To authorize the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to provide certain funds to eligible entities for activities undertaken to address the marine debris impacts of the March 2011 Tohoku earthquake and subsequent tsunami, and for other purposes.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-399, Part I.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · Apr 2, 2014
Authorizes the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide funds to any state, local, or tribal government impacted by the events, including marine debris, resulting from the March 2011 earthquake and subsequent tsunami in the Tohoku region of Japan (such events are defined collectively as a "covered severe marine debris event"). Provides for such funds to assist with the costs of any activity carried out to address the effects of such event.
Permits the Administrator to provide such funds using any funds provided by the government of Japan for such purposes.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-399, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-399, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.1491 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.1491 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.1491 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.1491 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.