Overview
Title
To direct the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to conduct high-resolution mapping of the lakebeds of the Great Lakes, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 7020 is a plan to make detailed maps of the bottom of the Great Lakes, using special technology to see under the water, by the end of 2029. The project has $200 million to spend on gathering and organizing the data, and will work with different groups to share the maps with everyone.
Summary AI
H.R. 7020, known as the "Great Lakes Mapping Act," directs the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to create detailed maps of the lakebeds of the Great Lakes by December 31, 2029. The project involves gathering high-resolution bathymetric data, creating systems to organize and store this data, and sharing the map with the public once the process is complete. The bill authorizes $200 million for this initiative, to be used through 2030, and stipulates collaboration with relevant state authorities and coastal observing systems.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposal in question, known as the "Great Lakes Mapping Act," is a legislative effort to enhance knowledge and understanding of the Great Lakes' lakebeds through high-resolution mapping. Introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, the bill empowers the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to complete this mapping initiative in collaboration with state entities and other organizations by the end of 2029. The proposed legislation allocates $200 million for the project, aiming for data transparency and accessibility.
General Summary of the Bill
The bill mandates NOAA to map the Great Lakes' lakebeds in high resolution, involving consultation with relevant state entities, the Ocean Policy Committee, and regional coastal observing systems, among others. The mapping initiative includes creating high-resolution maps, gathering bathymetric data, developing methods for data processing, and cataloging pertinent information. A significant aspect of the bill is its requirement for NOAA to make the collected data publicly available shortly after it is gathered. Importantly, the act clarifies that it does not intend to alter existing procedures under the Digital Coast Act or the Ocean and Coastal Mapping Integration Act.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several potential issues arise from the text of the bill. First and foremost is the lack of defined performance metrics or success criteria, which could lead to ambiguity in evaluating the initiative's outcomes. Additionally, the absence of a detailed fiscal plan raises concerns about potential misuse or inefficient allocation of the $200 million budgeted for the project. The bill also lacks mechanisms for monitoring and accountability, which could lead to resource mismanagement. Moreover, the responsibilities and roles of the Ocean Policy Committee and other consulted entities are not clearly defined, adding to implementation challenges. The relationship between this bill and existing legislation, such as the Digital Coast Act, is somewhat unclear, creating possibilities for conflicts or duplication of efforts.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, the completion of this high-resolution mapping endeavor could enhance knowledge of the Great Lakes, potentially aiding in environmental preservation, scientific research, and resource management. The comprehensive and publicly available data might improve public and governmental understanding of ecological changes, promote informed policymaking, and support activities like fisheries management and environmental conservation.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Government Agencies and Researchers: The data from this bill could bolster scientific research and provide a more informed basis for policy decisions related to environmental and resource management concerning the Great Lakes.
Local Governments and Communities: Stakeholders along the Great Lakes, including state agencies and municipalities, could use the compiled data for better planning and resource management, positively impacting local economies and environmental stewardship. However, unclear roles and responsibilities might lead to inefficiencies or conflicts among stakeholders.
Environmental Organizations: These groups may find the data valuable for advocacy and conservation efforts, allowing for more effective strategies in protecting and maintaining the Great Lakes' ecosystems.
In conclusion, while the "Great Lakes Mapping Act" holds potential benefits by enhancing understanding and management of the Great Lakes' resources, it faces several legislative and operational challenges. These concerns highlight the necessity for clearer definitions, strategic fiscal planning, and robust monitoring and accountability mechanisms to ensure the project's success and optimal use of allocated resources.
Financial Assessment
In the proposed H.R. 7020, known as the "Great Lakes Mapping Act," financial aspects play a significant role in facilitating the bill's objective to conduct a thorough mapping of the Great Lakes' lakebeds.
Summary of Financial Allocations
The bill includes a financial provision that authorizes up to $200 million to carry out the high-resolution mapping of the Great Lakes' lakebeds. This amount is designated to remain available through the fiscal year 2030. The funding aims to support the various necessary activities, such as collecting bathymetric data, developing processing methods, and cataloging the collected information. It also covers sharing the high-resolution maps and related data with the public.
Issues Relating to Financial References
Several issues may arise due to the manner in which these financial provisions are outlined:
Lack of Specific Performance Metrics: The bill, while earmarking $200 million, does not specify performance metrics or success criteria. Without these key performance indicators (KPIs), it becomes challenging to gauge whether the funds are being utilized effectively or if the project meets its intended goals. This could lead to difficulties in assessing the project's success and holding entities accountable for the expenditure.
Absence of a Detailed Fiscal Plan: There is no detailed breakdown of how the $200 million will be allocated across the various facets of the project. This absence raises concerns over potential wasteful spending and a lack of transparency. A more comprehensive fiscal plan could foster better financial management and ensure resources are directed toward necessary components effectively.
Lack of Monitoring and Accountability Mechanisms: The financial sections do not indicate mechanisms for continuous monitoring or accountability once the funds are appropriated. This oversight could result in mismanagement or ineffective use of resources, as there is no specified framework to ensure that the appropriations are efficiently tracked and reported.
Vague Collaboration Framework: The bill's mandate for consultation with various committees and systems lacks detail on budgetary responsibilities, potentially leading to confusion over financial roles. Without clear guidelines, there may be inefficiencies or misaligned priorities in how funds are distributed or utilized among the different entities involved.
Addressing these issues could enhance the clarity and efficiency of the financial allocations in the bill. A more structured approach to the appropriation and utilization of funds would likely improve accountability and effectiveness in carrying out the Great Lakes mapping initiative.
Issues
The mapping effort in Section 2(a) lacks specific performance metrics or success criteria, which can lead to ambiguities in determining the project's success and assessing accountability for the use of funds.
In Section 2(d), there is no detailed cost breakdown or fiscal plan outlined for the $200,000,000 authorized to carry out the mapping of the Great Lakes' lakebeds, raising concerns about potential wasteful spending and lack of transparency.
Section 2(a) does not specify any mechanism for ongoing monitoring or accountability once the funds are appropriated, which could result in mismanagement or ineffective use of resources.
The consultation language in Section 2(a) is vague regarding the roles and responsibilities of the Ocean Policy Committee and other entities, potentially leading to confusion and implementation challenges.
The rule of construction in Section 2(c) is unclear about its interaction with the Digital Coast Act and the Ocean and Coastal Mapping Integration Act, creating the potential for interpretative conflicts or duplicative processes.
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 first section of the act provides its official name, stating that it will be known as the “Great Lakes Mapping Act”.
2. Mapping the lakebeds of the Great Lakes in high resolution Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines a plan for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to map the lakebeds of the Great Lakes in high resolution by the end of 2029, involving collaboration with various entities and states. It requires the data collected to be made publicly available and allocates $200 million for this effort, clarifying it does not alter existing legal processes.
Money References
- (b) Data sharing.—The Administrator, in consultation with the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observing System and the regional coastal observing systems, shall— (1) during the mapping effort and within a reasonable time (as determined by the Administrator) after the relevant data is collected, make publicly available the parts of the high-resolution map of the lakebeds of the Great Lakes that are completed; and (2) not later than 180 days after completing the mapping effort, make publicly available— (A) the complete high-resolution map of the lakebeds of the Great Lakes; and (B) any additional information, including metadata, collected under subsection (a) that is required to be released to the public under any other provision of law. (c) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to change any process or procedure used by the Administrator in carrying out the requirements of the Digital Coast Act (16 U.S.C. 1467) or the Ocean and Coastal Mapping Integration Act (33 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). (d) Authorization of appropriations.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator $200,000,000 to carry out this section.