PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 25, 1998
Florida Coast Protection Act of 1998 - Amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from conducting any preleasing or lease sale activity in the following Areas ("covered areas"): (1) the Eastern Gulf of Mexico; (2) the Straits of Florida; and (3) the South Atlantic. Cites circumstances under which the Secretary may approve or permit an exploration, production, or drilling activity in such areas with respect to any existing lease. Establishes a Joint Federal-State Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Force to: (1) ensure acquisition and consideration of needed information in all relevant disciplines to understand environmental risks; (2) provide scientific expertise to the Secretary; (3) facilitate the resolution of conflicts between the State of Florida and Federal agencies with respect to OCS activities and environmental studies; and (4) participate in peer review of certain required studies and research. Subjects approval of oil and gas exploration plans in the covered areas to the detailed environmental impact statement requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Expands the scope of required oil and gas development and production plans to include analyses of the effects upon environmental, human, social and economic resources of the affected areas. Provides that a State's consistency response to the consistency certification accompanying such plans shall be considered preliminary and provisional until receipt and review of such expanded analyses. Requires State concurrence for any approval by the Secretary of either a Development and Production Plan or a Development Operations Coordination Document. Requires the Secretary to consult with and obtain the concurrence of each affected State in determining if the approval of a development and production plan constitutes a major Federal action for NEPA purposes. Requires the Secretary, upon a finding that such plan is a major Federal action, to ensure that each affected State receives the final environmental impact statement six months before determining concurrence or objection to the coastal zone consistency certification. Changes from discretionary to mandatory the Secretary's authority to apply the mandated oil and gas development and production plans to an oil or gas lease located in that area of the Gulf of Mexico which is adjacent to the State of Florida.
People & committees
Sen. Graham, Bob [D-FL] · D–FL
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 Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S7186)
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.2225 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.2225 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.2225 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.2225 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.