PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 19, 2010
Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment Implementation Act of 2010 - Encourages the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating to enter into negotiations through the International Maritime Organization to execute agreements to promote coordinated action among the United States, Russia, Canada, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, and other seafaring and Arctic nations to ensure in the Arctic: (1) placement and maintenance of aids to navigation; (2) appropriate marine safety, tug, and salvage capabilities; (3) oil spill prevention and response capability; (4) maritime domain awareness, including long-range vessel tracking; and (5) search and rescue.
Directs the Committee on the Maritime Transportation System to coordinate the establishment of domestic transportation policies in the Arctic necessary to carry out this Act.
Authorizes the Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements, contracts, or other agreements with, or make grants to, individuals and governments to carry out this Act or any agreements.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to promote safe commercial maritime navigation by means of icebreaking where needed.
Authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to enter into agreements or contracts with or make grants to: (1) individuals to conduct demonstration projects to reduce emissions or discharges from vessels operating in the Arctic; as well as (2) maritime training institutions to train mariners for ice navigation and Artic operations, including the prevention of discharges.
Directs the Commandant of the Coast Guard to analyze: (1) the costs and benefits of extending the service life of the existing fleet of icebreakers or of constructing new icebreakers for the Coast Guard; and (2) the impact on the U.S. ice-breaking mission and ability to maintain a presence in the Artic regions through 2020 if recapitalization of the icebreaker fleet is not fully funded.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) report to specified congressional committees on the results of the ongoing High Latitude Study to assess Arctic ice-breaking mission requirements; and (2) assess, and report to Congress on, the need for additional Coast Guard prevention and response capability in the high latitude regions.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.5770 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.
Examine H.R.5770 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.
Examine H.R.5770 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.
Examine H.R.5770 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.