PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 12, 2015
Marine Disease Emergency Act of 2015
This bill authorizes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to declare and respond to a marine disease emergency that: (1) is caused by a marine disease or environmental stressor, (2) is likely to threaten the sustainability of a marine species or the health of a marine ecosystem, and (3) is likely to expand in geographic scope. "Marine species" does not include aquacultured animals, marine mammals, or birds. NOAA may take appropriate actions to respond to the emergency, including making grants, entering into contracts, and investigating the cause, treatment, or prevention of the emergency.
Upon declaring an emergency, NOAA must: (1) designate an individual to coordinate the response to the emergency, (2) develop a response plan within 28 days of the declaration, and (3) publish a summary of the plan within 21 days of the declaration.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The emergency terminates when NOAA declares that the emergency no longer exists or 120 days after the declaration was made, whichever occurs first. NOAA may renew a declaration.
The Marine Disease Emergency Working Group is established in NOAA to provide advice on assessing, declaring, and responding to emergencies.
The Marine Disease Emergency Fund is established to respond to emergencies.
NOAA must establish a National Data Repository for Marine Diseases Research and Services to collect, store, and disseminate information on marine diseases and facilitate the development and rapid dissemination of research.
Sea star wasting syndrome is deemed to be a marine disease emergency.
People & committees
Rep. Heck, Denny [D-WA-10] · D–WA
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 Water, Power and Oceans.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock and Foreign Agriculture.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1052)
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Aug 12, 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.936 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.936 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.936 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.936 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.