PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 21, 2003
Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to redefine the term "essential fish habitat" as existing within the exclusive economic zone (established by Presidential Proclamation No. 5030) only in discrete areas.
Changes from a mandatory to a discretionary element of a fishery management plan any measure to minimize fishing-related adverse effects on essential fish habitat.
Specifies additional circumstances in which the specified time period for ending overfishing and rebuilding fisheries may exceed ten years.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Deems any fishery management plan, amendment, or implementing regulation prepared in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act to be in compliance with environmental impact statement requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.
Amends the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) Crab Rationalization Program to require that: (1) Blue Dutch, LLC receive specified "Class A" crab processing quota shares; and (2) applicable regulations include proportionate reductions of such shares for other holders.
Deems communities currently approved for participation in the western Alaska community development quota program under specified laws to have met eligibility criteria for program participation under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Amends the American Fisheries Act, in the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, to increase from ten percent to 12 percent the portion of the total allowable catch of pollock in the BSAI Management Area that is required to be allocated to the western Alaska program.
Requires the President to calculate and submit a report to specified congressional committees on the difference between the value in U.S. versus Canadian currency of annuity payments to U.S. citizens who worked in Canada for specified international fisheries commissions.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
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 Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
Executive Comment Requested from Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2407)
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
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: Apr 7, 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.3645 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.3645 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.3645 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.3645 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.