Passed
218 Yea212 Nay2 Not voting1/2 required
HR-261-119
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Sponsored by Earl Carter (R-GA)
What it does
This bill would prohibit the Department of Commerce from enforcing its permit requirements for activities involving undersea fiber optic cables in national marine sanctuaries, as long as the activity is already authorized by a state or federal agency license, lease, or permit. Covered activities include the installation, continued presence, operation, maintenance, repair, or recovery of such cables. The bill would also allow Commerce to direct NOAA to coordinate with other federal agencies on actions involving these cables that could harm sanctuary resources.
Who benefits
Telecommunications companies and internet service providers that install or maintain undersea fiber optic cables, who would face reduced regulatory burden and faster permitting timelines. Businesses and consumers who depend on undersea cable infrastructure for international internet and communications connectivity. Coastal and island communities whose connectivity depends on undersea cables. Cable repair crews who could respond to outages more quickly without waiting for additional federal authorization. Indirectly, any U.S. internet user who benefits from reliable international data transmission.
Who is hurt
Marine sanctuary ecosystems and the species that depend on them, if cable activities cause habitat disturbance without the additional layer of sanctuary-specific review. Environmental and conservation organizations that rely on the National Marine Sanctuaries Act permitting process as a check on industrial activity in protected waters. Recreational users, researchers, and fishing communities whose interests in sanctuary resources are represented through the existing permit review process. NOAA staff whose oversight role would be reduced. Competing infrastructure operators in other sectors who still face full sanctuary permitting requirements.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that requiring a separate sanctuary permit on top of already-issued state or federal authorizations creates duplicative, time-consuming bureaucracy that delays critical communications infrastructure without meaningfully improving environmental protection. They contend that undersea fiber optic cables are essential to national security and economic competitiveness — carrying over 95% of international internet traffic — and that existing federal and state permitting processes already evaluate environmental impacts. The bill's interagency cooperation provision, they argue, preserves NOAA's ability to flag concerns without creating a redundant veto point.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that national marine sanctuaries were specifically designated by Congress to receive heightened protection, and that stripping NOAA's permit authority removes the one review process tailored to sanctuary-specific ecological conditions. They contend that a state or federal permit issued for general navigational or communications purposes does not substitute for a sanctuary-focused environmental review, and that cable installation and repair activities can cause direct physical disturbance to sensitive habitats such as coral reefs and deep-sea ecosystems. The interagency cooperation provision, they argue, is advisory only and provides no enforceable protection for sanctuary resources.
Constitutional context
The National Marine Sanctuaries Act rests on Congress's Commerce Clause authority (Art. I, §8, cl. 3) to regulate activities affecting navigable waters and interstate commerce. This bill modifies the scope of that statutory authority by limiting Commerce Department enforcement — a straightforward exercise of congressional power to define the reach of its own legislation. Post-Loper Bright (2024), any remaining NOAA regulatory interpretations in this area would face independent judicial scrutiny rather than deference, making a clear statutory carve-out like this one more legally durable than an agency-level policy change.
Checks and balances
Congress would reduce Commerce Department/NOAA's permit enforcement authority over a specific category of activity; the remaining check is the interagency cooperation mechanism, which is advisory rather than binding, and existing state and federal permitting processes that still apply.
Historical precedent
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and subsequent FCC rules have addressed streamlining permitting for communications infrastructure, but no directly analogous legislation has previously carved out undersea cable activities from National Marine Sanctuaries Act permit requirements.
Passed