Saltonstall-Kennedy Act:
July 14, 2020
Background and Issues
Harold F. Upton
The Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Act of 1954 (

Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Updated November 14, 2025 (R46335) Jump to Main Text of Report

Contents

• Introduction
• General Provisions of the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act
• The American Fisheries Advisory Committee
• History of the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act
• Revenue and Use of Funds
• Use of Funds: Operations, Research, and Facilities Account
• Use of Funds: Remaining Funding
• Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program
• Issues for Congress
• Congressional Actions
• Funding Allocation
• Stopping the Transfer to the Operations, Research, and Facilities Account
• Past Proposals to Amend S-K Funding Priorities

Figures

• Figure 1. Flow and Use of Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Act Funds
• Figure 2. Total Funds Transferred from USDA and Percentage of Funds Transferred to Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF)

Tables

• Table 1. History of Legislation Related to the Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Act
• Table 2. Requested and Enacted ORF Transfers and S-K Grant Program Funding
• Table A-1. Financing History of the Saltonstall-Kennedy Program

Appendixes

• Appendix. History of Financing Under the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act

Summary

The Saltonstall-Kennedy Act of 1954 (S-K Act; 15 U.S.C. §713c-3) established a program to 15 U.S.C. §713c-3) established a program to
Analyst in Natural
provide financial support for research and development of commercial fisheries. The S-K Act provide financial support for research and development of commercial fisheries. The S-K Act
Resources Policy
created a fund (known as the S-K created a fund (known as the S-K fundfund) that is financed by a permanent appropriation of a portion ) that is financed by a permanent appropriation of a portion

of import duties on marine of import duties on marine fishery products. S-K funds are distributed by the Secretary of Commerce as products. S-K funds are distributed by the Secretary of Commerce as
grants and cooperative agreements to address needs of the U.S. fishing industry, grants and cooperative agreements to address needs of the U.S. fishing industry, including but not

limited tosuch as harvesting, processing, marketing, and associated infrastructure. harvesting, processing, marketing, and associated infrastructure. However, Congress
allocates mostCongress typically allocates most S-K funding to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) funding to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to fund, part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for agency activities related to marine fisheries agency activities related to marine fisheries
research and management. Some have questioned whether research and management. Some have questioned whether thethis allocation of S-K funds reflects the original intent of the S-K allocation of S-K funds reflects the original intent of the S-K
Act and Act and whether the S-K Grant Program addresses the needs and priorities of the fishing industry.
Since its creation, the S-K fund’saddresses the fishing industry's needs and priorities. Since the creation of the S-K fund, the authorizing language and authorizing language and prioritiesCongress's priorities for the fund have evolved with have evolved with changes to the fishing industrythe fishing industry's needs, new , new
or amended federal laws governing fisheries management, and or amended federal laws governing fisheries management, and changing federal agencychanges to NMFS responsibilities. In 1980, the responsibilities. In 1980, the
American Fisheries Promotion Act (AFPAAmerican Fisheries Promotion Act (AFPA; P.L. 96-561) amended the S-K Act to authorize a competitive grant program, known as the ) amended the S-K Act to authorize a competitive grant program, known as the
Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program (S-K Grant Program)Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program (S-K Grant Program), and the National Program to support fishing industry research and and the National Program to support fishing industry research and
development projects. Both programs are administered by NMFS, part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA)development projects. NMFS administers both programs. In the 1980s, the S-K Grant Program focused on fisheries development. In the 1980s, the S-K Grant Program focused on fisheries development, but; in subsequent years, as in subsequent years, as
U.S. fisheries became fully or overexploited, priorities generally shifted to resource conservation and management. U.S. fisheries became fully or overexploited, priorities generally shifted to resource conservation and management. More recently, Congress established the American Fisheries Advisory Committee (AFAC) through the American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 117-121) to administer elements of the S-K Grant Program and recommend projects for funding to NMFS. The AFAC is an industry advisory committee that identifies the fishing industry's needs, develops requests for proposals, reviews grant applications, and selects grant applications for approval. The S-K The S-K
Grant Program has supported Grant Program has supported a variety of differentvarious projects, such as gear technology research, seafood marketing, projects, such as gear technology research, seafood marketing,
aquaculture, and others.
and aquaculture. The S-K Grant Program is funded by a permanent appropriation of 30% of the previous calendar yearThe S-K Grant Program is funded by a permanent appropriation of 30% of the previous calendar year’'s customs receipts s customs receipts
from imports of fish and fish products. These funds are transferred into NOAAfrom imports of fish and fish products. These funds are transferred into NOAA’'s Promote and Develop American Fisheries s Promote and Develop American Fisheries
Products and Research Pertaining to American Fisheries Fund (P&D account). Transfers of revenue into the P&D account Products and Research Pertaining to American Fisheries Fund (P&D account). Transfers of revenue into the P&D account
have grown steadily from $26.7 millionhave grown steadily from $26.7 million in 1980 to $182.8 million in 2020 in FY1980 to approximately $376.5 million in FY2024 (nominal dollars, not adjusted for inflation). Congress subsequently transfers most funds into . Congress subsequently transfers most funds into
the Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF) account within NOAA. Congress has directed NMFS to use funds allocated to the Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF) account within NOAA. Congress has directed NMFS to use funds allocated to
the ORF account for specific activitiesthe ORF account for specific activities, including stock assessments, fishing information networks, survey and monitoring including stock assessments, fishing information networks, survey and monitoring
projects, cooperative research, and interjurisdictional fisheries. The remaining funds are available projects, cooperative research, and interjurisdictional fisheries. The remaining funds are available for supportingto support the annual the annual
competitive S-K Grant Program andcompetitive S-K Grant Program and, in some cases in some cases, the National Program. the National Program.
Since the early 1980s, Congress has transferred most P&D account funds into the ORF discretionary account, sometimes Since the early 1980s, Congress has transferred most P&D account funds into the ORF discretionary account, sometimes
leaving little or no funding for the specified purposes of the S-K Act. Some critics have questioned whether funds from the leaving little or no funding for the specified purposes of the S-K Act. Some critics have questioned whether funds from the
P&D account could be used more effectively by targeting fishing industry needs, as Congress originally intended. For P&D account could be used more effectively by targeting fishing industry needs, as Congress originally intended. For
example, in the 112th, 113th, and 114th Congresses, bills were introduced that would have used mostexample, in the 119^th Congress, some Members have introduced bills that would authorize increased allocations for the S-K Grant Program and other purposes. In previous Congresses, some Members proposed legislation that would have included additional priorities (e.g., climate-related priorities) for the S-K Grant Program or would have proposed using S-K funds to establish a S-K funds to establish a
regional fisheries grant program. regional fisheries grant program. By contrast, someSome stakeholders have expressed concerns that if significant funding have expressed concerns that if significant funding iswere shifted away from shifted away from
NMFS fisheries management programs, additional funds would need to be appropriated or activities such as data collection NMFS fisheries management programs, additional funds would need to be appropriated or activities such as data collection
and fish population assessments could be compromised. These NMFS activities provide information and analyses used to and fish population assessments could be compromised. These NMFS activities provide information and analyses used to
manage and conserve manage and conserve fishfishery populations. Additional issues of interest may include potential impacts of tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration to future P&D funding amounts, as well as potential implications of Executive Order (E.O.) 14276, "Restoring America's Seafood Competitiveness," and NOAA staffing priorities for ongoing activities with respect to the promotion and development of U.S. fisheries. The impacts of tariffs and E.O. 14276 on S-K funding and the S-K Grant Program are unclear at present, as are NOAA's ongoing priorities for these efforts under the second Trump Administration.

Introduction

The Saltonstall-Kennedy Act of 1954 (S-K Act; 15 U.S.C. §713c-3) established a fund (known as the S-K fund) to support U.S. fisheries development and research. Funding for the S-K fund populations.
Some also have questioned whether the S-K Grant Program could be modified to provide the fishing industry with more
direct input into the S-K grant process. Currently, NMFS, in consultation with the fishing industry, identifies S-K Grant
Program priorities and selects the recipients of S-K grants. Over the last several Congresses, bills have been introduced that
would change the procedure for screening, evaluating, and awarding S-K grants. In the 116th Congress, the American
Fisheries Advisory Committee Act (H.R. 1218 and S. 494) would establish an industry advisory committee to identify the
needs of the fishing industry, develop requests for proposals, review grant applications, and select grant applications for
approval. S. 494 was reported on August 16, 2019, by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation; on
June 6, 2020, H.R. 1218 was reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service

---

link to page 4 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 8 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 5 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 8 link to page 12 link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 17 Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
The Saltonstal -Kennedy Act ............................................................................................ 2
Current Provisions ..................................................................................................... 2
History of the Saltonstal -Kennedy Act ......................................................................... 3
Revenue ................................................................................................................... 5
Use of Funds............................................................................................................. 7
Operations, Research, and Facilities Account ............................................................ 7
Remaining Funding .............................................................................................. 7
Saltonstal -Kennedy Grant Program ........................................................................ 8
Issues for Congress ......................................................................................................... 9
Congressional Actions .............................................................................................. 10
Funding Allocation ............................................................................................. 10
Stopping the Transfer to the Operations, Research, and Facilities Account................... 11
American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act ............................................................... 11

Figures
Figure 1. Flow and Use of Saltonstal -Kennedy Act (S-K) Funds ............................................ 2
Figure 2. Total Funds Transferred From USDA and Funds Transferred to Operations,
Research, and Facilities (ORF) ....................................................................................... 6

Tables
Table 1. History of Legislation Related to the Saltonstal -Kennedy Act.................................... 5
Table 2. Requested and Enacted ORF Transfers and S-K Grant Funding .................................. 9

Table A-1. Financing History of the Saltonstal -Kennedy Program........................................ 13

Appendixes
Appendix. History of Financing Under the Saltonstal -Kennedy Act ..................................... 13

Contacts
Author Information ....................................................................................................... 14

Congressional Research Service

---

link to page 5 Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Introduction
The Saltonstal -Kennedy (S-K) Act of 1954 (15 U.S.C. §713c-3) established a fund (known as the
S-K fund) to support U.S. fisheries development and research. Funding originates from a transfer
originates from a transfer by the Secretary of Agriculture into the Promote and Develop American Fisheries Products and by the Secretary of Agriculture into the Promote and Develop American Fisheries Products and
Research Pertaining to American Fisheries Fund (P&D account)Research Pertaining to American Fisheries Fund (P&D account). The; the P&D account is P&D account is
administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of the National Oceanic and administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the Department of Commerce.in the Department of Commerce.11 Transfers of revenue into Transfers of revenue into
the P&D account have grown steadily from $26.7 the P&D account have grown steadily from $26.7 mil ion in 1980 to $182.8 mil ion in 2020.
million in FY1980 to approximately $376.5 million in FY2024 (nominal dollars, not adjusted for inflation). Currently, the bulk of P&D account revenue is transferred into Currently, the bulk of P&D account revenue is transferred into theNOAA's Operations, Research, and Operations, Research, and
Faculties (ORF) accountFacilities (ORF) discretionary account (Figure 1), which supports fisheries science and management administered by , which supports fisheries science and management administered by
NMFS.NMFS.22 The remaining funds support the The remaining funds support the Saltonstal Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program (S-K Grant -Kennedy Grant Program (S-K Grant
Program) and sometimes the National Program, which focus on fishing industry research and Program) and sometimes the National Program, which focus on fishing industry research and
development projects.development projects.
Historical y, the3 Historically, use of the S-K fund has evolved with changing fisheries management institutions use of the S-K fund has evolved with changing fisheries management institutions
and changingand shifting needs of U.S. fisheries. needs of U.S. fisheries.3 Congress is continuing to consider4 Congress has considered whether current funding whether current funding
from the P&D account meets the needs of U.S. fisheries and the U.S. fishing industry.from the P&D account meets the needs of U.S. fisheries and the U.S. fishing industry. Some5 Some stakeholders and Members of Congress have have
questioned whether the U.S. commercial fishing industry receives sufficient opportunities to questioned whether the U.S. commercial fishing industry receives sufficient opportunities to
provide input into the S-K competitive grant process.provide input into the S-K competitive grant process.4 Due in part to6 Citing what they what they perceivehave described as a lack as a lack
of industry input, of industry input, among other concerns, some critics some critics asserthave asserted that NMFS has not distributed funding in accordance with that NMFS has not distributed funding in accordance with
the primary purposes the primary purposes and stipulations of the S-K Act,of the S-K Act,⁷ such as supporting projects related to the marketing of fish. such as supporting projects related to the marketing of fish.5
8 Another concern is the Another concern is the al ocationallocation of funds, and of funds, and specifical yspecifically whether there is a need for more whether there is a need for more
financial financial support of S-K competitive grants than for funding NMFS fisheries science and support of S-K competitive grants than for funding NMFS fisheries science and
management activities in the ORF management activities in the ORF account.6 However, if funding were real ocateddiscretionary account.⁹ If Congress were to reallocate funding to provide to provide
greater support of the S-K Grant Program, greater support of the S-K Grant Program, Congressit may need to consider implications of the may need to consider implications of the
likely likely decrease in funds that would be transferred to ORF from the P&D account to support decrease in funds that would be transferred to ORF from the P&D account to support
NMFS fishery research and management activitiesNMFS fishery research and management activities. Figure 1 summarizes the flow of funding
from the P&D account into NOAA and the S-K program.

1 NMFS is also known as National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries.
2 T he ORF account, NOAA’s largest, funds a portion of all of NOAA’s line office budgets, including the National
Weather Service; National Ocean Service; Oceanic and At mospheric Research; NMFS; National Environmental
Satellite, Data, and Information Service; and the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations.
3 T he Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (P.L. 94-265) defines fishery as “(A) one or more
stocks of fish which can be treated as a unit for purposes of conservation and management and which are identified on
the basis of geographical, scientific, technical, recreat ional, and economic characteristics; and (B) any fishing for such
stocks.”
4 Senator Dan Sullivan, “Senators Pass Bill Out of Committee to Give Fishermen Voice in Grant Process, Boost U.S.
Seafood,” press release, June 29, 2016.
5 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and T ransportation, American Fisheries Advisory
Com m ittee Act, committee print, prepared by Committee on Commerce, Science, and T ransportation, 115 th Cong., 1st
sess., December 11, 2017, p. 2.
6 “Senators Kerry and Snowe Will Introduce Bill to Restore Intent of Saltonstall-Kennedy Act,” Saving Seafood, March
9, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Figure 1. Flow and Use of Saltonstall-Kennedy Act (S-K) Funds

Source: Adapted from NOAA Fisheries, Saltonstal -Kennedy Research Program, Presentation provided to New
England Fishery Management Council, December 6, 2018, at https://s3.amazonaws.com/nefmc.org/7_NE-Council-
Presentation_Feedback-Sessions-Final.pdf.
Notes: NMFS = National Marine Fisheries Service; Saltonstal -Kennedy (S-K) Act of 1954 (15 U.S.C. §713c-3).
The Saltonstall-Kennedy Act
Current Provisions
The S-K Act requires the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer 30% of duties on marine products
collected under the so-cal ed Section 32 Program to the Secretary of Commerce.7 These funds are
transferred into the P&D account and made available to NMFS. Currently, the uses of S-K funds
as specified in 15 U.S.C. 713c-3 include the following:8
 providing grants in support of fisheries research and development projects under
subsection (c),
 implementing a national fisheries research and development program under
subsection (d),
 implementing the Northwest Atlantic Ocean Fisheries Reinvestment Program,
and
 funding the federal share of a fisheries capacity reduction fund.

7 T he program’s name is from the section that established the program, Section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935,
Chapter 641, §32; 7 U.S.C. §612c.
8 15 U.S.C. §713c-3(c) and (d).
Congressional Research Service
2

---

link to page 8 Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

The S-K Act requires the Secretary of Commerce to use no less than 60% of funds to make direct
industry-assistance grants pursuant to subsection (c). Subsection (c) refers to topics that may be
addressed by research and development grants, including but not limited to harvesting,
processing, marketing, and associated infrastructures. Subsection (c) also identifies the terms and
conditions of grant awards.
The S-K Act requires the balance of S-K funds to be al ocated to finance NMFS activities that
support development of U.S. fisheries pursuant to subsection (d). Subsection (d) refers to a
national fisheries research and development program (including but not limited to harvesting,
processing, marketing, and associated infrastructures), if not adequately covered by projects
assisted under subsection (c) of this section or as the Secretary deems appropriate.
History of the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act
. Additionally, Congress may wish to consider other administrative priorities for these types of NMFS research and management activities.¹⁰

Figure 1. Flow and Use of Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Act Funds Source: Congressional Research Service, adapted from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), "Saltonstall-Kennedy Research Program," presentation provided to New England Fishery Management Council, December 6, 2018, https://s3.amazonaws.com/nefmc.org/7_NE-Council-Presentation_Feedback-Sessions-Final.pdf. Notes: ORF = Operations, Research, and Facilities; P&D = Promote and Develop Account; Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Act of 1954 (15 U.S.C. §713c-3); USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture. For P&D and S-K Program funding values since 2018, see Table A-1. General Provisions of the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act The S-K Act requires the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer 30% of duties on marine fishery products collected under the so-called Section 32 Program (see Table 1) to the Secretary of Commerce.¹¹ These funds are transferred into the P&D account and made available to NMFS. Currently, uses of S-K funds as specified under 15 U.S.C. §713c-3 include

• providing grants in support of fisheries research and development projects under Subsection (c),¹²
• implementing a national fisheries research and development program under Subsection (d),¹³
• implementing the Northwest Atlantic Ocean Fisheries Reinvestment Program,¹⁴ and
• funding the federal share of a fishing capacity reduction fund.¹⁵

The S-K Act requires the Secretary of Commerce to use no less than 60% of funds to make direct industry-assistance grants. The act also requires the balance of S-K funds to be allocated to finance NMFS activities that support development of U.S. fisheries.¹⁶ See the section on "Revenue and Use of Funds" for more information regarding the administration and uses of these funds for fisheries research and development.

The American Fisheries Advisory Committee

The S-K Act, as amended by the American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 117-121), established the American Fisheries Advisory Committee (AFAC), which administers elements of S-K competitive grants.¹⁷ The S-K Act, as amended, includes provisions for the AFAC's composition, roles and responsibilities, and procedures.¹⁸ In 2022, the American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act changed the process for awarding S-K competitive grants by assigning to the AFAC certain duties that include

• identifying the needs of the seafood industry,
• developing requests for proposals,
• reviewing grant applications, and
• selecting grant applications for approval.¹⁹

Prior to the AFAC's establishment, NMFS performed these functions and considered industry input during the selection process.²⁰ P.L. 117-121 expanded the specified purposes of fisheries research and development projects by explicitly including projects that focus on fisheries science and recreational fishing.²¹

In accordance with statute, the AFAC comprises 22 representatives from six geographic regions of the United States.²² The Secretary of Commerce appoints three members from each region, including (1) an individual with experience as a seafood harvester or processor, (2) an individual with experience in recreational or commercial fishing or in growing seafood, and (3) an individual who represents the fisheries science community or the relevant U.S. regional fishery management council.²³ The Secretary also appoints four at-large members, including (1) an individual who has experience in food distribution, marketing, retail, or service; (2) an individual with experience in the recreational fishing industry supply chain; (3) an individual with experience in the commercial fishing industry supply chain; and (4) an individual who is an employee of NMFS with expertise in fisheries research.²⁴ In selecting these members, the Secretary of Commerce is to seek to maximize, to the extent practicable, a balanced representation of expertise in U.S. fisheries, seafood production, and science.²⁵ The AFAC elects a chair among its members.²⁶ All AFAC members serve three-year terms.²⁷ The AFAC members are to meet twice annually, with meetings rotating among the six regions.²⁸ The Secretary is to designate an agency staff member to coordinate and assist with the AFAC's activities.²⁹

The Secretary of Commerce is to identify three or more federal, private, or public sector experts to undertake technical review of grant applications, which occurs prior to committee review.³⁰ The Secretary also is required to develop guidance related to technical review, including criteria for elimination of applications that fail to meet a minimum level of technical merit.³¹ A grant may not be approved unless the Secretary is satisfied with the applicant's technical and financial capability.³² Based on the AFAC's recommendations, the Secretary of Commerce is to evaluate the proposed project according to listed criteria and other criteria that the Secretary may require.³³ If the Secretary fails to provide funds to a grant selected by the AFAC, the Secretary is required to send a written document to the AFAC justifying the decision.³⁴

History of the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act Congress passed the S-K Act in 1954, but the act's legislative history began in 1935 (Table 1). Congress last amended the S-K Act in the 117^th Congress through passage of the American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 117-121). In 1935, Congress passed legislation to provide financial support for domestic agricultural In 1935, Congress passed legislation to provide financial support for domestic agricultural
commodity markets. Section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, provided a permanent commodity markets. Section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, provided a permanent
appropriation equal to 30% of gross receipts from appropriation equal to 30% of gross receipts from al all duties collected under customs laws.duties collected under customs laws.935 The The
act authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to use these funds to support exports and domestic act authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to use these funds to support exports and domestic
consumption of agricultural commodities. The Act of August 11, 1939, authorized the Secretary consumption of agricultural commodities. The Act of August 11, 1939, authorized the Secretary
of Agriculture to transfer up to $1.5 of Agriculture to transfer up to $1.5 mil ionmillion from funds collected under Section 32 to support the from funds collected under Section 32 to support the
fishing industry. Funds were transferred to the Federal Surplus Commodities Corporation to fishing industry. Funds were transferred to the Federal Surplus Commodities Corporation to
purchase and distribute surplus fishery products and to the Secretary of the Interior to promote purchase and distribute surplus fishery products and to the Secretary of the Interior to promote
markets for fishery products of domestic origin.markets for fishery products of domestic origin.10 Table 1 provides a history of legislative
changes to the S-K Act.
36 In 1954, the S-K Act amended the Act of August 11, 1939, to provide additionalIn 1954, the S-K Act amended the Act of August 11, 1939, to provide additional funding from funding from
Section 32 funds to support the U.S. fishing industry.Section 32 funds to support the U.S. fishing industry.1137 The S-K Act authorized the transfer from The S-K Act authorized the transfer from
the Secretary of Agriculture to the Secretary of the Interior,the Secretary of Agriculture to the Secretary of the Interior,³⁸ from the larger Section 32 account from the larger Section 32 account’s
's funding, an amount equal to 30% of gross receipts from duties collected on fishery products.funding, an amount equal to 30% of gross receipts from duties collected on fishery products.12
39 These funds were maintained in a separate account for use by the Secretary of the Interior to These funds were maintained in a separate account for use by the Secretary of the Interior to
support the flow of fishery products in commerce, develop and increase markets for fishery support the flow of fishery products in commerce, develop and increase markets for fishery
products, and conduct research. Annual expenditures from the fund were limited to $3 products, and conduct research. Annual expenditures from the fund were limited to $3 mil ion,
million, and the balance of the fund was not and the balance of the fund was not al owedallowed to exceed $5 to exceed $5 mil ion million at the end of any year. In 1956, at the end of any year. In 1956,
the S-K Act was amended to remove the limit on annual expenditures from the fund.the S-K Act was amended to remove the limit on annual expenditures from the fund.⁴⁰ The S-K Act The S-K Act
also authorized the Secretary of the Interior to appoint a fishing industry advisory committee to also authorized the Secretary of the Interior to appoint a fishing industry advisory committee to
provide guidance on the formulation of policy, rules, and regulations pertaining to requests for provide guidance on the formulation of policy, rules, and regulations pertaining to requests for
assistance, and other matters.assistance, and other matters.1341
In 1976, the Fishery Conservation and Management Act (FCMA; P.L. 94-265) established a 200- In 1976, the Fishery Conservation and Management Act (FCMA; P.L. 94-265) established a 200-
nautical nautical-mile fishery conservation zone (FCZ) and brought marine fisheries within the FCZ under mile fishery conservation zone (FCZ) and brought marine fisheries within the FCZ under
domestic control.domestic control.14 Foreign fishing was al owed42 The FCMA allowed foreign fishing to continue in the FCZ, but it granted priority fishing rights to the domestic fishing industry.⁴³ In the following years, U.S. policy emphasized development of domestic fisheries and replacement of foreign fishing with domestic fishing in the FCZ (e.g., through implementation of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act [MSA; 16 U.S.C. §1801 et seq.]).⁴⁴ According to the U.S. to continue in the FCZ, but the domestic fishing

9 T he Act of August 24, 1935, Chapter 641, §32; 7 U.S.C. §612c. See CRS Report RL34081, Farm and Food Support
Under USDA’s Section 32 Program , coordinated by Jim Monke.
10 Act of August 11, 1939, Chapter 696; 15 U.S.C. §713c-2. T he Act of 1939 authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to
transfer these funds to the Federal Surplus Commodities Corporation under the Section 32 program.
11 Act of July 1, 1954, Chapter 447; 15 U.S.C. §713c-3.
12 Products included fish, shellfish, mollusks, crustaceans, aquatic plants and animals, and any products thereof,
including processed and manufactured products.
13 Act of July 1, 1954, Chapter 447, §2(c).
14 On March 10, 1983, President Reagan issued Proclamation 5030, which established the 200-nautical mile exclusive
Congressional Research Service
3

---

link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 8 link to page 16 Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

industry was granted priority fishing rights under the FCMA.15 In the following years, U.S. policy
emphasized development of domestic fisheries and replacement of foreign fishing with domestic
fishing in the FCZ.16 According to the Government Accountability Office, until 1979, NMFS used Government Accountability Office, until 1979, NMFS used
nearly nearly al all S-K funds to support fisheries management and development activitiesS-K funds to support fisheries management and development activities; it—NMFS granted only granted only
smal small amounts to the fishing industry for development projects.amounts to the fishing industry for development projects.1745 In 1979, likely because of In 1979, likely because of
growing industry support of domestic fisheries development, NMFS made available growing industry support of domestic fisheries development, NMFS made available
approximately $5.3 approximately $5.3 mil ion million of S-K funds to regional fisheries development foundations, of S-K funds to regional fisheries development foundations,
universities, private industry, and state and local governments.universities, private industry, and state and local governments.18
46 In 1980, Congress In 1980, Congress formal yformally authorized the current competitive S-K Grant Program in Section 210 authorized the current competitive S-K Grant Program in Section 210
of the American Fisheries Promotion Act (AFPA; P.L. 96-561). The AFPA directed the Secretary of the American Fisheries Promotion Act (AFPA; P.L. 96-561). The AFPA directed the Secretary
of Commerce to use at least 50% of S-K funds for the S-K Grant Program and the balance of of Commerce to use at least 50% of S-K funds for the S-K Grant Program and the balance of
funds for a National Program. Both programs supported research and development efforts to funds for a National Program. Both programs supported research and development efforts to
address areas such as harvesting, processing, marketing, and related infrastructures. By 1980, the address areas such as harvesting, processing, marketing, and related infrastructures. By 1980, the
transfer from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) had grown to $26.7 transfer from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) had grown to $26.7 mil ion million (Table A-
1). The AFPA also . The AFPA also formal yformally transferred responsibility for administering the fund from the transferred responsibility for administering the fund from the
Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary of Commerce. The House committee report Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary of Commerce. The House committee report
accompanying the AFPA noted that the definition of accompanying the AFPA noted that the definition of fishery includes recreational fishing and that includes recreational fishing and that
recreational projects would be eligiblerecreational projects would be eligible for grants.for grants.1947 The AFPA also removed a section that The AFPA also removed a section that
established the S-K fishing industry advisory committee; the advisory committee had been established the S-K fishing industry advisory committee; the advisory committee had been
previously terminated pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 92-463).previously terminated pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 92-463).20
In subsequent years, Congress48 Congress has made additional changes to the made additional changes to the al ocationallocation and use of the S-K fund and use of the S-K fund
(Table 1). The Highway Improvement Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-424) increased the share of funds . The Highway Improvement Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-424) increased the share of funds
used for the competitive grant program from 50% to 60%. In the following years, potential uses used for the competitive grant program from 50% to 60%. In the following years, potential uses
of the fund were broadened to include the Fisheries Promotion Fund (P.L. 99-659), the Northwest of the fund were broadened to include the Fisheries Promotion Fund (P.L. 99-659), the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean Fisheries Reinvestment Fund (P.L. 102-567), and the federal share of a fishing Atlantic Ocean Fisheries Reinvestment Fund (P.L. 102-567), and the federal share of a fishing
capacity reduction program (P.L. 104-297). Congress established the Fisheries Promotion Fund to capacity reduction program (P.L. 104-297). Congress established the Fisheries Promotion Fund to
support domestic and international markets for support domestic and international markets for domestical ydomestically produced seafood produced seafood. A; a portion of S-K portion of S-K
funds was transferred to the fund from FY1987 to FY1991 for this purposefunds was transferred to the fund from FY1987 to FY1991 for this purpose (Table A-1).21

economic zone (EEZ). T he EEZ provided sovereign rights over the natural resources in the zone, including fisheries,
and replaced the fishery conservation zone established by the Fishery Conservation and Management (Table A-1).⁴⁹ In 2022, through the American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act ( Act (P.L. 117-121), Congress modified the process for awarding S-K competitive grants, including in its establishment of the AFAC to administer elements of the grant process. Table 1. History of Legislation Related to the Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Act

Year

Act

Brief Description

1935

Act of August 24, 1935, Chapter 641, Section 32

P.L. 94-265)
in 1976.
15 Foreign fishing was allocated the surplus after U.S. domestic fishing needs were met. Allocations to foreign
operations were terminated when the surplus was completely utilized by U.S. domestic fishing.
16 T he capacity of U.S. domestic fishing fleets increased during the 1980s; by 1990, domestic fleets had replaced nearly
all foreign fishing fleets operating in the U.S. EEZ.
17 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Uses of Saltonstall-Kennedy Fisheries Development Funds, August
30, 1985, at http://www.gao.gov/assets/150/143275.pdf. GAO was called the General Accounting Office when the
report was written in 1985. Hereinafter cited as GAO, 1985.
18 GAO, 1985.
19 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, American Fisheries Promotion Act, to
accompany H.R. 7039, 96th Cong., 2nd sess., June 26, 1980, H. Rept. 96-1138, p. 39.
20 5 U.S.C. App., Section 14 of Federal Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 92 -463) terminated advisory committees within
two years of the law’s enactment (January 5, 1973) unless the committee was renewed within that two -year period or,
in the case of a committee established by Congress, its duration is otherwise provided by law.
21 Funding levels included $750,000 in FY1987, $2.6 million in FY1988, $3 million in FY1989, $2 million in FY1990,
and $2 million in FY1991.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Table 1. History of Legislation Related to the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act
Year
Act
Brief Description
1935
Act of August 24, 1935, Chapter
Established a permanent appropriation (§32) to set aside 30%
641, Section 32
Established a permanent appropriation (§32) to set aside 30% of annual customs receipts; supported the farm sector by of annual customs receipts; supported the farm sector by
purchasingauthorizing the purchasing of surplus commodities surplus commodities and funding and funding a variety ofvarious other other
activities.activities.
1939

1939

Act of August 11, 1939 (P.L. 76-Act of August 11, 1939 (P.L. 76-
Authorized the purchase and distribution of surplus fishery
392), Chapter 696, Section 1
392), Chapter 696, Section 1 Authorized the purchase and distribution of surplus fishery products with funding of up to $1.5 products with funding of up to $1.5 mil ion million per year.per year.
1954
Act of July 1, 1954 (Saltonstal -

1954

Act of July 1, 1954 (Saltonstall-Kennedy Act), Chapter 447

Required U.S. Department of AgricultureRequired U.S. Department of Agriculture to transfer to the to transfer to the
Kennedy Act), Chapter 447
Department of CommerceDepartment of Commerce 30% of duties on marine30% of duties on marine products products
to fund U.S. fisheriesto fund U.S. fisheries and limitedand limited expenditures to no more expenditures to no more
than $3 than $3 mil ion million per year.per year.
1956

1956

Fish and WildlifeFish and Wildlife Act of 1956, ActAct of 1956, Act Removed limitation on annual expenditures.
of August 8, 1956, Chapter 1036, of August 8, 1956, Chapter 1036,
Section 12(b)Section 12(b)
1980
American Fisheries Act (P.L. 96-

Removed limitation on annual expenditures.

1980

American Fisheries Promotion Act (P.L. 96-561), Title II, Section 210

Authorized competitive grants and national fisheriesAuthorized competitive grants and national fisheries research research
561), Title II, Section 210
and developmentand development programs; directedprograms; directed that at least 50% of that at least 50% of
funds be used for funds be used for competitive a competitive grant program,grant program, with the with the
balance for the National Program.balance for the National Program.
1983

1983

Highway ImprovementHighway Improvement Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-424), Title IV, Section 423(a)

Increased competitive grant share to at least 60% of funds; stipulated that S-K funds were to be used exclusively for promoting U.S. fisheries.

1986

Act of
Increased competitive grant share to at least 60% of funds;
1982 (P.L. 97-424), Title IV,
stipulated that S-K funds were to be used exclusively for
Section 423(a)
promoting U.S. fisheries.
1986
Fish and Seafood Promotion Act
Expanded authorized uses of S-K funds to include the
Fish and Seafood Promotion Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-659of 1986 (P.L. 99-659), Title II, Section 209(e) ), Title II,
Fisheries Promotion Fund for several years.
Section 209(e)
1992
National Oceanic and
Expanded authorized uses of S-K funds to include Expanded authorized uses of S-K funds to include
Atmospheric Administration
implementation of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean Fisheries
the Fisheries Promotion Fund for several years.

1992

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (Authorization Act of 1992 (P.L. P.L.
Reinvestment Program.
102-567), Title IX, Section 902(c)102-567), Title IX, Section 902(c)
1996
Sustainable Fisheries Act (P.L.
Expanded authorized uses of S-K funds to include Expanded authorized uses of S-K funds to include the federal
implementation of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean Fisheries Reinvestment Program.

1996

Sustainable Fisheries Act (P.L. 104-297), Title I, Section 116(c)104-297), Title I, Section 116(c)
share of a fishing capacity reduction program.
2013
Consolidated and Further
Restricted the use of the Promote and Develop Fisheries
Continuing Appropriations Act,

Expanded authorized uses of S-K funds to include the federal share of a fishing capacity reduction program.

2013

Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6), Title I

Restricted the use of the Promote and Develop Fisheries Products funds transferred to the Operations,Products funds transferred to the Operations, Research, and Facilities Research, and
2013 (P.L. 113-6), Title I
Facilities account to cooperative research,account to cooperative research, annual stock annual stock
assessments, data col ection, interjurisdictional assessments, data collection, interjurisdictional fisheries fisheries
grants, and fisheriesgrants, and fisheries information networks.information networks. Subsequent Subsequent
appropriations acts have adopted similarappropriations acts have adopted similar language.

2022

American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 117-121)

Modified the process for awarding competitive grants, including through the establishment of, and assignment of duties to, the American Fisheries Advisory Committee for administering elements of the grant process.

Source: Congressional Research Service. Revenue and Use of Funds language.
Source: CRS.
Revenue
The revenues that are transferred into The revenues that are transferred into theNOAA's P&D account from USDA are derived from duties on P&D account from USDA are derived from duties on
fishery products, fishery products, “"including fish, including fish, shel fishshellfish, mollusks, crustaceans, aquatic plants and animals, and , mollusks, crustaceans, aquatic plants and animals, and
any products thereof, including processed and manufactured products.any products thereof, including processed and manufactured products.”22"⁵⁰ The P&D account is a The P&D account is a
mandatory fund that requires no periodic reauthorization or appropriation.23 Transfers from

22 Duties are collected by calendar year but not appropriated for use until the subsequent fiscal year (i.e., collect ions
from CY2012 would be appropriated in FY2014).
23 When funds from the P&D account are used to offset ORF funding, the funding is considered to be discretionary
because the ORF is a discretionary account. However, P&D funds used for the S-K Grant Program or the National
Congressional Research Service
5

---

link to page 9 link to page 16
Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

USDA to NOAA’s P&D account have steadily increased from $26.7 mil ion in 1980 to $182.8
mil ion in 2020 (Figure 2).24 In CY2017, approximately 77% of revenues were from duties
collected on imports of nonedible marine products, including jewelry, ink, various chemicals, and
skins.25 The remaining 23% of revenues were from duties on imports of edible seafood products.
Tariffs on edible fish products havemandatory fund that requires no periodic reauthorization or appropriation.⁵¹ Transfers into NOAA's P&D account have steadily increased from $26.7 million in FY1980 to approximately $376.5 million in FY2024 (Figure 2). According to NOAA, in calendar year (CY) 2017, approximately 77.0% of revenues were from duties collected on imports of nonedible marine products, including jewelry, ink, various chemicals, and skins.⁵² The remaining 23.0% of revenues were from duties on imports of edible seafood products. According to NMFS foreign fishery trade statistics, in CY2024, total calculated duties on identified fishery imports amounted to approximately $364.0 million,⁵³ or 96.5% of the amount requested by NOAA for its P&D account in FY2025.⁵⁴ According to NMFS trade statistics, the majority of calculated duties (i.e., 95.3% cumulatively) collected on identified fishery imports in CY2024 were from edible seafood products, including unclassified edible products (34.8%), tilapia (25.7%), albacore tuna (6.3%), caviar and caviar substitutes (4.2%), and additional miscellaneous edible products (24.3%). The remaining 4.7% of calculated duties mostly were from unclassified nonedible products. As of CY2024, tariffs on edible fish products had been reduced or eliminated for many seafood products, and been reduced or eliminated for many seafood products, and
most remaining duties most remaining duties arewere collected on canned products collected on canned products such as(e.g., tuna tuna) or processed products or processed products such
as fish sticks. In CY2017(e.g., fish sticks).⁵⁵ In CY2024, most duties were collected on , most duties were collected on identified fishery imports from imports from India ($89.9 mil ion),
China ($86.2 mil ion), Thailand ($79.8 mil ion), Italy ($53.2 mil ion), and France ($36.2
mil ion).26
China ($232.9 million), followed by Thailand ($59.8 million), Vietnam ($19.2 million), Ecuador ($13.5 million), and Indonesia ($4.7 million).⁵⁶ As of November 14, 2025, CRS had not identified any published accounting of amounts available for NOAA's P&D account in response to tariffs enacted by the Trump Administration.

Figure 2. . Total Funds Transferred Fromfrom USDA and Percentage of Funds Transferred to Operations,
Research, and Facilities (ORF)

(FY1979 to FY2024; nominal dollars)

Figure is interactive in the HTML version of this report.

<script type="text/javascript">//Based on IAG in AP 7.4.1 (Revised 20240624) $(function () { $('#IAG-1330947790').bind('mousedown', function () { /* saveRptHighChartClick(); */ }); //#### HIGHCHART LIBRARIES ####// var files = ["https://code.highcharts.com/highcharts.js","https://code.highcharts.com/highcharts-more.js","https://code.highcharts.com/modules/exporting.js","https://code.highcharts.com/modules/export-data.js","https://code.highcharts.com/modules/accessibility.js"], loaded = 0; if (typeof window["HighchartsEditor"] === "undefined") { window.HighchartsEditor = { ondone: [cl], hasWrapped: false, hasLoaded: false }; include(files[0]); } else { if (window.HighchartsEditor.hasLoaded) { cl(); } else { window.HighchartsEditor.ondone.push(cl); } } function isScriptAlreadyIncluded(src) { var scripts = document.getElementsByTagName("script"); for (var i = 0; i < scripts.length; i++) { if (scripts[i].hasAttribute("src")) { if ((scripts[i].getAttribute("src") || "").indexOf(src) >= 0 || (scripts[i].getAttribute("src") === "http://code.highcharts.com/highcharts.js" && src === "https://code.highcharts.com/stock/highstock.js")) { return true; } } } return false; } function check() { if (loaded === files.length) { for (var i = 0; i < window.HighchartsEditor.ondone.length; i++) { try { window.HighchartsEditor.ondone[i](); } catch (e) { console.error(e); } } window.HighchartsEditor.hasLoaded = true; } } function include(script) { function next() { ++loaded; if (loaded < files.length) { include(files[loaded]); } check(); } if (isScriptAlreadyIncluded(script)) { return next(); } var sc = document.createElement("script"); sc.src = script; sc.type = "text/javascript"; sc.onload = function () { next(); }; document.head.appendChild(sc); } function each(a, fn) { if (typeof a.forEach !== "undefined") { a.forEach(fn); } else { for (var i = 0; i < a.length; i++) { if (fn) { fn(a[i]); } } } } var inc = {}, incl = []; each(document.querySelectorAll("script"), function (t) { inc[t.src.substr(0, t.src.indexOf("?"))] = 1; }); function cl() { if (typeof window["Highcharts"] !== "undefined") { //#### HIGHCHART LIBRARIES END ####// //##### CRS THEME START (v1.2, 20220510)#####// Highcharts.theme = { colors: ['#0C90FC', '#003865', '#F1B434', '#7060A8', '#6CC8BD', '#757048', '#B4C7D0', '#D36127'], chart: {backgroundColor: 'white',}, title: { style: { color: 'black', font: '15px "Calibri", Verdana, sans-serif', fontWeight: 'bold' } }, subtitle: { style: { color: 'black', font: '14px "Calibri", Verdana, sans-serif' }}, credits: { enabled: false }, legend: { itemStyle: { fontFamily: '"Calibri", Verdana, sans-serif', fontSize: '14px', color: 'black', "text-decoration": 'none !important' }, verticalAlign: 'top', itemMarginBottom: 7, }, yAxis: { title: { style: { font: '14px "Calibri", Verdana, sans-serif', fontWeight: 'bold', color: 'black'} }, labels: { style: { font: '14px "Calibri", Verdana,sans-serif', color: 'black'}}, }, xAxis: { title: { style: { font: '14px "Calibri", Verdana, sans-serif', fontWeight: 'bold', color: 'black'}, y: 8 }, labels: { style: { font: '14px "Calibri", Verdana, sans-serif', color: 'black' }, }, lineColor: 'black', lineWidth: 0.5 } }; Highcharts.setOptions(Highcharts.theme); Highcharts.setOptions({ lang: {thousandsSep: ','}, chart: {style: {fontFamily: 'Calibri'}}, exporting: { enabled: false } }); //##### CRS THEME END #####// //#### START chart elements before Highcharts container ####// //#### END chart elements before the Highcharts container ####// var options = { //#### START code inside Highcharts.chart('container', { ####// chart: { zoomType: 'xy', // marginTop: 25 }, title: { text: null }, subtitle: { text: null }, xAxis: [{ categories: [ '1979', '1980', '1981', '1982', '1983', '1984', '1985', '1986', '1987', '1988', '1989', '1990', '1991', '1992', '1993', '1994', '1995', '1996', '1997', '1998', '1999', '2000', '2001', '2002', '2003', '2004', '2005', '2006', '2007', '2008', '2009', '2010', '2011', '2012', '2013', '2014', '2015', '2016', '2017', '2018', '2019', '2020', '2021', '2022', '2023', '2024'], crosshair: true, labels: {rotation: -89.9} }], yAxis: [{ // Primary yAxis labels: { formatter: function() { return '$' + (this.value / 1000000).toFixed(0); }, style: { color: '#52467F', fontWeight: 'bold' } }, title: { text: '$ in millions', rotation: -89.9, style: { color: '#52467F', fontWeight: 'bold' }, } }, { // Secondary yAxis title: { text: null, style: { color: '#12473E' } }, labels: { format: '{value}%', style: { color: '#009483', fontWeight: 'bold' } }, opposite: true, softMax: 100, max: 100, endOnTick: false, }], plotOptions: { series: { marker: { enabled: true, radius: 4 }, clip: false //disables clipping and lets the marker overflow the plot area } }, tooltip: { shared: true, headerFormat: '{point.category}', }, legend: { layout: 'horizontal', align: 'center', //x: 10, verticalAlign: 'top', y: -20, floating: false, reversed: false, itemDistance: 100, useHTML: true, labelFormatter: function () { const isSecondaryAxis = this.yAxis && this.yAxis.opposite; const color = isSecondaryAxis ? '#1A6B5F' : this.color; return `${this.name}`; }, }, series: [ { name: 'Total Funds Transferred', type: 'line', data: [17436000, 26700000, 35000000, 26200000, 30600000, 33600000, 34900000, 43700000, 57400000, 56300000, 53600000, 61900000, 70800000, 64100000, 61400000, 61944000, 64765000, 72893000, 66381000, 65730000, 66430000, 69920000, 72828000, 79127000, 75220000, 79724000, 77539000, 79284000, 82816000, 84594000, 108511000, 113371000, 90239000, 109098000, 130236000, 127187000, 142615000, 146389000, 145073000, 154664000, 158406000, 182783000, 258171000, 254160000, 356401000, 376522000, ], lineWidth: 2.5, color: '#52467F', marker: { enabled: false }, tooltip: { valuePrefix: '$' } }, { name: 'Percentage ORF', type: 'line', yAxis: 1, data: [28.7, 18.7, 50.0, 38.2, 73.9, 70.2, 74.2, 78.0, 89.9, 78.9, 85.1, 88.9, 86.0, 98.4, 89.6, 88.5, 85.7, 86.4, 99.4, 94.9, 95.4, 97.3, 93.4, 85.9, 86.4, 77.8, 83.8, 84.5, 95.4, 91.0, 72.8, 92.3, 100.0, 100.0, 91.4, 90.4, 81.3, 88.9, 89.7, 93.1, 99.7, 95.6, 95.4, 95.8, 96.8, 98.1], lineWidth: 2.5, color: '#6CC8BD', marker: { enabled: false }, tooltip: { valueSuffix: '%' }, },] //#### END container ####// }; new Highcharts.Chart("IAG-1330947790", options); } } }); </script> Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Budget Office, Email, January 20, 2020; National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program: Fisheries Research and Development Reports 2008, 2001, 1991-1992, 1987-1990, and 1982-1986; and NOAA, "Budget and Reports," https://www.noaa.gov/organization/budget-finance-performance/budget-and-reports. Notes: USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture. Data included on the primary axis (left axis; purple line) are the total funds (nominal value; not adjusted for inflation) transferred from USDA to the NOAA Promote and Develop American Fisheries Products and Research Pertaining to American Fisheries Fund (P&D account) since FY1979. Data included on the secondary axis (right axis; green line) are the percentage of funds from the P&D account that were ultimately transferred to the NOAA ORF account since FY1979. For a detailed account of funding, including real dollar values for the NOAA P&D account (i.e., 2025 USD; adjusted for inflation), see Table A-1. Use of Funds: Operations, Research, and Facilities Account Congress has allocated(FY1979 to FY2019)

Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Budget Office, Email, January 20, 2020;
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Saltonstal -Kennedy Grant Program: Fisheries Research and Development
Reports 2008, 2001, 1991-1992, 1987-1990, and 1982-1986.
Notes: USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture. For a detailed account of funding, see Table A-1.

Program are identified in law and used by NOAA as mandatory funding.
24 According to NOAA’s FY2021budget request, a legislative proposal is being developed to appropriate mandatory
funding to the Department of Commerce directly rather than as a transfer from USDA. T his change would be part of a
broader reform of the USDA Section 32 program.
25 NOAA Ocean and Coastal Budget Formulation and Communication, NOAA Budget Office, July 12, 2018. For more
information on tariffs on fish products, see Chapters 3 and 16 of the Harmonized T ariff Schedule, at
https://hts.usitc.gov/current.
26 NOAA Ocean and Coastal Budget Formulation and Communication, NOAA Budget Office, July 12, 2018.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 16 link to page 16 Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Use of Funds
Operations, Research, and Facilities Account
Congress has al ocated a growing portion of revenue in the P&D account to the ORF account a growing portion of revenue in the P&D account to the ORF account
rather than funding the S-K Grant Program as prescribed by the S-K Act. The transfer to the ORF rather than funding the S-K Grant Program as prescribed by the S-K Act. The transfer to the ORF
account has ranged from $5 account has ranged from $5 mil ionmillion, or 29% of the P&D account in 1979, to over $, or 29% of the P&D account in 1979, to over $130 mil ion174 million in in
the five most recent years the five most recent years (FY2016-FY2020reported by NOAA (FY2020-FY2024), which is more than ), which is more than 9095% of the annual transfer into % of the annual transfer into
the P&D accountthe P&D account ( (Figure 2; Table 2). ORF funds are used . ORF funds are used “"to support fisheries research and management to support fisheries research and management
activities including the analysis and decision-making that supports ecosystem approaches to activities including the analysis and decision-making that supports ecosystem approaches to
management.management.”27"⁵⁷ Often the Often the al ocationallocation of most funds to the of most funds to the OFRORF account limits the funding that is account limits the funding that is
available available for the specified purposes of the S-K Act.for the specified purposes of the S-K Act.
In the last three fiscal years (FY2018-FY2020), the NOAA budget request proposed that al P&D
account funding be transferred to the ORF account in support of NMFS activities. However, the
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6), In 2013, Congress restricted the use of restricted the use of
P&D funds that P&D funds that arewere transferred into the ORF account transferred into the ORF account. that year.⁵⁸ It limited this funding to fisheries activities It limited this funding to fisheries activities
related to cooperative research, annual stock assessments, survey and monitoring projects, related to cooperative research, annual stock assessments, survey and monitoring projects,
interjurisdictional fisheries grants, and fish information networks. In subsequent years, agency interjurisdictional fisheries grants, and fish information networks. In subsequent years, agency
budget requests have reflected this intent by identifying similar areas, and Congress has continued budget requests have reflected this intent by identifying similar areas, and Congress has continued
to include similar language in appropriations laws and accompanying Senate committee reports.to include similar language in appropriations laws and accompanying Senate committee reports.28
Remaining Funding
In most years, the majority of the 59 In more recent fiscal years (FY2025-FY2026), however, the NOAA budget request has proposed that all P&D account funding be transferred to the ORF account in support of NMFS activities. Use of Funds: Remaining Funding In most years, the majority of funds that remain in the P&D account after the transfer into the funds that remain in the P&D account after the transfer into the
ORF account have been used for the competitive S-K Grant Program as described in ORF account have been used for the competitive S-K Grant Program as described in subsection
Subsection (c) of the S-K Act and the National Program as described in (c) of the S-K Act and the National Program as described in subsectionSubsection (d) (d) (Table 2).).2960 The The
amount of remaining funding for the S-K Grant Program has varied amount of remaining funding for the S-K Grant Program has varied considerably from year to from year to
year, ranging from no funding in FY2011 and FY2012, when Congress did not leave any year, ranging from no funding in FY2011 and FY2012, when Congress did not leave any
remaining funding for remaining funding for the S-K program, to S-K program, to its highest levela high of $29.5 of $29.5 mil ionmillion in FY2009 in FY2009 (Table 2).
. Since 2020, annual remaining funding for the S-K program has averaged approximately $9.5 million per year. The S-K Act directs the Secretary of Commerce to use no less than 60% of funds for fisheries The S-K Act directs the Secretary of Commerce to use no less than 60% of funds for fisheries
research and development grants pursuant to research and development grants pursuant to subsectionSubsection (c). The (c). The Secretary also is requiredact also requires the Secretary to use to use
the remaining funds to finance NMFS activities directly related to U.S. fisheries development, as the remaining funds to finance NMFS activities directly related to U.S. fisheries development, as
outlined in outlined in subsectionSubsection (d). Since 1982, S-K grant funding has been less than 30% of total transfers (d). Since 1982, S-K grant funding has been less than 30% of total transfers
from USDA, and it has been from USDA, and it has been significantly lower in most years. In many years, Congress did not lower in most years. In many years, Congress did not
fund the National Program or provided a fund the National Program or provided a smal small portion of the remaining funds for that purpose. For FY2026, the Senate Committee on Appropriations proposed $10 million for the S-K Grant Program, as communicated in S.Rept. 119-44, accompanying the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 (S. 2354) in the 119^th Congress.⁶¹ Table 2. Requested and Enacted ORF Transfers and S-K Grant Program Funding

(funding in thousands of dollars)

Fiscal Year

Request ORF Transfer

Request S-K Grant Program Funding

Enacted ORF Transfer

Remaining Funding for S-K Grant Program^a

2007

77,000

2,283

79,000

3,816

2008

77,000

5,816

77,000

7,594

2009

79,000

5,594

79,001

29,510

2010

104,600

9,400

104,600

8,771

2011

104,600

8,771

90,239

0

2012

66,200

5,000

109,098

0

2013

119,064

5,000

119,064

11,172

2014

123,164

8,208

115,000

12,187

2015

123,164

8,208

116,000

26,615

2016

130,164

13,574

130,164

16,225

2017

130,164

15,647

130,164

14,909

2018

154,199

0

144,000

10,664

2019

154,868

0

157,980

426

2020

158,407

0

174,774

8,009

2021

183,834

0

246,171

12,000

2022

246,171

7,989

243,532

10,628

2023

348,871

7,530

344,901

11,500

2024

355,081

7,530

369,522

7,000

2025

377,363

0

N/A

N/A

2026

409,644

0

N/A

N/A

Sources: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Budget Office, Email, January 20, 2020; NOAA, Budget Office, Email, December 2, 2019; and NOAA, "Budget and Reports," https://www.noaa.gov/organization/budget-finance-performance/budget-and-reports.

Notes: N/A = Not available; ORF = NOAA Operations, Research, and Facilities account; S-K Grant Program = Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program. No information regarding FY2025 enacted ORF transfer and remainder of funds was included in the FY2026 NOAA budget justification.

a. Includes the S-K Grant Program, National Program, and NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service administrative costs. Historically, Congress also provided financial support for the Fisheries Promotion Fund, which was funded between $750,000 and $3 million from FY1987 to FY1991 (Table A-1).⁶² No funding has been provided for the Fisheries Promotion Fund since 1991. From FY2003 to FY2006, most funding remaining after the ORF transfer was used for congressionally directed projects that supported several regional seafood marketing initiatives (Table A-1).⁶³ Annual S-K reports from the agency and portion of the remaining funds for that purpose.
Historical y, financial support also was provided for the Fisheries Promotion Fund, which was
funded between $750,000 and $3 mil ion from FY1987 to FY1990. (Table A-1). No funding has
been provided for the Fisheries Promotion Fund since 1991. From FY2003 to FY2006, most
funding remaining after the ORF transfer was used for congressional y directed projects that
supported several regional seafood marketing initiatives (Table A-1).30 Annual S-K reports and

27 NOAA, NMFS, The Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program: Fisheries Research and Development Report, 2011.
28 P.L. 113-76, P.L. 113-235, P.L. 114-113, and P.L. 115-31 added the S-K Grant Program to the list of fishery-related
activities that should be funded from the P&D account. Fishery -related activities identified in P.L. 115-141, P.L. 116-6,
and P.L. 116-93 included the S-K Grant Program, fishery data collection, surveys and assessments, and
interjurisdictional fisheries.
29 15 U.S.C. §713c-3(c) and (d). A portion of the remainder also has been used to administer the use of S-K funds for
the S-K Grant Program and the National Program.
30 S-K funds also have supported congressionally directed projects focused generally on regional marketing initiatives,
including $10 million in FY2003, $17.5 million in FY2004, $12 million in FY2005, and $12 million in FY2006.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

other sources indicate that S-K funds have not been used for either the Northwest Atlantic Ocean
other sources indicate that S-K funds have not been used for either the Northwest Atlantic Ocean Fisheries Reinvestment fund or the fishing capacity reduction program.Fisheries Reinvestment fund or the fishing capacity reduction program.⁶⁴
Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program
According to NMFS, According to NMFS, general goals of the S-K programthe S-K program’s general goals are to fund projects that address the needs are to fund projects that address the needs
of fishing communities, optimize economic benefits by building and maintaining sustainable of fishing communities, optimize economic benefits by building and maintaining sustainable
fisheries, and increase other opportunities to keep working waterfronts viable.fisheries, and increase other opportunities to keep working waterfronts viable. Historical y,
examples of areas65 Historically, projects funded by the S-K Grant Program have included funded by the S-K Grant Program have included, for example, enhancing markets for fishery enhancing markets for fishery
products, examining fishery management options, and developing more efficient and selective products, examining fishery management options, and developing more efficient and selective
fishing gear. Projects often have focused on both state and federal marine commercial fisheries, fishing gear. Projects often have focused on both state and federal marine commercial fisheries,
butand other sectors—such as aquaculture and recreational fishing—also have been eligible other sectors—such as aquaculture and recreational fishing—also have been eligible for and for and
have received received supportfunding. .
NMFS solicits proposals as a federal funding opportunity on the federal grants website, which NMFS solicits proposals as a federal funding opportunity on the federal grants website, which
includes funding priorities, application requirements, and proposal evaluation criteria.includes funding priorities, application requirements, and proposal evaluation criteria.⁶⁶ Funding Funding
priorities are developed in coordination with regional fishery management councils, interstate
fishery commissions, NMFS science centers, and NMFS regional offices. For example in 2020,
priorities are developed annually by the AFAC. For example, in FY2020, S-K program priorities S-K program priorities arewere seafood promotion, development, and marketing, and science or seafood promotion, development, and marketing, and science or
technology that promotes sustainable U.S. seafood production and harvesting.technology that promotes sustainable U.S. seafood production and harvesting.31
67 NMFS included similar priorities for the FY2025 S-K grant competition.⁶⁸ According to the AFAC charter, the AFAC annually identifies the needs of U.S. marine fishing communities and finalizes priorities for the annual competitive grant solicitation.⁶⁹ The review process includes (1) pre-proposal review, (2) technical review and ranking, (3) panel The review process includes (1) pre-proposal review, (2) technical review and ranking, (3) panel
review and ranking, and (4) grant selection. Pre-proposals undergo an administrative review by review and ranking, and (4) grant selection. Pre-proposals undergo an administrative review by
NOAA staff, a review by subject matter experts, and S-K program evaluationthe AFAC, which recommends to NMFS those pre-proposals to be encouraged to submit full proposals for review. Full review . Full review
includes administrative screening; technical review by federal, public, and private sector experts; includes administrative screening; technical review by federal, public, and private sector experts;
and funding recommendations by and funding recommendations by the AFAC to program and NMFS leadership. AFAC communicates to NMFS which proposals have been recommended by the AFAC for funding. The committee weighs its recommendations based on the proposals' ranking and other considerations, such as availability of funding, balance and distribution of funds, and duplication.⁷⁰ Congress also has reinforced this approach in directives to NMFS, such as in the explanatory statement for the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (P.L. 117-328).⁷¹ In the past, NMFS has consideredprogram and NMFS leadership. NMFS also may solicit
comments and evaluation from a constituent review panel composed of three or more
representatives chosen by the NMFS assistant administrator of fisheries.32
Funding of proposals is recommended by the S-K program manager; constituent panel ranking (if
applicable); and input from NMFS regional directors, science center directors, and office
directors. The agency selecting official, the NMFS assistant administrator, determines which
proposals wil be funded. The decision is based on the order of the proposals’ ranking and other
considerations, such as availability of funding, balance and distribution of funds, and
duplication.33 Recently, NMFS has been considering whether the program and fishing industry whether the program and fishing industry
would benefit from placing greater emphasis on monitoring approved projects and disseminating would benefit from placing greater emphasis on monitoring approved projects and disseminating
results. results. DuringFor example, during 2019, feedback sessions were arranged with regional fishery management 2019, feedback sessions were arranged with regional fishery management
councils to solicit constituentscouncils to solicit constituents’' views on how to improve the dissemination and use of results views on how to improve the dissemination and use of results
from funded projects.34

31 NOAA Fisheries, “ Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program: Funding Opportunities,” December 2019, at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/grant/saltonstall-kennedy-grant-program.
32 Panelists are chosen from the fishing industry, state government, nongovernmental organizations, and others.
33 NMFS, “ FY20 Saltonstall-Kennedy Competition,” May 31, 2019, at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/search-
grants.ht ml?keywords=saltonstall (search in “ Archived” status).
34 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, “Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program - Public Feedback Webinar,” press
release, June 14, 2019, at http://www.mafmc.org/council-events/2019/saltonstall-kennedy-grant-program-public-
feedback-webinar.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

link to page 12 Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Table 2. Requested and Enacted ORF Transfers and S-K Grant Funding
(funding in thousands of dol ars)
Request ORF
Request S-K Grant
Enacted ORF
Remaining Funding
Year
Transfer
Funding
Transfer
for S-K Programa
2007
77,000
2,283
79,000
3,816
2008
77,000
5,816
77,000
7,594
2009
79,000
5,594
79,001
29,510
2010
104,600
9,400
104,600
8,771
2011
104,600
8,771
90,239
0
2012
66,200
5,000
109,098
0
2013
119,064
5,000
119,064
11,172
2014
123,164
8,208
115,000
12,187
2015
123,164
8,208
116,000
26,615
2016
130,164
13,574
130,164
16,225
2017
130,164
15,647
130,164
14,909
2018
154,199
0
144,000
10,664
2019
154,868
0
157,980
426
2020
158,407
0
174,774
8,009
Sources: NOAA, Budget Office, Email, January 20, 2020; NOAA, Budget Office, Email, December 2, 2019.
a. Includes the S-K Grant Program, National Program, and NMFS administrative costs.
Issues for Congress
from funded projects.⁷² Issues for Congress Some fishing industry representatives have Some fishing industry representatives have questioned whethersuggested the U.S. commercial fishing the U.S. commercial fishing
industry and fishing communities could benefit from greater direct support from S-K funding.industry and fishing communities could benefit from greater direct support from S-K funding.
Two of the main concerns have been73 Relatedly, some industry representatives have raised concerns about whether the competitive grant process whether the competitive grant process should include greater
has included sufficient fishing industry input and whether a greater portion of P&D funds should be fishing industry input and whether a greater portion of P&D funds should be al ocatedallocated to the to the
annual S-K Grant Program.annual S-K Grant Program. Some assert74 Some stakeholders and Members of Congress have asserted that NMFS decides by its own criteria which programs that NMFS decides by its own criteria which programs
receive grants and that in some cases the fishing industryreceive grants and that in some cases the fishing industry’'s priorities do not match those of s priorities do not match those of
NMFS.35 They contendNMFS.⁷⁵ These Members and stakeholders have contended that broader, more direct fishing industry participation is needed to inform that broader, more direct fishing industry participation is needed to inform
the process of identifying the needs and priorities of grant funding.the process of identifying the needs and priorities of grant funding.
Another concern Congress addressed some of these concerns through passage of the American Fisheries Advisory Act (P.L. 117-121). Some industry concerns regarding future funding of the S-K program and its funding priorities continue.⁷⁶ Another question from stakeholders regarding S-K Act implementation has been whether a greater portion of P&D funding should be has been whether a greater portion of P&D funding should be al ocatedallocated to the S- to the S-
K Grant Program.K Grant Program.36 Some contend77 Some Members have contended that Congress, as reflected in statute, intended to provide that Congress, as reflected in statute, intended to provide at
least 60% of fundsfunding primarily to the S-K Grant Program and to the S-K Grant Program and to allocate remaining funding to the National Program for remaining funding to the National Program for
fishing industry research and development.fishing industry research and development.37 However,78 A counterargument is that shifting significant funding from current shifting significant funding from current
NMFS activities may prompt questions about whether additional discretionary funding would be NMFS activities may prompt questions about whether additional discretionary funding would be
forthcoming to support other NMFS functions, such as data collection and fish population forthcoming to support other NMFS functions, such as data collection and fish population
assessments.

35 Senator Dan Sullivan, “Sullivan Applauds Senate Passage of American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act,” press
release, July 28, 2018.
36 Leslie T aylor, “Opinion: Don’t Be Fooled by NOAA Grants Increase,” October 24, 2014.
37 Senator Kerry, “Introduction of S. 2184,” Congressional Record, daily edition, March 12, 2012, p. S1579.
Congressional Research Service
9

---

Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Congressional Actions
Funding Allocation
Several bil s were introduced during the 112th, 113th, and 114th Congresses that would have
significantly changed the al ocation of P&D funding. Similar versions of the Fisheries Investment
and Regulatory Relief Act in each of these Congresses would have al ocated funding to fisheries
management regions and would have established a regional fisheries grant program.38 Under
these bil s, each regional fishery management council would have established a fishery
investment committee, which would focus resources on strengthening regional fisheries
management.39 Each fishery investment committee would have
 developed a regional fishery investment plan;
 reviewed grant applications and projects to implement regional fishery
investment plans; and
 made recommendations on grant applications.
The regional fishery investment plans would have identified research, conservation, and
management needs, as wel as corresponding actions to rebuild and maintain fish populations and
associated fisheries. Each regional investment plan would have been required to include topics
related to
 supporting stock surveys, stock assessments, and cooperative fishery research;
 improving the collection and accuracy of recreational and commercial data;
 analyzing social and economic impacts of fishery management decisions;
 providing financial assistance and investment for fishermen and fishing
communities;
 developing methods or technologies to improve the quality and value of landings;
 researching and developing conservation engineering technologies; and
 restoring and protecting fish habitat.40
Investment plans would have been reviewed by the Secretary of Commerce to ensure consistency
with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. §§1801 et
seq.). Limited funding also would have been provided for administrative costs of the grant
program and for the development and implementation of investment plans.
Under these versions of the Fisheries Investment and Regulatory Relief Act, the Secretary of
Commerce also would have established a regional fisheries grant program to provide funds to
advance the regional priorities identified in the regional fishery investment plans. The Secretary
would have awarded grants only to projects that would implement regional fishery investment
plans and to projects recommended by respective regional fishery investment committees and
approved by each regional fishery management council. The Secretary would have been required

38 T he Fisheries Investment and Regulatory Relief Act of 2012 (H.R. 4208 and S. 2184) was introduced during the
112th Congress; the Fisheries Disaster Relief and Research Investment Act ( H.R. 799) was introduced during the 113th
Congress; and the Fisheries Investment and Regulatory Relief Act of 2015 ( H.R. 2106) was introduced in the 114th
Congress. No further action was taken following introduction of any of these bills.
39 Regional fishery management councils were established under the Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(currently known as the Magnuson-Stevens Act) to develop fishery management plans that conserve and manage
fisheries in federal waters.
40 Research priority plans are developed by regional fishery management councils according to 16 U.S.C. §1852(h)(7).
Congressional Research Service
10

---

Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

to al ocateassessments.

Additional issues of interest may include potential impacts of tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration on future P&D funding amounts,⁷⁹ as well as potential implications of Executive Order (E.O.) 14276, "Restoring America's Seafood Competitiveness," and NOAA staffing priorities for ongoing activities with respect to the promotion and development of U.S. fisheries.⁸⁰ The impacts of tariffs and E.O. 14276 on S-K funding and the S-K Grant Program are unclear at present, as are NOAA's ongoing priorities for these efforts under the second Trump administration.

Congressional Actions

The below sections summarize selected legislation and legislative proposals in the current and past Congresses, with respect to addressing funding allocations for the S-K Grant Program, transfers to the NOAA ORF account, and funding priorities for fisheries research and development projects.

Funding Allocation

Some Members of Congress have introduced legislation seeking to address the allocation of P&D funding for projects supported through the S-K Grant Program. In the 119^th Congress, the Working Waterfronts Act of 2025 (S. 1968, Section 204) would amend the S-K Act to stipulate that 25% of all marine product duty receipts transferred from USDA to NOAA's P&D account is to be used for promoting U.S. fisheries. The bill would direct the Secretary of Commerce to make available not less than 75% of P&D funding (i.e., 18.75% of all marine product duty receipts transferred) for direct industry assistance grants under the S-K Grant Program. Additionally, the bill would direct the Secretary to make available no less than 20% of P&D funding (i.e., 5% of all marine product duty receipts transferred) to carry out the Young Fishermen's Development Act (33 U.S.C. §§1141-1144).⁸¹ The balance of money in the fund would be allocated to the NMFS National Program. This language in Section 204 of S. 1968 also was included in S. 3785 in the 118^th Congress. If the language were enacted, it remains uncertain whether Congress would follow the authorizing language with respect to apportioning funding into the NOAA ORF account and these other programs during the annual appropriations process.

Some previously introduced bills proposed changing the allocation of P&D funding to support different priorities. For example, several proposals in the 112^th-114^th Congresses would have allocated funding to fisheries management regions and would have established a regional fisheries grant program.⁸² Under these bills, each regional fishery management council would have established a fishery investment committee, which would have focused resources on strengthening regional fisheries management.⁸³ Each fishery investment committee would have

• developed a regional fishery investment plan,
• reviewed grant applications and projects to implement regional fishery investment plans, and
• made recommendations on grant applications.

The regional fishery investment plans would have identified research, conservation, and management needs, as well as corresponding actions to rebuild and maintain fish populations and associated fisheries. Each regional investment plan would have been required to include specific topics (e.g., supporting stock surveys, stock assessments, and cooperative fishery research).⁸⁴ Further, the Secretary of Commerce would have been required to establish a regional fisheries grant program to provide funds to advance the regional priorities identified in the regional fishery investment plans. The Secretary would have awarded grants only to projects that would implement regional fishery investment plans and to projects recommended by respective regional fishery investment committees and approved by each regional fishery management council.

Under these bills, the Secretary of Commerce would have been required to allocate 70% of funds from the P&D account to the eight council regions. Half of this funding 70% of funds from the P&D account to the eight council regions. Half of this funding
would have been would have been al ocated equal yallocated equally among the councils, and half would have been distributed among the councils, and half would have been distributed
according to the combined economic impact of recreational and commercial fisheries in each according to the combined economic impact of recreational and commercial fisheries in each
region. region.
The Secretary also would have been required to allocate 20% of funds for a national fisheries The Secretary also would have been required to allocate 20% of funds for a national fisheries
investment program that would support rebuilding and maintaining fish populations and promote investment program that would support rebuilding and maintaining fish populations and promote
sustainable fisheries. Funding would have been divided equal y among five general areas: (1)
regional fisheries commissions; (2) seafood promotion; (3) fisheries management; (4) fisheries
disasters; and (5) other needs, including highly migratory species and international fisheries. sustainable fisheries. Each Each
of the of the bil s bills would have limitedwould have limited the transfer of ORF funding from the P&D account to 10% of the transfer of ORF funding from the P&D account to 10% of
receipts. The legislation also included a provision to provide funding to review regulations and receipts. The legislation also included a provision to provide funding to review regulations and
procedures used to implement management under the procedures used to implement management under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act and toMSA and make recommendations to streamline regulations and incorporate make recommendations to streamline regulations and incorporate
new information into the management process. new information into the management process.

Congress has not seen similar legislation proposing a regional fisheries grant program since the 114^th Congress. S-K-related legislation introduced in the 114^th-117^th Congresses primarily focused on passage of the American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act and establishment of the AFAC.⁸⁵

Stopping the Transfer to the Operations, Research, and Facilities Account
In the 113th In recent Congresses (i.e., since the 113^th Congress), no proposals have been introduced seeking to prevent the transfer of P&D funds to NOAA's ORF account. In the 113^th Congress, a section of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Congress, a section of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2014 (S. 2991) would have attempted to stop the transfer of P&D funds to Reauthorization Act of 2014 (S. 2991) would have attempted to stop the transfer of P&D funds to
the ORF account. According to Section 205 of S. 2991, it would not be in order in the Senate or the ORF account. According to Section 205 of S. 2991, it would not be in order in the Senate or
in the House of Representatives to consider any in the House of Representatives to consider any bil bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report , resolution, amendment, or conference report
that would reduce any amount in the fund (P&D account)that would reduce any amount in the fund (P&D account).41 This;⁸⁶ this proposed change in the Senate and House change in the Senate and House
rules would have rules would have al owedallowed any Senator or Representative to stop the transfer of P&D funds to the any Senator or Representative to stop the transfer of P&D funds to the
ORF discretionary account by making a point of order that a rule ORF discretionary account by making a point of order that a rule iswas being violated. No further being violated. No further
action was taken following the introduction of action was taken following the introduction of S. 2991. Past Proposals to Amend S-K Funding Priorities

In past Congresses, several bills have been introduced seeking to amend S-K funding priorities, including for the S-K Grant Program. In the 117^th Congress, a section of H.R. 3764 would have amended language with respect to fisheries research and development projects supported through the S-K Grant Program. Among its contents, the bill would have amended current language to focus research and development projects to areas including "harvesting, processing, packaging, marketing, and associated infrastructures." Additionally, the bill would have expanded the S-K Grant Program to include the marketing and promoted consumption of

• local or domestic marine fishery products,
• "environmentally and climate-friendly" marine fishery products that minimize and avoid bycatch and impacts to marine mammals,⁸⁷
• invasive species, or
• "well-managed" but less known species.

Further, another section of the bill would have directed the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the NOAA Administrator, to prioritize the S-K Grant Program when carrying out programs relating to aquaculture research and development.⁸⁸

In the 115^th Congress, H.R. 6966/S. 3138 would have included similar considerations for the Secretary to use existing programs, such as the S-K Grant Program, when carrying out an aquaculture research and development program. Additionally, among its contents, H.R. 1335 in the 114^th Congress would have included a real-time reporting and data collection program for the Gulf red snapper fishery as a priority for S-K funding and would have allowed the Secretary to use S-K funding to carry out a cooperative research program in the Gulf and South Atlantic regions, with priority to data-poor fisheries in those regions.⁸⁹

Appendix. S. 2991.
American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act
In the 116th Congress, identical versions of the American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act (S.
494 and H.R. 1218) were reported from the committees of jurisdiction in the Senate and the
House.42 The bil s would establish an American fisheries advisory committee and would change
the process for awarding S-K competitive grants. The committee would
 identify the needs of the seafood industry;
 develop requests for proposals;
 review grant applications; and
 select grant applications for approval.
Currently, NMFS is responsible for these functions, and NMFS considers industry input during
the selection process. Both bil s also would expand the specified purposes of fisheries research

41 A point of order is a claim from the floor made by a Senator or Representative that a rule of the House of
Representatives or Senate is being violated. If the chair sustains the point of order, the action in violation of the rule is
not permitted.
42 S. 494 was reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and T ransportation on August 16, 2019, and
H.R. 1218 was reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on June 4, 2020. Similar versions also were
introduced in previous Congresses, including S. 3087, reported in the 114th Congress; S. 1322, passed the Senate in the
115th Congress; and H.R. 5775, introduced in the 114th Congress; and H.R. 214, introduced in the 115th Congress.
Congressional Research Service
11

---

Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

and development projects by explicitly including projects that focus on fisheries science and
recreational fishing.43
The committee would be composed of representatives from six geographic regions of the United
States.44 The Secretary of Commerce would appoint three members from each region, including
(1) an individual with experience as a seafood harvester or processor, (2) an individual with
experience in recreational or commercial fishing or growing seafood, and (3) an individual who
represents the fisheries science community or the relevant regional fishery management council.
The Secretary also would appoint four at-large members, including (1) an individual who has
experience in food distribution, marketing, retail, or service; (2) an individual with experience in
the recreational fishing industry supply chain; (3) an individual with experience in the
commercial fishing industry supply chain; and (4) an individual who is an employee of NMFS
with expertise in fisheries research.45 The committee members would meet twice annual y, and
meetings would rotate among the six regions.
The Secretary of Commerce would identify three or more experts to undertake technical review
of grant applications, which would occur prior to committee review. The Secretary also would be
required to develop guidance related to technical review, including criteria for elimination of
applications that fail to meet a minimum level of technical merit. A grant would not be approved
unless the Secretary was satisfied with the applicant’s technical and financial capability. Based on
the committee’s recommendations, the Secretary would evaluate the proposed project according
to listed criteria and other criteria the Secretary may require. If the Secretary fails to provide
funds to a grant selected by the committee, the Secretary would be required to send a written
document to the committee justifying the decision.

43 Projects related to recreational fisheries and science historically have been included, but these projects are not
explicitly considered in the statute.
44 Region 1 would include Alaska and the Western Pacific, including Hawaii, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, and the territories of Guam and American Samoa. Region 2 would include Connecticut, Rhode Island,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine. Region 3 would include T exas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida,
Arkansas, Puerto Rico, and the T erritory of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Region 4 would include California, Oregon,
Washington, and Idaho. Region 5 would include New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. Region 6 would include Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana,
Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
45 Individuals with experience in recreational and commercial supply chains are defined as fishermen, manufacturers,
retailers, and distributers.
Congressional Research Service
12

---

link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17 Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Appendix. History of Financing Under the
Saltonstall-Kennedy Act
Table A-1. Financing History of the Saltonstall-Kennedy Program
(in thousands of (in thousands of dol ars)
dollars) Fiscal
Year Transfer to
Transfer to
NMFS ORF
Fisheries
Directed by
P&Da
P&D
Promotion
Year
(nominal $)
(real $b)
Offset
Fund
Congressc
Remainderd
1979
17,436
51,373
5,000
0
0
12.436
1980
26,679
72,265
5,000
0
0
21,697
1981
35,000
86,368
17,500
0
0
17,500
1982
26,200
60,433
10,000
0
0
16,200
1983
30,600
67,635
22,600
0
0
8,000
1984
33,600
71,705
23,600
0
0
10,000
1985
34,900
72,066
25,900
0
0
9,000
1986
43,700
88,241
34,100
0
0
9,600
1987
57,400
113,413
51,600
750
0
5,050
1988
56,300
107,701
44,400
2,600
0
9,300
1989
53,600
98,594
45,600
3,000
0
5,000
1990
61,900
109,813
55,000
2,000
0
4,900
1991
70,800
121,286
60,900
2,000
0
7,900
1992
64,100
107,116
63,100
0
0
1,000
1993
61,400
100,264
55,000
0
0
6,400
1994
61,944
98,985
54,800
0
0
7,144
1995
64,765
101,344
55,500
0
0
9,265
1996
72,893
111,947
63,000
0
0
9,893
1997
66,381
100,168
66,000
0
0
381
1998
65,730
97,967
62,380
0
0
3.350
1999
66,430
97,731
63,380
0
0
3,050
2000
69,920
100,807
68,000
0
0
1,920
2001
72,828
102,629
68,000
0
0
4,828
2002
79,127
109,709
68,000
0
0
11,127
2003
75,220
102,438
65,000
0
10,000
220
2004
79,724
106,016
62,000
0
17,250
474
2005
77,539
100,048
65,000
0
12,000
539
2006
79,284
99,143
67,000
0
12,000
284
2007
82,816
100,836
79,000
0
0
3,816
2008
84,594
100,884
77,000
0
0
7,594
Congressional Research Service
13

---

link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17 Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues

Transfer to
Transfer to
Fisheries
Fiscal
NMFS ORF
Directed by
Year
P&Da
P&D
Offset
Promotion
Congressc
Remainderd
(nominal $)
(real $b)
Fund
2009
108,511
127,897
79,001
0
0
29,510
2010
113,371
132,514
104,600
0
0
8,771
2011
90,239
103,425
90,239
0
0
0
2012
109,098
122,701
109,098
0
0
0
2013
130,236
143,849
119,064
0
0
11,172
2014
127,187
137,862
115,000
0
0
12,187
2015
142,615
152,731
116,000
0
0
26,615
2016
146,389
155,377
130,164
0
0
16,225
2017
145,073
151,359
130,164
0
0
14,909
2018
154,664
157,646
144,000
0
0
10,664
2019
158,406
158,406
157,980
0
0
426
2020
182,783
182,783
174,774
0
0
8,009
Sources: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Budget Office, P&D^a (nominal $) Transfer to P&D (real $^b)

NMFS ORF Offset

Fisheries Promotion Fund

Directed by Congress^c Remainder^d

1979

17,436

84,186

5,000

0

0

12,436

1980

26,700

115,029

5,000

0

0

21,700

1981

35,000

133,717

17,500

0

0

17,500

1982

26,200

90,880

10,000

0

0

16,200

1983

30,600

100,954

22,600

0

0

8,000

1984

33,600

107,778

23,600

0

0

10,000

1985

34,900

107,377

25,900

0

0

9,000

1986

43,700

130,246

34,100

0

0

9,600

1987

57,400

168,597

51,600

750

0

5,050

1988

56,300

158,195

44,400

2,600

0

9,300

1989

53,600

144,469

45,600

3,000

0

5,000

1990

61,900

159,667

55,000

2,000

0

4,900

1991

70,800

171,817

60,900

2,000

0

7,900

1992

64,100

151,142

63,100

0

0

1,000

1993

61,400

140,283

55,000

0

0

6,400

1994

61,944

133,738

54,800

0

0

7,144

1995

64,765

140,350

55,500

0

0

9,265

1996

72,893

153,647

63,000

0

0

9,893

1997

66,381

135,855

66,000

0

0

381

1998

65,730

131,776

62,380

0

0

3,350

1999

66,430

131,230

63,380

0

0

3,050

2000

69,920

134,675

68,000

0

0

1,920

2001

72,828

135,601

68,000

0

0

4,828

2002

79,127

144,261

68,000

0

0

11,127

2003

75,220

134,415

65,000

0

10,000

220

2004

79,724

139,614

62,000

0

17,250

474

2005

77,539

131,591

65,000

0

12,000

539

2006

79,284

128,946

67,000

0

12,000

284

2007

82,816

132,955

79,000

0

0

3,816

2008

84,594

131,171

77,000

0

0

7,594

2009

108,510

162,324

79,000

0

0

29,510

2010

113,371

169,905

104,600

0

0

8,771

2011

90,239

133,671

90,239

0

0

0

2012

109,098

156,104

109,098

0

0

0

2013

130,236

182,405

119,064

0

0

11,172

2014

127,187

176,434

115,000

0

0

12,187

2015

142,615

194,597

116,000

0

0

26,615

2016

146,389

199,407

130,164

0

0

16,225

2017

145,073

194,433

130,164

0

0

14,909

2018

154,664

203,141

144,000

0

0

10,664

2019

158,406

202,937

157,980

0

0

426

2020

182,783

230,108

174,774

0

0

8,009

2021

258,171

321,218

246,171

0

0

12,000

2022

254,160

297,704

243,532

0

0

10,628

2023

356,401

387,452

344,901

0

0

11,500

2024

376,522

396,476

369,522

0

0

7,000

2025

345,294

345,294

N/A

0

0

N/A

Sources: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Budget Office, 2020, January 20, 2020; 2020, January 20, 2020;
NOAA,NOAA, Budget Office,Budget Office, FY2007–FY2019, December 2, 2019; NOAAFY2007–FY2019, December 2, 2019; NOAA;, National Marine Fisheries National Marine Fisheries Service Service (NMFS), (NMFS),
The Saltonstal Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program:: Fisheries Research and Development, Report Report 2008, August 1, 2008, p. 4; , August 1, 2008, p. 4;
NOAA,NOAA, NMFS, NMFS, The Saltonstal Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program,, Fisheries Fisheries Research and Development,Research and Development, Report 2001, August Report 2001, August
1, 2001, p. 8; NOAA, NMFS, 1, 2001, p. 8; NOAA, NMFS, The Saltonstal Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program:: Fisheries Research and Development, , Report
1991-1992, 1992, p. 3; NOAA,, 1992, p. 3; NOAA, NMFS, NMFS, The Saltonstal Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program:: Fisheries Research and Development, ,
Report 1987-1990, 1990, p. 3; NOAA,, 1990, p. 3; NOAA, NMFS, The Saltonstal -Kennedy Grant Program NMFS, The Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program, Fisheries Research and
Development, Report 1982-1986, 1986, p. 2; NOAA, "Budget and Reports," https://www.noaa.gov/organization/budget-finance-performance/budget-and-reports; U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), "Congressional Justifications," https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/general-information/staff-offices/office-budget-and-program-analysis/congressional-justifications; and U.S. Government Accountability Office, Uses of Saltonstall/Kennedy Fisheries Development Funds, RCED-85-145, August 30, 1985, pp. 1-64, https://www.gao.gov/products/rced-85-145.

Notes: N/A = Not available; ORF = NOAA Operations, Research, and Facilities account; P&D = NOAA Promote and Develop American Fisheries Products and Research Pertaining to American Fisheries Fund. Some values are rounded based on earlier reporting.

a. Balance of funds transferred from USDA to NOAA and other reported financing in NOAA budget justifications. For FY2025, the value only reflects total funds transferred from USDA to NOAA, as included in USDA budget justifications. No additional information regarding FY2025 P&D funding, or associated ORF offset and remainder of funds, was included in the FY2026 NOAA budget justification. b. Real dollars (2025 USD) calculated using the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index, https://www.bls.gov/cpi/. c. Report 1982-1986, 1986, p. 2.
a. Funds transferred from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to NOAA.
b. Real dol ars calculated from Bureau of Economic Analysis, GDP deflator, Table 1.1.7.
c. Funding appropriated by Congress to seafood marketing boards and programs in FY2003, P.L. 108-7Funding appropriated by Congress to seafood marketing boards and programs in FY2003, P.L. 108-7; ;
FY2004, P.L. 108-199; FY2005, P.L. 108-447, and FY2006, P.L. 109-108. FY2004, P.L. 108-199; FY2005, P.L. 108-447, and FY2006, P.L. 109-108.
d. d. Remainder includes funds used for the Remainder includes funds used for the Saltonstal Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program,-Kennedy Grant Program, the National Program,the National Program, and administrative costs. Harold F. Upton, and
administrative costs.

Author Information

Harold F. Upton

Analyst in Natural Resources Policy

Congressional Research Service
14

---

Saltonstall-Kennedy Act: Background and Issues



Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should n ot be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R46335 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED
15
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy (retired), wrote the original version of this report.

Footnotes

1.

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) also is known as National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries.

2.

The Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF) discretionary account, NOAA's largest, funds a portion of all of NOAA's line office budgets and Mission Support. For more information, see CRS Report R48157, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Budget and Funding: Overview and Issues for Congress, by Eva Lipiec and Natalie Paris.

3.

NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Research Program: Background, Process, and Transparency," p. 7, https://meetings.npfmc.org/CommentReview/DownloadFile?p=6b955135-a4ad-42f2-a415-6636df6ea502.pdf&fileName=B1%20S-K%20Grant%20Review%20PRESENTATION.pdf.

4.

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), under 16 U.S.C. §1802(13), defines fishery as "(A) one or more stocks of fish which can be treated as a unit for purposes of conservation and management and which are identified on the basis of geographical, scientific, technical, recreational, and economic characteristics; and (B) any fishing for such stocks."

5.

For example, Nathan Strout, "Senate Budget Would Shrink NOAA Fisheries' Budget Slightly, Despite Trump Administration's Demand for Steep Cuts," Seafood Source, July 21, 2025, https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/supply-trade/senate-budget-would-shrink-noaa-fisheries-budget-slightly-despite-trump-administration-s-demand-for-steep-cuts.

6.

Senator Lisa Murkowski, "Murkowski, Sullivan Welcome Signing of American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act," press release, May 16, 2022; and Senator Dan Sullivan, "Senators Pass Bill Out of Committee to Give Fishermen Voice in Grant Process, Boost U.S. Seafood," press release, June 29, 2016.

7.

As examples, Senator Lisa Murkowski, "Murkowski Supports a Safer and More Prosperous Alaska: Senate Appropriations Approves Commerce, Justice, Science Funding Bill," press release, June 15, 2018; and Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, Inc., "Your Support Needed for Saltonstall-Kennedy Act Revision," May 8, 2012, https://afdf.org/updates/your-support-needed-for-saltonstall-kennedy-act-revision (hereinafter Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, 2012). The Saltonstall-Kennedy Act (S-K Act) requires the Secretary of Commerce to make grants using the funds transferred from the Secretary of Agriculture and to use "no less than 60 per centum of such moneys to make direct industry grants to develop [U.S.] fisheries and to expand domestic and foreign markets for [U.S.] fishery products." 15 U.S.C. §713c-3(b), (c), (f).

8.

U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act, committee print, prepared by Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 115^th Cong., 1^st sess., December 11, 2017, p. 2; and 15 U.S.C. §713c-3(c)(1), (f)(1)(A).

9.

Saving Seafood, "Senators Kerry and Snowe Will Introduce Bill to Restore Intent of Saltonstall-Kennedy Act," March 9, 2012.

10.

For example, Executive Order 14276 of April 17, 2025, "Restoring American Seafood Competitiveness," 90 Federal Register 16993-16995, April 22, 2025 (hereinafter E.O. 14276). For more information about this executive order, see CRS In Focus IF13017, President Trump's April 2025 Executive Order on American Seafood Competitiveness: Considerations for U.S. Fisheries, by Anthony R. Marshak.

11.

The program's name is from the section that established the program, Section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, Chapter 641, §32; 7 U.S.C. §612c.

12.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(c). Subsection (c) refers to topics that may be addressed by research and development grants, including but not limited to "fisheries science, recreational fishing, harvesting, processing, marketing, and associated infrastructures." Subsection (c) also identifies the terms and conditions of grant awards.

13.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(d). Subsection (d) refers to a national fisheries research and development program ("including but not limited to, harvesting, processing, marketing, and associated infrastructures, if not adequately covered by projects assisted under Subsection (c) of this section or as the Secretary [of Commerce] deems appropriate.")

14.

The MSA, under 16 U.S.C. §1863, stipulates that the purposes of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean Fisheries Reinvestment Program are "(A) promoting development of commercial fisheries and markets for underutilized species of the northwest Atlantic Ocean; [and] (B) developing alternative fishing opportunities for participants in the New England Groundfish fishery," among other purposes, including providing technical support and assistance to U.S. fishers and fish processors for underutilized species in the region; providing economic opportunities through improved processing and expanded use of fish waste; and addressing overfished New England groundfish stocks by using aquaculture or hatchery programs.

15.

16 U.S.C. §1861a(b), (c).

16.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(f)(1).

17.

NOAA, NMFS, "American Fisheries Advisory Committee [AFAC]," https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/partners/american-fisheries-advisory-committee; and U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, American Fisheries Advisory Committee Charter, pp. 1-7, September 2024, https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/s3//2024-09/AFAC-Charter.docx. Hereinafter NOAA, American Fisheries Advisory Committee Charter, 2024.

18.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e).

19.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(5).

20.

Functions performed by NMFS included development of priorities by NMFS in coordination with regional fishery management councils, interstate marine fisheries commissions, NOAA Fisheries Science Centers, and NMFS Regional Offices.

21.

Projects related to recreational fisheries and science historically have been included, but these projects were not explicitly considered in the statute prior to enactment of P.L. 117-121.

22.

Region 1 includes Alaska and the Western Pacific, including Hawaii, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the territories of Guam and American Samoa. Region 2 includes Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine. Region 3 includes Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Arkansas, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Region 4 includes California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. Region 5 includes New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. Region 6 includes Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. 15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(2).

23.

Individuals are to be selected so that members of the AFAC "have experience or expertise with as many seafood species as practicable." 15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(3)(A)(i)-(iv). For more information on U.S. regional fishery management councils, see CRS Report R47645, U.S. Regional Fishery Management Councils, by Anthony R. Marshak.

24.

Examples in statute of individuals with experience in recreational and commercial supply chains include "fishermen, manufacturers, retailers, and distributors." 15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(3)(B)(i)-(iv).

25.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(3)(C).

26.

NOAA, NMFS, "American Fisheries Advisory Committee Members," https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/partners/american-fisheries-advisory-committee-members; and 15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(6).

27.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(4).

28.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(8).

29.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(9).

30.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(12)(A).

31.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(e)(12)(B); and NOAA, NMFS, "Frequent Questions About the Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program," https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/funding-financial-services/frequent-questions-about-saltonstall-kennedy-grant-program.

32.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(c)(3).

33.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(c)(3)(A).

34.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(c)(3)(B).

35.

The Act of August 24, 1935, Chapter 641, §32; 7 U.S.C. §612c. See CRS In Focus IF12193, Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Account, by Jim Monke; and CRS Report RL34081, Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program, coordinated by Jim Monke.

36.

Act of August 11, 1939, Chapter 696; 15 U.S.C. §713c-2. The Act of 1939 authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer these funds to the Federal Surplus Commodities Corporation under the Section 32 program.

37.

Act of July 1, 1954, Chapter 447; 15 U.S.C. §713c-3.

38.

Prior to the transfer of duties for marine fisheries to the Department of Commerce (via the Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970), NMFS's predecessor, the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, was included under the Department of the Interior, as established in the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (P.L. 1024, Chapter 1036). The White House, Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970, Title 5, Appendix-Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970, July 9, 1970, pp. 221-223, https://darrp.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/Reorganization%20Plan%20No.%204%20of%201970.pdf.

39.

Products included fish, shellfish, mollusks, crustaceans, aquatic plants and animals, and any products thereof, including processed and manufactured products.

40.

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (P.L. 1024, Chapter 1036, §12(b)).

41.

Act of July 1, 1954, Chapter 447, §2(c).

42.

On March 10, 1983, President Reagan issued Proclamation 5030, which established the 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The EEZ provided sovereign rights over the natural resources in the zone, including fisheries, and replaced the fishery conservation zone established by the Fishery Conservation and Management Act (P.L. 94-265) in 1976.

43.

Foreign fishing was allocated the surplus after U.S. domestic fishing needs were met. Allocations to foreign operations were terminated when the surplus was completely utilized by U.S. domestic fishing.

44.

The capacity of U.S. domestic fishing fleets increased during the 1980s; by 1990, domestic fleets had replaced nearly all foreign fishing fleets operating in the U.S. EEZ. Daniel S. Holland, "Governance of Fisheries in the United States," in Handbook of Marine Fisheries Conservation and Management, eds. R. Quentin Grafton et al. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 382-392.

45.

U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Uses of Saltonstall-Kennedy Fisheries Development Funds, August 30, 1985, http://www.gao.gov/assets/150/143275.pdf. GAO was called the General Accounting Office when the report was written in 1985. Hereinafter cited as GAO, 1985.

46.

GAO, 1985.

47.

U.S. Congress, House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, American Fisheries Promotion Act, report to accompany H.R. 7039, 96^th Cong., 2^nd sess., June 26, 1980, H. Rept. 96-1138, p. 39.

48.

5 U.S.C. App., Section 14, of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 92-463) terminated advisory committees within two years of the law's enactment (January 5, 1973) unless the committee was renewed within that two-year period or, in the case of a committee established by Congress, its duration was otherwise provided by law.

49.

Funding levels included $750,000 in FY1987, $2.6 million in FY1988, $3 million in FY1989, $2 million in FY1990, and $2 million in FY1991.

50.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(b)(1). Duties are collected by calendar year (CY) but not appropriated for use until the subsequent fiscal year (FY), such that collections from CY2022 would be appropriated in FY2024 (i.e., the FY following completion of the full CY).

51.

When funds from the Promote and Develop American Fisheries Products and Research Pertaining to American Fisheries Fund (P&D) account are used to offset ORF funding, the funding is considered to be discretionary because the ORF is a discretionary account. However, P&D funds used for the S-K Grant Program or the National Program that are identified in law as mandatory funding are not used by NOAA to offset ORF funding.

52. NOAA Ocean and Coastal Budget Formulation and Communication, NOAA Budget Office, July 12, 2018. For more information on tariffs, see the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) of the United States, https://hts.usitc.gov/. Most aquatic products are found in HTS chapters 3 and 16, but additional aquatic products can be found in other chapters of the HTS. 53.

The U.S. Census Bureau cautions that estimates of calculated duty do not necessarily reflect amounts of duty paid and should be used with caution. For example, factors such as foreign processing and assembly or situations where portions of the value may be eligible for duty-free consideration may lead to overstatement or understatement in estimates of calculated duty. U.S. Census Bureau, "International Trade Definitions," https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/reference/definitions/index.html#C.

54.

NOAA, NMFS, "Foreign Fishery Trade Data," accessed September 2, 2025, https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/sustainable-fisheries/foreign-fishery-trade-data (hereinafter, NOAA, NMFS, "Foreign Fishery Trade Data"); and NOAA, Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 2025, Congressional Submission, March 2024, pp. NMFS-137, https://www.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/NOAA_FY25_Congressional_Justification.pdf.

55.

NOAA, NMFS, "Foreign Fishery Trade Data."

56.

NOAA, NMFS, "Foreign Fishery Trade Data."

57.

NOAA, NMFS, The Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program: Fisheries Research and Development Report, 2011.

58.

Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6), March 26, 2013, 127 STAT. 239.

59.

As examples, P.L. 113-76, P.L. 113-235, P.L. 114-113, and P.L. 115-31 added the S-K Grant Program to the list of fishery-related activities that should be funded from the P&D account. Fishery-related activities identified in P.L. 115-141, P.L. 116-6, and P.L. 116-93 included the S-K Grant Program, fishery data collection, surveys and assessments, and interjurisdictional fisheries.

60.

15 U.S.C. §713c-3(c) and (d). A portion of the remainder also has been used to administer the use of S-K funds for the S-K Grant Program and the National Program.

61.

No language regarding the S-K Grant Program was included in H.Rept. 119-272, accompanying the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 (H.R. 5342) in the 119^th Congress.

62.

16 U.S.C. §4008.

63. S-K funds have supported congressionally directed projects focused generally on regional marketing initiatives, including $10 million in FY2003, $17.5 million in FY2004, $12 million in FY2005, and $12 million in FY2006. Also see Table A-1. 64.

NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Research and Development Program," https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/funding-financial-services/saltonstall-kennedy-research-and-development-program. Hereinafter NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Research and Development Program."

65.

NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Research and Development Program."

66.

NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Competition," https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/grant/saltonstall-kennedy-grant-competition. Hereinafter, NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Competition."

67.

NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program: Funding Opportunities," December 2019, https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/grant/saltonstall-kennedy-grant-program.

68.

NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Competition."

69.

NOAA, American Fisheries Advisory Committee Charter, 2024; and NOAA, NMFS, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Competition."

70.

NMFS, "FY20 Saltonstall-Kennedy Competition," May 31, 2019, https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/search-grants.html?keywords=saltonstall (search in "Archived" status).

71.

Joint Explanatory Statement Submitted by Mr. Leahy, Chair of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, Regarding H.R. 2617, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 168, no. 198 (December 20, 2022), p. S7908.

72.

Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, "Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program - Public Feedback Webinar," press release, June 14, 2019, http://www.mafmc.org/council-events/2019/saltonstall-kennedy-grant-program-public-feedback-webinar.

73.

Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, 2012; and Kirk Moore, "Money for Fishing: How Fishermen Can Sell Directly," National Fisherman, November 8, 2023, https://www.nationalfisherman.com/west-coast-pacific/money-for-fishing-how-fishermen-can-sell-directly (hereinafter Moore, National Fisherman, 2023).

74.

Moore, National Fisherman, 2023.

75.

Senator Dan Sullivan, "Sullivan Applauds Senate Passage of American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act," press release, July 28, 2018.

76. Edward Carver, "Sweeping Cuts and Deregulation Imperil U.S. Fisheries, Experts Warn," Mongabay, April 21, 2025, https://news.mongabay.com/2025/04/sweeping-cuts-and-deregulation-imperil-u-s-fisheries-experts-warn/. 77.

Leslie Taylor, "Opinion: Don't Be Fooled by NOAA Grants Increase," October 24, 2014.

78.

Senator Kerry, "Introduction of S. 2184," Congressional Record, daily edition, March 12, 2012, p. S1579; Senator Ed Markey, "Senator Markey Amendment to Critical Fisheries Research Grant Program Passes Senate as Part of Sullivan Legislation," press release, August 29, 2018; and Senator Lisa Murkowski, "Working Waterfronts Framework: A Plan to Grow and Support Alaska's Coastal and River Communities," https://www.murkowski.senate.gov/download/working-waterfronts-framework.

79.

For more information, see CRS Report R48549, Presidential 2025 Tariff Actions: Timeline and Status, by Keigh E. Hammond and William F. Burkhart.

80.

E.O. 14276and CRS In Focus IF13017, President Trump's April 2025 Executive Order on American Seafood Competitiveness: Considerations for U.S. Fisheries, by Anthony R. Marshak.

81. NOAA National Sea Grant Program, "Young Fishermen's Development Program," https://seagrant.noaa.gov/how-we-work/topics/youngfishermen/. 82.

The Fisheries Investment and Regulatory Relief Act of 2012 (H.R. 4208 and S. 2184) was introduced during the 112^th Congress; the Fisheries Disaster Relief and Research Investment Act (H.R. 799) was introduced during the 113^th Congress; and the Fisheries Investment and Regulatory Relief Act of 2015 (H.R. 2106) was introduced in the 114^th Congress. No further action was taken following introduction of any of these bills.

83.

Regional fishery management councils were established under the MSA to develop fishery management plans that conserve and manage fisheries in federal waters. For more information, see CRS Report R47645, U.S. Regional Fishery Management Councils, by Anthony R. Marshak.

84.

Research priority plans are developed by regional fishery management councils according to 16 U.S.C. §1852(h)(7).

85.

Prior to the enactment of the American Fisheries Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 117-121), similar bills were introduced in the 114^th (H.R. 5775/S. 3087), 115^th (H.R. 214/S. 1322), 116^th (H.R. 1218/S. 494), and 117^th (H.R. 3128/S. 497) Congresses.

86.

A point of order is a claim from the floor made by a Senator or Representative that a rule of the House of Representatives or the Senate is being violated. If the chair sustains the point of order, the action in violation of the rule is not permitted.

87.

The MSA, under 16 U.S.C. §1802(2), defines bycatch as "fish which are harvested in a fishery, but which are not sold or kept for personal use, and includes economic discards and regulatory discards. Such term does not include fish released alive under a recreational catch and release fishery management program." Some experts also use the term in the context of non-targeted protected species (e.g., marine mammals, threatened and endangered species) that may be captured during fishing practices.

88.

The National Aquaculture Act, under 16 U.S.C. §2802(1), defines aquaculture as "the propagation and rearing of aquatic species in controlled or selected environments, including, but not limited to, ocean ranching (except private ocean ranching of Pacific salmon for profit in those States where such ranching is prohibited by law)."

89.

16 U.S.C. §1867; and NOAA, NMFS, "National Cooperative Research Program," https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/sustainable-fisheries/national-cooperative-research-program.

---