PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 27, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on June 16, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Delaware River Protection Act of 2005 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Ports and Waterways Safety Act to require any person who knows of a release from a vessel or facility of any object that creates an obstruction in the navigable waters of the United States to notify the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating and the Secretary of the Army.
(Sec. 3) Amends the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to gradually increase liability limits associated with oil spills for single-hull and double-hull tank vessels and other type tank vessels.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 4) Requires the Philadelphia Area Committee to review and revise annually the Philadelphia Area Contingency Plan (a plan to remove a worst case discharge, and to mitigate or prevent a substantial threat of such a discharge, from a vessel, offshore facility, or onshore facility operating in or near an area) to include available data and biological information on environmentally sensitive areas of the Delaware River and Delaware Bay that has been collected by federal and state surveys.
(Sec. 5) Establishes the submerged oil program to detect, monitor, and evaluate the environmental effects of submerged oil. Directs the Commandant of the Coast Guard to conduct a demonstration project to develop and demonstrate technologies and management practices to remove submerged oil from the Delaware River and other navigable waters. Authorizes appropriations for FY2006-FY2010.
(Sec. 6) Establishes the Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee to make recommendations to the Commandant and Congress on methods to improve the prevention of and response to future oil spills in the Delaware River and Delaware Bay.
People & committees
Rep. LoBiondo, Frank A. [R-NJ-2] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5197-5198)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5197-5198)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1412.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5197-5200)
Mr. LoBiondo moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 79.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 109-137.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 109-137.
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Discharged.
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.1412 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.1412 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.1412 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.1412 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.