Technical corrections only. v5 incorporates U.S. Code citation notes and publication metadata, such as page numbers and legislative history, which are standard for an enrolled bill becoming public law. There are no substantive changes to the operative text or policy between v4 and v5.
Save Our Seas 2.0 Amendments Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Sullivan, Dan [R-AK]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Dec 26, 2025
Bottom line
The bill streamlines the administration and expands the reach of federal marine debris initiatives by updating existing legislation and extending funding.
What it actually does
This Act amends the Save Our Seas 2.0 Act and the Marine Debris Act to refine the operations of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Marine Debris Program and the Marine Debris Foundation. It clarifies grant and agreement authorities for NOAA, modifies the structure and governance of the Marine Debris Foundation, and reauthorizes appropriations for the Marine Debris Act through fiscal year 2029.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that these amendments will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of efforts to combat marine debris, enhance collaboration with diverse stakeholders including Indian Tribes, and ensure sustained funding for critical environmental programs. They emphasize the importance of a well-administered Marine Debris Foundation and NOAA program in addressing a global environmental challenge.
Opponents contend
No specific organized opposition is typically raised against technical amendments aimed at improving program administration and extending reauthorization for established environmental programs. Potential critics might raise concerns about the overall cost of such programs or the effectiveness of specific strategies, but these amendments are largely administrative.
The bill is concise and its core changes are understandable, making it accessible for a reader to evaluate within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2(b) of the Act, amending Section 101(d) of the Marine Debris Act (33 U.S.C. 1952(d)).
Expanded Authority for NOAA Marine Debris Program Agreements and In-Kind Contributions
This provision expands the types of agreements NOAA can use for marine debris projects beyond just grants and contracts to include "other agreements." It also allows NOAA's Under Secretary to make in-kind contributions for projects that are not grants or cooperative agreements, specifically when NOAA derives a benefit from the project. This provides greater flexibility in how NOAA partners with external entities, potentially streamlining project implementation and resource leveraging.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this flexibility is crucial for adapting to diverse project needs and partners, allowing for more efficient and effective deployment of resources to combat marine debris. In-kind contributions can leverage non-monetary assets and expertise, maximizing program impact and fostering innovative solutions.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against administrative flexibility that aims to improve program efficiency, provided there are adequate oversight mechanisms to ensure accountability and proper resource utilization.
Tradeoffs
The tradeoff is between increased administrative flexibility and the potential for less standardized oversight compared to traditional grants or contracts, though the bill implies NOAA's benefit must be determined for in-kind contributions, suggesting a level of scrutiny.
Section 3 of the Act, amending various sections of the Marine Debris Act (Public Law 109-449) related to the Foundation.
Enhanced Governance, Tribal Engagement, and Office Location for Marine Debris Foundation
This section makes several changes to the Marine Debris Foundation. It clarifies its status as a "corporation," adds "Indian Tribes" to its purposes, modifies the Board of Directors appointment process to include recommendations and Secretary of Commerce approval, and adds the Administrator of USAID to the ex officio board members. It also requires the Foundation to develop best practices for outreach to Indian Tribes and Tribal Governments, and mandates its principal office be in the National Capital Region or a coastal shoreline community.
Section 3(i) of the Act, amending Section 9(a) of the Marine Debris Act (33 U.S.C. 1958).
Extension of Marine Debris Act Appropriations
This provision reauthorizes appropriations for carrying out the Marine Debris Act for each of fiscal years 2018 through 2029. Additionally, Section 3(h) specifically inserts an authorization of $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2025 for the Marine Debris Foundation and expands the list of eligible recipients for matching funds to include Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations, broadening the scope of potential partners.
Defines "coastal shoreline community" as "a city or county directly adjacent to the open ocean, major estuaries, or the Great Lakes."
Section 5(a)(3) of the Act, inserting new paragraph (2) into Section 131 of the Marine Debris Act.
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to define terms in a dedicated section to ensure consistent interpretation throughout the Act, rather than embedding the definition within the operative text.
Case for: Supporters argue that a clear definition ensures the Foundation's principal office is genuinely connected to areas directly impacted by marine debris, fostering local engagement and relevance. This helps ensure the Foundation's work remains grounded in the realities of coastal communities.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against technical definitions. Some might argue for broader or narrower definitions depending on specific regional interests, but this is a minor technical detail.
Estimated impact: Ensures the physical location of a key administrative body is strategically placed, potentially enhancing its operational effectiveness and community ties by requiring proximity to affected areas.
States that nothing in the Act may be construed to satisfy any requirement for government-to-government consultation with Tribal Governments or to affect or modify any treaty or other right of any Tribal Government.
Section 3(g) of the Act, adding new subsection (i) to Section 113 of the Marine Debris Act.
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to include such clauses to protect existing legal frameworks and relationships, especially concerning Tribal sovereignty and treaty rights, ensuring that new legislation does not inadvertently undermine them.
Case for: Supporters argue this clause is essential for respecting Tribal sovereignty and ensuring that the Act's provisions, particularly those encouraging outreach to Indian Tribes, do not inadvertently undermine existing government-to-government relationships or treaty rights. It provides crucial legal protection for Indigenous communities.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against clauses protecting Tribal rights. Such provisions are widely supported as a matter of federal-tribal relations and legal precedent.
Estimated impact: Prevents unintended legal consequences for Tribal Governments and reinforces the principle of government-to-government consultation, ensuring that federal agencies continue to meet their distinct obligations to Tribes.