Coastal Communities Ocean Acidification Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 9, 2025
Bottom line
This bill strengthens intergovernmental and stakeholder collaboration in addressing ocean and coastal acidification impacts, particularly for Indigenous communities and coastal regions, by formalizing input channels and representation.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Federal Ocean Acidification Research And Monitoring Act of 2009 (FOARAM Act) to enhance collaboration between the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and State, local, and Tribal governments, as well as Native Hawaiian organizations. It mandates an ongoing input mechanism for diverse stakeholders, expands the advisory board membership to include Tribal representatives, and requires the development of a policy for engagement with Indian Tribes concerning ocean and coastal acidification research and vulnerability assessments.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill is crucial for ensuring that federal research and monitoring efforts on ocean acidification are directly relevant and responsive to the needs of affected coastal communities, especially Indigenous populations who are disproportionately impacted. They contend that enhanced collaboration will lead to more effective adaptation strategies and better-informed local decision-making, leveraging local expertise and traditional ecological knowledge.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that while the intent to increase collaboration is positive, adding more bureaucratic layers and advisory roles could potentially slow down federal research efforts or divert resources from direct scientific investigation. Some may also raise concerns about the administrative burden of establishing and maintaining these new formal collaboration mechanisms without explicit new funding.
The bill is relatively short and clearly structured, making it accessible for a reader to understand its provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2 of the bill, amending Section 12403 of the FOARAM Act
Inclusion of 'Indian Tribe' and 'Native Hawaiian Organization' Definitions
This section formally adds definitions for 'Indian Tribe' and 'Native Hawaiian organization' to the Federal Ocean Acidification Research And Monitoring Act of 2009. It also clarifies the definition of 'ocean acidification' to specify 'an increase of carbon dioxide' and defines 'Subcommittee' and 'United States' for consistency within the Act.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that formal definitions are essential for ensuring these groups are explicitly recognized and included in federal programs and policies related to ocean acidification, facilitating more targeted and culturally appropriate engagement.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against definitional updates that clarify inclusion, as they are generally seen as administrative improvements.
Tradeoffs
None apparent; this is a clarifying amendment aimed at improving precision and inclusivity.
Section 3(a) of the bill, amending Section 12404(c)(2) of the FOARAM Act
Establishment of Ongoing Stakeholder Input Mechanism
This provision requires the Secretary of Commerce, through NOAA, to establish or maintain an ongoing mechanism for engaging various non-federal stakeholders. These include affected industry members, coastal stakeholders, community acidification networks, fishery management councils, Indigenous knowledge groups, non-Federal resource managers, and scientific experts, to provide continuous input on research, data, and monitoring related to ocean and coastal acidification.
Section 3(b), (c), (d) of the bill, amending Section 12404(c)(3), (c)(4)(C), and (c)(9) of the FOARAM Act
Inclusion of Tribal Representatives on Advisory Board and Mandated Tribal Engagement Policy
This section amends the FOARAM Act to include two representatives from Indian Tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, Tribal organizations, and Tribal consortia on the Advisory Board. It also changes the appointment language to explicitly include 'Indigenous' representatives and mandates the Advisory Board to develop and maintain a policy for engagement and coordination with Indian Tribes affected by ocean and coastal acidification, requiring consultation with these Tribes during policy development.
Section 3(e) and (g) of the bill, amending Section 12404(e)(4)(A) and Section 12406 of the FOARAM Act
Enhanced Collaboration with State, Local, and Tribal Governments on Vulnerability Assessments
This provision requires the Secretary to build upon existing activities and collaborate with State and local governments and Indian Tribes that are conducting vulnerability assessments, research planning, or climate action plans related to ocean and coastal acidification. The goal is to support interagency relationships, information sharing, and assist these entities in improving existing systems and identifying models for other communities. It also allows for collaboration with Native Hawaiian organizations, Tribal organizations, and Tribal consortia, with a specific prioritization for underserved populations.
Clarifies the definition of 'ocean acidification' to explicitly state it refers to 'an increase of carbon dioxide' in the ocean.
Section 2, Paragraph (4) of the bill, amending Section 12403(4) of the FOARAM Act
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for technical corrections or clarifications to ensure precise language in the law. It is not intended to be evasive.
Case for: Proponents would argue this provides greater precision and clarity to a key scientific term, ensuring consistent understanding and application of the law across all stakeholders and research efforts.
Case against: No specific opposition, as it is a technical clarification that enhances scientific accuracy in the foundational definition of the Act.
Estimated impact: Minimal direct impact, but ensures scientific accuracy in the foundational definition of the Act, which underpins all subsequent research and policy.
Changes the requirement for the Secretary to 'maximize' the use of existing Federal assets and capabilities to instead 'take into consideration' the use of such assets when carrying out the ocean acidification program.
Section 3(g)(1)(A)(i) of the bill, amending Section 12406(a)(1)(C) of the FOARAM Act
Why it matters:This could be seen as a subtle shift in emphasis. 'Maximize' implies a stronger directive to prioritize existing resources, while 'take into consideration' offers more flexibility. It might be a technical adjustment to allow for new investments or approaches, or it could be seen as subtly weakening the directive for efficiency.
Case for: Proponents might argue it provides necessary flexibility for the Secretary to pursue the most effective strategies, even if it means investing in new capabilities rather than strictly relying on existing ones. This allows for a more holistic and adaptive approach to resource management.
Case against: Critics might argue that this change subtly weakens the directive for federal agencies to be efficient and leverage existing infrastructure, potentially leading to redundant spending or less coordinated efforts if new assets are acquired when existing ones could suffice.
Estimated impact: Potentially allows for greater discretion in resource allocation within NOAA's ocean acidification efforts, which could lead to new program development or different investment priorities.