Overview
Title
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the NMFS Saltonstall-Kennedy Research and Development Program
Agencies
ELI5 AI
NOAA wants to write a big report on how to help fish in the sea, by making sure we don't catch too many and there's enough fish for everyone. They also want to hear what people think about this idea and if anyone has better ideas to keep our fish friends safe and healthy.
Summary AI
NOAA has announced its plan to create a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) to support the implementation of projects under the Saltonstall-Kennedy Research and Development Program. This program aims to promote, market, research, and develop U.S. Fisheries to help fishing communities, ensuring sustainable and economically beneficial fisheries. As part of the process, NOAA is seeking public input by inviting comments on the potential environmental impacts and alternatives of the proposed projects, and it will hold several public scoping meetings to gather feedback. The deadline for written comments is March 25, 2021.
Abstract
NOAA announces its intent to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the implementation of projects that foster the promotion, marketing, research, and development of U.S. Fisheries and their associated fishing sectors, as consistent with NOAA's Saltonstall-Kennedy Research and Development Program (S-K Program). The focus of this action will be activities and projects under the S-K Program, which interfaces with numerous programs within NOAA, and it is NOAA's intention that this PEIS may also cover those activities and projects implemented by other NOAA programs and offices that are consistent with the scope of the S-K Program. The S-K Program funds projects that address the needs of fishing communities, optimize economic benefits by building and maintaining sustainable fisheries (where the term "fisheries" includes commercial wild capture, recreational fishing, cultural and subsistence fishing, and marine aquaculture), and increase other opportunities to keep working waterfronts viable. This notice of intent (NOI) to prepare a PEIS initiates the public scoping process and invites interested parties to provide comments on the proposed project, its potential to affect the human environment, means for avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating those effects, the preliminary range of alternatives, and any additional reasonable alternatives that should be considered.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document titled "Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the NMFS Saltonstall-Kennedy Research and Development Program" from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) outlines plans to prepare a comprehensive evaluation, known as a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). This PEIS aims to assess projects intended to boost U.S. Fisheries' promotion, marketing, research, and development. The ultimate goal is to sustain fisheries and enhance economic advantages for fishing communities across the country. NOAA is actively seeking public feedback by inviting comments on the plan, its environmental impacts, alternatives, and is hosting several public scoping meetings to collect input. The deadline for submitting written comments is March 25, 2021.
Issues and Concerns
There are several significant issues and concerns surrounding this document that merit attention. Firstly, it lacks specific details about the budget or financial limits for the projects under the Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Program. This absence of information could raise worries about the potential for inefficient spending or allocation of resources.
Furthermore, the criteria for selecting and prioritizing projects are not clearly defined. This omission could lead to concerns over possible favoritism or a lack of transparency in deciding which projects receive funding. Clarity in selection criteria is crucial to ensure fair and transparent allocation processes.
The document also contains numerous technical terms and acronyms such as PEIS, S-K Program, and NEPA without providing explanations. This could hinder understanding for individuals who are not familiar with the specific terminology used in environmental and regulatory contexts.
While the procedure for submitting public comments is detailed, there is no clear description of how these comments will be evaluated or how they will influence decision-making. Public confidence in the engagement process depends on transparency about how their input will be utilized.
In the discussion of alternatives, only two options are presented: the "No Action Alternative" and the "Promotion, Marketing, Research and Development Alternative." The limited scope of these alternatives might not provide a comprehensive view of all possible options and solutions, potentially restricting the analysis.
Lastly, the language used to describe affected environments is technical, referring to terms such as "coastal, estuarine, and marine habitats," which may not be easily comprehensible to all readers, potentially limiting public engagement and informed feedback.
Public Impact
The proposed action and the resulting impacts of this document could broadly affect public interests. By funding programs under the S-K Program, NOAA aims to sustain and grow the fishing industry, which plays a significant role in local and national economies. If successfully implemented, these projects can enhance the economic vitality of fishing communities, maintain viable working waterfronts, and ensure sustainable fisheries management.
Specific stakeholders, such as fishers, business owners in the fishing industry, and coastal community members, stand to benefit from potential economic growth and job opportunities. However, these stakeholders might also face challenges such as adjusting to new regulations or compliance requirements driven by NOAA's environmental priorities.
Conversely, any lack of transparency in funding decisions, as well as the potential for inefficient spending, could negatively impact public trust in NOAA and other federal agencies. Immediate stakeholders and the broader public may feel disenfranchised if they perceive the decision-making process as opaque or biased.
In conclusion, while this document outlines a strategic plan that could bear positive outcomes for both the environment and the economy, addressing the issues and concerns mentioned could help build better public understanding, trust, and effective participation.
Issues
• The document does not specify any specific amounts or budgetary constraints for the funding of projects under the S-K Program, which may lead to concerns about potential wasteful spending.
• There is no clear criteria outlined for the selection or prioritization of projects, which might lead to concerns about favoritism or lack of transparency in funding decisions.
• The document frequently uses technical terms and acronyms (e.g., PEIS, S-K Program, NEPA) without providing definitions, which may make the text difficult to understand for individuals not familiar with the subject matter.
• The process for submitting public comments is described in detail, but it lacks clarity on how those comments will be evaluated and incorporated into the decision-making process.
• The 'Alternatives' section describes the 'No Action Alternative' and the 'Promotion, Marketing, Research and Development Alternative', but it lacks exploration of additional alternatives, which might limit the scope of the analysis.
• The language in the section discussing affected environments might be too technical, referring to 'coastal, estuarine, and marine habitats', which may not be clear to all readers.