Bill Overview
Title: Aqua Alert Act
Description: This bill directs the U.S. Coast Guard to establish a pilot program to improve the issuance of alerts to render aid to distressed individuals on and under the high seas and waters over which the United States has jurisdiction. In developing the pilot program, the Coast Guard must consult with relevant federal agencies, states, territories, tribal governments, and political subdivisions.
Sponsors: Rep. Phillips, Dean [D-MN-3]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals on and under the seas
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The bill is focused on improving rescue operations for individuals who are distressed at sea.
- Hoards of people use the seas, including fishermen, commercial ship workers, naval personnel, and leisure boaters.
- Being a maritime country, many U.S. citizens engage in activities involving the high seas and U.S. jurisdictional waters.
- Globally, millions of individuals use the high seas for various purposes, including international transport and recreation.
- The pilot program will specifically cater to areas within and related to U.S. jurisdiction which may only cover a portion of the global seas.
Reasoning
- High-impact individuals would be those who frequently engage in risky maritime activities and may not have had sufficient safety measures in place before.
- The policy might not directly impact everyone's day-to-day wellbeing but could dramatically affect those who find themselves in distress on the water even once.
- Recreational boaters and commercial maritime workers are numerous, but not all will directly experience a change in wellbeing unless in distress situations.
- Budget constraints may limit the immediate rollout, focusing initially on high-traffic or high-risk areas.
- Some individuals may not perceive a direct benefit unless they have previously been or can foreseeably be in a distress situation.
Simulated Interviews
Recreational Boater (Tampa, FL)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this kind of alert system is well overdue. I’ve had a couple of instances where my boat malfunctioned and the delays in getting help were worrying.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Commercial Fisher (Seattle, WA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There’s always a risk when we’re out. With quicker response times and better alerts, I’d definitely feel safer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Maritime Logistics Coordinator (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could streamline our emergency protocols. Direct impacts on me are minimal, but I see the broader industry benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Naval Officer (Anchorage, AK)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Although it won’t significantly change my day-to-day life, enhanced alerts will allow us to work more efficiently.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
US Coast Guard (San Diego, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is crucial; it’ll enhance our capacity to save lives more effectively, which is fundamental to our mission.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cruise Ship Operator (Miami, FL)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving safety alerts is always good, though we have stringent safety protocols already on large ships like ours.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Leisure Boater (Honolulu, HI)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It’s not every day you need assistance, but knowing it’s more readily available is comforting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Marine Biologist (Boston, MA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We know the risks out there and any policy that improves safety is beneficial, especially when caught off-guard by the weather.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Oil Rig Worker (Houston, TX)
Age: 49 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While oil rigs have good safety systems, any additional responsiveness from more alert channels heightens overall safety.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Developer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 31 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I find the tech aspect interesting though I’m not directly affected. These alerts would help my clients, the shipbuilders.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5500000 (Low: $3300000, High: $7700000)
Year 3: $6000000 (Low: $3600000, High: $8400000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Coordination efforts with various jurisdictions will be complex and may require extended time and resources.
- The program's success depends heavily on technological upgrades and the ability to effectively respond to distress alerts.
- Training and public awareness campaigns are essential for program effectiveness but will require budget allocations.