PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 1, 2020
Prevent Harmful Algal Blooms Act
This bill directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to designate organizations as National Centers of Excellence in Harmful Algal Bloom Research, Prevention, Response, and Mitigation. An algal bloom is a rapid growth of algae that may create toxic or hypoxic (severely low-oxygen) conditions that are harmful to humans, animals, aquatic ecosystems, and the economy.
To be eligible for designation, an organization must
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
be an institution of higher education, a government research agency, a nonprofit laboratory or other research entity, or a consortium of such institutions;
have demonstrated expertise and success in harmful algal bloom research, monitoring, forecasting, prevention, or response efforts;
have demonstrated ability to collaborate with local, state, territorial, and tribal governments and federal agencies on harmful algal blooms; and
be located in an area that is economically and environmentally impacted by harmful algal blooms.
In designating National Centers of Excellence, NOAA must (1) consult with the Inter-Agency Task Force on Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia; (2) ensure regional balance by designating centers in a variety of locations throughout the United States, including the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and other territories and possessions of the United States; and (3) avoid duplication of other harmful algal bloom research.
Each designation shall be effective for five years and reviewed by NOAA in the fourth year of such effective period. The designation may be renewed for an additional five-year period.
People & committees
Rep. Crist, Charlie [D-FL-13] · D–FL
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 Water, Oceans, and Wildlife.
Referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 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 Science, Space, and Technology, 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
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 3, 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.7450 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.7450 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.7450 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.7450 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.