Senate Report 117-78 - REGIONAL OCEAN PARTNERSHIP ACT

[Senate Report 117-78]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

Calendar No. 217
117th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2d Session } { 117-78
_______________________________________________________________________

REGIONAL OCEAN PARTNERSHIP ACT

__________

R E P O R T

of the

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

S. 1894

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

February 15, 2022.--Ordered to be printed

__________

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

29-010 WASHINGTON : 2022

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
one hundred seventeenth congress
second session

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington, Chair
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii ROY BLUNT, Missouri
EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts TED CRUZ, Texas
GARY PETERS, Michigan DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JERRY MORAN, Kansas
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JON TESTER, Montana MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona TODD YOUNG, Indiana
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada MIKE LEE, Utah
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia

RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia RICK SCOTT, Florida
CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming
Melissa Porter, Acting Staff Director
John Keast, Minority Staff Director

Calendar No. 217
117th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2d Session } { 117-78

======================================================================

REGIONAL OCEAN PARTNERSHIP ACT

_______

February 15, 2022.--Ordered to be printed

_______

Ms. Cantwell, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany S. 1894]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill (S. 1894) to designate Regional
Ocean Partnerships of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, and for other purposes, having considered the
same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment (in the
nature of a substitute) and recommends that the bill (as
amended) do pass.

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of S. 1894, the Regional Ocean Partnership Act,
is to provide a process for Governors of coastal states to
apply for designation as a Regional Ocean Partnership (ROP);
provide authority to the Secretary of Commerce to designate
ROPs; designate the Gulf of Mexico Alliance, the Northeast
Regional Ocean Council, the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council, and
the West Coast Ocean Alliance as ROPs; define the functions of
ROPs; and establish ROP coordination requirements with Federal
agencies, Indian Tribes, and nongovernmental entities.

BACKGROUND AND NEEDS

In the United States, the ocean and Great Lakes economy
accounted for 3.3 million jobs and produced $307 billion in
goods and services annually, or 1.5 percent of total U.S. gross
domestic product (GDP), in 2017.\1\ Over 40 percent of all
Americans currently live in coastal regions, and these regions
account for nearly half of total economic productivity in the
United States,\2\ with 3.2 million employees working in 152,000
businesses in the ocean and Great Lakes economy, earning $128
billion in wages as of 2015.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office for
Coastal Management, NOAA Report on the U.S. Marine Economy, 2020,
Charleston, SC: NOAA Office for Coastal Management (http://
coast.noaa.gov/data/digitalcoast/pdf/econ-report-2017.pdf) (accessed
September 8, 2021).
\2\Ibid.
\3\National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office for
Coastal Management, NOAA Report on the U.S. Ocean and Great Lakes
Economy, 2018, Charleston, SC: NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(http://coast.noaa.gov/data/digitalcoast/pdf/econ-report-2015.pdf)
(accessed September 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal and ocean management issues frequently cross State
boundaries and require regional coordination. The ROPs are
voluntarily convened by State Governors in collaboration with
local and Federal Government partners and stakeholders to
address ocean and coastal issues of common concern for the
region. There are currently four ROPs, located in the
Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and the West Coast.
ROPs provide a State-led model for coordinated ocean and
coastal resource management, and present opportunities for
increased efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and more robust
ecosystem-based approaches to the way the Nation engages the
ocean and its many stakeholder groups. They leverage existing
State and Federal resources, knowledge, and partnerships to
build a stronger base of information and experience to make
well-informed decisions about the use of ocean resources.
Several of the ROPs have established ocean data portals,
which link existing data systems together to provide an easy-
to-use gateway to discover ocean and coastal data. Coastal
decision-makers, researchers, and stakeholders use the portals
to access data and decision-support tools they need to
understand and address high-priority regional issues. These
regional data portals work with the national-level data
portal,\4\ called the Marine Cadastre, to provide national-
level data and identify multi-use areas for siting projects,
identifying compatibility, and providing data to support ocean
action plans. The portals may also contain data specific to a
region such as State-created recreational data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, ``About MarineCadastre.gov'' (https://
marinecadastre.gov/about/) (accessed September 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2000, Congress passed the Oceans Act,\5\ in recognition
of the importance of and the challenges to the oceans and the
coasts. Pursuant to that Act, President Bush appointed a 16-
member U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, which submitted its
report, ``An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century,'' to the
President and Congress.\6\ A key recommendation of the Ocean
Commission was that a National Ocean Council should support the
voluntary establishment of regional ocean councils in order to
improve Federal agency coordination at the regional level and
develop and disseminate regionally important data that would be
useful for ecosystem management.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Public Law 106-256.
\6\U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, ``About the Commission,''
updated December 27, 2004 (http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/
oceancommission/commission/welcome.html) (accessed September 8, 2021).
\7\U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, see chapter 5 in An Ocean
Blueprint for the 21st Century, 2004 (https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/
oceancommission/documents/full_color_rpt/000_ocean_full_
report.pdf) (accessed September 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the recommendations, the regions began to
organize. The Gulf of Mexico Alliance started in 2004 and
includes the States of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Texas. Its mission is to enhance the
ecological and economic health of the Gulf of Mexico through
increased regional collaboration.\8\ The Northeast Regional
Ocean Council was formed in 2005 by the Governors of the New
England States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, and Connecticut to serve as a forum for the
development of goals and priorities and address regional
coastal and ocean management challenges with creative
solutions.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\Gulf of Mexico Alliance, ``Who We Are'' (https://
gulfofmexicoalliance.org/) (accessed September 8, 2021).
\9\Northeast Regional Ocean Council, ``About'' (https://
www.northeastoceancouncil.org/) (accessed September 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June 2009, President Obama issued a presidential
memorandum establishing an Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force
to develop recommendations regarding a coordinated national
ocean policy, improved stewardship, and coastal and marine
spatial planning.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\Obama Administration, Executive Office of the President of the
United States, Council on Environmental Quality, ``Interagency Ocean
Policy Task Force,'' June 12, 2009 (https://
obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ceq/whats_new/
Interagency-Ocean-Policy-Task-Force) (accessed September 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The same month, the Governors of Virginia, Maryland,
Delaware, New Jersey, and New York signed an agreement to
enhance the vitality of the Mid-Atlantic's ocean ecosystem and
economy by identifying four regional priorities for shared
action to improve ocean health and contribute to the quality of
life and the economic vitality of the region.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\Mid-Atlantic Regional Council on the Ocean, ``About MARCO''
(http://midatlanticocean
.org/) (accessed September 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2010, the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force released
its recommendations. Chief among them was that nine regional
planning bodies should be formed to--among other things--
aggregate and coordinate development of regional coastal and
marine spatial plans.\12\ President Obama formally adopted
these recommendations in a July 19, 2010, Executive order.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\Obama Administration, Executive Office of the President of the
United States, The White House Council on Environmental Quality, Final
Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, pp. 52-60,
July 19, 2010 (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/files/documents/
OPTF_FinalRecs.pdf) (accessed September 8, 2021).
\13\``Executive Order 13547 of July 19, 2010, Stewardship of the
Ocean, Our Coasts, and the Great Lakes,'' Code of Federal Regulations,
title 3 (2011): 227-231 (https://www.govinfo.gov/
content/pkg/CFR-2011-title3-vol1/pdf/CFR-2011-title3-vol1-eo13547.pdf)
(accessed September 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Though the National Ocean Policy espoused laudable goals,
it faced political backlash due to concerns regarding
separation of powers. In response, Congress enacted several
appropriations provisions barring funding to be expended on
implementation of the policy. One inadvertent result was that
the existing regional bodies (Gulf of Mexico Alliance,
Northeast Regional Council, and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Ocean
Council) lost all funding related to the National Ocean Policy.
In the years since, there has been interest among the
regional bodies and on Capitol Hill in differentiating the
conflict regarding a broad and sweeping national ocean policy
and the more narrowly tailored consensus push for regional
ocean and coastal planning and data-sharing. For example, in
2016, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation favorably reported S. 3038, the Coastal
Coordination Act. That bill would have reauthorized the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972 and included new provisions
strengthening the role of interstate and regional coordination
of coastal zone management. It would have also specifically
authorized the Gulf of Mexico Alliance as a regional
coordination body.
On June 19, 2018, President Trump signed an Executive
order\14\ rescinding President Obama's National Ocean Policy.
The new Executive order was intended to advance the economic,
security, and environmental interests of the United States
through improved public access to marine data and information,
efficient Federal agency coordination on ocean-related matters,
and engagement with marine industries, the science and
technology community, and other ocean stakeholders, including
ROPs. However, the Executive order excluded climate change and
conservation goals of the previous National Ocean Policy.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\``Executive Order 13840 of June 19, 2018, Ocean Policy To
Advance the Economic, Security, and Environmental Interests of the
United States,'' Code of Federal Regulations, title 3 (2019): 837-841
(https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2019-title3-vol1/pdf/CFR-2019-
title3-vol1.pdf) (accessed September 8, 2021).
\15\David Malakoff, ``Trump's New Oceans Policy Washes Away Obama's
Emphasis on Conservation and Climate,'' Science, June 19, 2018 (https:/
/www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06/trump-s-new-oceans-policy-washes-away-
obama-s-emphasis-conservation-and-climate) (accessed September 8,
2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the most recently formed ROP, the West Coast Ocean
Alliance, includes the States of Washington, Oregon, and
California, and was formed in December 2018 to support healthy,
resilient ocean ecosystems and communities that thrive on ocean
resources.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\West Coast Ocean Alliance, ``About Us'' (https://
westcoastoceanalliance.org/) (accessed September 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This legislation has the ability to provide a strong
national framework for the regions to address their own
specific issues while also being able to coordinate better with
Federal agencies acting on the ground.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS

S. 1894, the Regional Ocean Partnership Act, would do the
following:
Provide a process for Governors of coastal states to
apply to the Secretary of Commerce for designation as a
ROP.
Provide authority to the Secretary of Commerce to
designate a ROP.
Define the governance and functions of ROPs.
Designate the Gulf of Mexico Alliance, the Northeast
Regional Ocean Council, the Mid-Atlantic Regional
Council, and the West Coast Ocean Alliance as ROPs.
Authorize the ROP to award grants and enter into
cooperative agreements and contracts.
Authorize $10.1 million with a 1 percent increase
annually for this program to be split evenly across all
ROPs and $1 million annually to facilitate Tribal
participation.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 1894 was introduced on May 27, 2021, by Senator Wicker
and was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate. On June 16, 2021, the Committee
met in open Executive Session and, by voice vote, ordered S.
1894 reported favorably with an amendment (in the nature of a
substitute). The amendment added Great Lakes and further
clarified Tribal coordination and consultation. On June 24,
2021, Senator Hassan became a cosponsor.
On June 11, 2021, a corresponding bill, H.R. 3817, was
introduced by Representative Crist (for himself and
Representatives Palazzo, Lowenthal, and Smith [NJ]) and was
referred to the Committee on Natural Resources in the House of
Representatives. Representatives Pingree, Murphy [FL], and
Huffman are additional cosponsors.
In the 116th Congress, S. 2166 was introduced on July 18,
2019, by Senator Wicker (for himself and Senators Cantwell,
Cassidy, Collins, and Jones) and was referred to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.
Senators Markey, Kennedy, and Murphy were additional
cosponsors. On July 24, 2019, the Committee met in open
Executive Session and, by voice vote, ordered S. 2166 reported
favorably with an amendment (in the nature of a substitute). A
corresponding bill, H.R. 5390, the Regional Ocean Partnership
Act, was introduced on December 11, 2019, by Representative
Crist in the House of Representatives.
In the 114th Congress, similar language was included in S.
3038, the Coastal Coordination Act of 2016, introduced on June
8, 2016, by Senator Nelson (for himself and Senator Wicker) and
referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate. On June 15, 2016, the Committee
met in open Executive Session and, by voice vote, ordered S.
3038 reported favorably with an amendment (in the nature of a
substitute). That legislation was not considered in the full
Senate.

ESTIMATED COSTS

In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office:

U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, October 12, 2021.
Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Chair, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Madam Chair: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1984, the Regional
Ocean Partnership Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Sofia Guo.
Sincerely,
Philip L. Swagel,
Director.
Enclosure.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

S. 1894 would authorize the appropriation of specific
amounts totaling $57 million over the 2022-2026 period for the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to provide
grants to regional ocean partnerships. Those partnerships would
consist of coastal states that share a common ocean or coastal
area. Under the bill, a partnership would coordinate
conservation efforts and other related activities of state,
federal, and tribal governments and work with international
counterparts to conserve shared coastal resources. The bill
would designate four current partnerships under the program and
create a process for other groups of two or more coastal states
to apply for recognition as such a partnership.
Based on historical spending patterns for similar
activities, and assuming appropriation of the authorized
amounts, CBO estimates that implementing S. 1894 would cost $49
million over the 2022-2026 period and $7 million after 2026
(about 1 percent of the authorized amounts would not be spent).
The costs of the legislation, detailed in Table 1, fall within
budget function 300 (natural resources and environment).

TABLE 1.--ESTIMATED INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION UNDER S. 1894
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, millions of dollars--
--------------------------------------------------------------
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2022-2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization 11 11 11 11 12 57
Estimated Outlays 7 9 11 11 11 49
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Sofia Guo. The
estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Director
of Budget Analysis.

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the
legislation, as reported:

Number of Persons Covered

S. 1894, as reported, would not create any new programs or
impose any new regulatory requirements, and therefore will not
subject any individuals or businesses to new regulations.

Economic Impact

S. 1894, as reported, is not expected to have a negative
impact on the Nation's economy.

Privacy

S. 1894, as reported, would have no impact on the personal
privacy of individuals.

Paperwork

S. 1894, as reported, would require a report every 5 years
from the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) on the effectiveness of the partnership.
This requirement would sunset in 2040.

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

In compliance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides that no
provisions contained in the bill, as reported, meet the
definition of congressionally directed spending items under the
rule.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title.

This section would provide that the Act may be cited as the
``Regional Ocean Partnership Act''.

Section 2. Findings; sense of Congress; purposes.

This section states that it is the sense of Congress that
the United States should seek to attain coordination of ocean
management, conservation, resilience, and restoration through
ROPs.

Section 3. Regional Ocean Partnerships.

This section would define the terms ``Administrator'',
``coastal state'', ``Indian Tribe'', and ``Regional Ocean
Partnership''. A coastal state could participate in a ROP with
another coastal state(s) that shares a common ocean or coastal
area, is a coastal state(s) bordering the Great Lakes and/or
with a non-coastal state(s) that shares a watershed with a
coastal state. It provides a process by which a Governor or
Governors of a coastal state(s) could apply to the Secretary of
Commerce for designation as an ROP. Designated ROPs would
coordinate the management of coastal and ocean resources, with
a focus on environmental issues affecting ocean and coastal
areas that complement local, State, and Tribal efforts. The
ROPs would not have a regulatory function.
This section would designate the Gulf of Mexico Alliance,
the Northeast Regional Ocean Council, the Mid-Atlantic Regional
Council, and the West Coast Ocean Alliance as ROPs.
This section would establish the composition of the ROP's
governing body to include voting members from each State in the
partnership as designated by the Governor. It defines the
functions of a ROP to include promoting coordination between
State and Federal agencies, Indian Tribes, State and local
authorities, and other stakeholders to conserve natural
resources, manage data and data portals, and implement outreach
programs. It would direct the ROP to maintain mechanisms for
coordination, consultation, and engagement with the Federal
Government, Indian Tribes, nongovernmental entities, and other
federally mandated regional entities. It would allow ROPs to
create grants and enter into contracts for the purposes of
monitoring water quality and other ocean and coastal natural
resources, and researching and addressing the effects of
environmental change.
The ROPs would be required to submit a report no later than
5 years after the date of enactment of this Act on the
effectiveness of the partnership and recommendations to improve
the partnership.
This section would authorize $10.1 million for fiscal year
2022, with a 1 percent increase annually until fiscal year
2026. This section would also authorize $1 million for Indian
Tribes to improve Tribal participation and engagement with the
ROPs.

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee states that the
bill as reported would make no change to existing law.

[all]