Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/3952

Bill Overview

Title: NOAA Chief Scientist Act

Description: This bill revises requirements concerning the qualifications and responsibilities of the Chief Scientist in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Specifically, the bill establishes new minimum qualification requirements for the position of the Chief Scientist. It also outlines new responsibilities of the Chief Scientist. For example, the Chief Scientist must follow NOAA's scientific integrity policies and ensure NOAA's employees and contractors adhere to the policies as well. In addition, the Chief Scientist must (1) provide policy and program direction for the science and technology priorities of NOAA, and (2) manage the Office of the Chief Scientist.

Sponsors: Rep. Sherrill, Mikie [D-NJ-11]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals potentially impacted by the scientific and technical work of NOAA

Estimated Size: 330000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Climate Scientist at NOAA (Seattle, WA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a NOAA scientist, adherence to clear integrity policies is important to ensure the credibility of our work.
  • The new Chief Scientist guidelines could bring more structured and effective research management.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

NOAA Policy Analyst (Silver Spring, MD)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Streamlining scientific priorities can lead to more impactful outcomes.
  • The Chief Scientist needs to ensure that policies support innovative research directions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

University Professor (Lincoln, NE)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • NOAA's integrity policies will guide the research standards followed by others in the field.
  • Expect better communication and data resources for academic collaborations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Environmental Consultant (Austin, TX)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy may improve the reliability of NOAA data, which is crucial for my work.
  • Hope it leads to more collaborative opportunities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Weather Forecaster (Miami, FL)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More robust oversight might enhance the quality of forecasts we deliver.
  • Important to maintain high trust in the data provided.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Marine Biologist (Portland, OR)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • A focused Chief Scientist could mean better use of NOAA's funds towards understanding marine ecosystems.
  • Changes in priority could affect ongoing collaboration projects.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Retired Meteorologist (Chicago, IL)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Scientific integrity at NOAA ensures continued trust in its forecasts and data.
  • This could affect how municipalities plan for weather-related disasters.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

Graduate Student (New York, NY)

Age: 26 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Stronger policies may enhance the rigor of data available for research so I support the changes.
  • Interested in seeing how these changes will influence future data sets.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

NOAA Contractor (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 55 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy enforcement could improve consistency in project execution and outcomes.
  • It might require adaptation in work practices, but overall beneficial.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

Environmental Policy Advocate (Boston, MA)

Age: 75 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • NOAA's leadership in scientific integrity is essential for all environmental advocacy work.
  • Strengthening NOAA's structure and policies may set a precedent for other institutions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Key Considerations