting in environmental oversight or failure to adequately address environmental protection needs. (Section 2(b))
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 referred to as either the “Restoring Our Unopened Trails for Enjoyment and Safety Act” or the “ROUTES Act.”
2. Reopening of covered recreation sites closed due to natural disasters Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill mandates that recreation sites affected by natural disasters must be reopened within three years, and if not, reports on the barriers to reopening must be submitted to Congress. It establishes a categorical exclusion for certain restoration activities from environmental assessments and permits specific regulations for removing hazard trees during recovery efforts. The bill also requires a report on reopened sites and those still closed due to natural disaster damage, and defines key terms like "covered recreation site," "hazard tree," and "natural disaster."