PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 104-213.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 28, 1996
Carbon Hill National Fish Hatchery Conveyance Act - Mandates conveyance to the State of Alabama of the Carbon Hill National Fish Hatchery in Alabama for use by the Game and Fish Division of the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources as part of the fish culture program.
People & committees
Rep. Bevill, Tom [D-AL-4] · D–AL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 104-213.
Became Public Law No: 104-213.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11054)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11054)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 462.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported to Senate by Senator Chafee without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported to Senate by Senator Chafee without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Committee consideration and Mark Up Session held.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minute of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4918)
Mr. Saxton moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 278.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-568.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-568.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Executive Comment Received from Interior.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2982 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2982 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2982 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2982 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.