HR 2406: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Sexual Harassment and Assault Prevention Improvements Act of 2025

HR 2406 in plain English: This bill expands NOAA's sexual harassment and sexual assault prevention and response requirements to cover a broader range of personnel, including observers, at-sea monitors, and fishery council staff. It removes a requirement that certain harmful acts be 'forcible' to be unlawful, creates new reporting obligations to the Coast Guard, and establishes a confidential reporting option for victims. It also bars people convicted of certain sexual offenses from joining NOAA.

Stated purpose

This bill aims to strengthen NOAA's policies for preventing and responding to sexual harassment and sexual assault among its personnel, including observers and fishery management council members, by expanding reporting requirements, creating confidential reporting options, and barring convicted sex offenders from NOAA service.

Key points

• Extends NOAA's harassment and assault policies to observers, at-sea monitors, and fishery management council staff
• Removes the 'forcible' requirement for acts like assault and harassment of observers to be considered unlawful
• Requires NOAA's Office of Marine and Aviation Operations to report names and incident details of harassment or assault claims to the Coast Guard
• Bars individuals convicted of certain sexual offenses from enlisting with or being commissioned by NOAA
• Creates a confidential 'restricted reporting' system letting personnel report harassment or assault and receive services without triggering an investigation

Arguments supporters make

• NOAA personnel who work in isolated environments like ships are especially vulnerable to harassment and assault, and clearer policies with confidential reporting give victims a safer path to seek help without fear of unwanted exposure.
• Removing the requirement that misconduct be 'forcible' to be unlawful closes a legal loophole that previously let some harmful behavior go unaddressed.
• Requiring detailed public reports on harassment and assault cases — including outcomes and disciplinary actions — creates accountability and helps identify patterns that leadership must fix.

Arguments opponents make

• Expanding mandatory reporting to the Coast Guard and other agencies could discourage victims from coming forward if they fear their information will spread beyond what they intended, undermining the confidential reporting goal.
• Adding new administrative reporting layers and bureaucratic requirements may divert limited NOAA resources away from its core scientific and environmental mission.
• Some critics may argue that existing federal workplace harassment laws and policies are already sufficient, and duplicating them in agency-specific legislation creates redundancy without meaningful added protection.

Tradeoffs

Giving victims a confidential reporting option protects privacy and may encourage more reports, but stricter mandatory reporting to outside agencies like the Coast Guard could work against that privacy goal, creating tension between victim protection and institutional accountability. Expanding coverage and reporting also increases administrative burden on an agency with scientific and operational responsibilities.

Current status in Congress: Passed House.

NewsClear — neutral news & congressional tracking · Bill of the Week