PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 8, 2005
National Offshore Aquaculture Act of 2005 - Directs the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to establish a site and operating permit process to make areas of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone available to persons to develop and operate offshore aquaculture facilities.
Excludes offshore aquaculture from certain fishery conservation requirements under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) establish permit fees; and (2) modify or suspend such permits.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to aquaculture operations located on facilities subject to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, to: (1) enforce all requirements contained in federal mineral leases and regulations issued pursuant to such Act; (2) require and enforce additional conditions necessary to protect the marine environment, property, or human life or health; and (3) issue orders to any offshore aquaculture permit holder to take appropriate action to ensure safe oil and gas or other mineral operations on such facility.
Sets forth certain environmental requirements for offshore aquaculture facilities.
Authorizes the Secretary to establish an integrated, multidisciplinary, scientific research and development (R&D) program to further offshore aquaculture technologies compatible with the protection of marine ecosystems.
Makes it unlawful for any person to: (1) falsify any information required to be reported, or any regulation or permit issued, under this Act; (2) engage in offshore aquaculture within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone except in full compliance with this Act; or (3) violate any provision of this Act. Sets forth civil and criminal penalties for violations of this Act. Provides for judicial review of civil penalties or permit sanctions.
People & committees
Sen. Stevens, Ted [R-AK] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6228)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.1195 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 S.1195 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 S.1195 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 S.1195 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.