On November 19, 2019, President Trump signed Memorandum 2019-25618 directing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to undertake comprehensive ocean mapping of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and Alaska's shoreline and nearshore areas. The memorandum established a federal coordinating framework requiring NOAA and participating agencies to prioritize systematic bathymetric and topographic surveys across these marine regions. Rather than creating new statutory authority, the directive leveraged existing agency capabilities to accelerate and coordinate mapping efforts that had previously proceeded on a more fragmented timeline.

The directive directly affects NOAA's operational priorities, requiring the agency to allocate resources and personnel toward these surveying initiatives. Oceanographers, hydrographers, and marine scientists employed by NOAA and partner federal agencies became responsible for executing these expanded mapping operations. Coastal communities, maritime industries reliant on navigation data, and researchers studying marine ecosystems stand to benefit from improved bathymetric information. The memorandum also indirectly affects resource management decisions at state and federal levels, since enhanced ocean mapping data informs decisions about fishing zones, mineral resources, and coastal protection infrastructure.

This action exists within a broader Trump administration framework that selectively engaged with scientific institutions and data collection. While this particular memorandum directed increased scientific activity rather than curtailment, it occurs alongside concurrent efforts that weakened scientific advisory structures—most notably the dissolution of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in January 2025 and the termination of National Science Board members. The ocean mapping directive represents a narrow area where the administration prioritized federal scientific capacity, though principally through operational direction rather than through institutional investment in scientific governance.

To date, no significant legal challenges to this memorandum have emerged. The directive remained active through the administration's tenure, with NOAA continuing implementation of the designated surveys. Reversal would require a subsequent presidential directive reallocating NOAA's resources away from these mapping priorities, though the agency might continue elements of this work under its statutory mandate to support maritime safety and coastal stewardship.