PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 507.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 7, 1999
Chesapeake Bay Restoration Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to: (1) continue the Chesapeake Bay Program; and (2) maintain a Program Office to provide specified support to the Chesapeake Executive Council.Authorizes the Administrator to provide technical assistance and assistance grants to nonprofit organizations, State and local governments, colleges and universities, and interstate agencies to achieve Program goals. Provides the Federal and non-Federal share of various Program costs. Provides for Chesapeake Bay Agreement (an agreement among signatory members to restore and protect the Bay's ecosystem) implementation and monitoring grants, with specified Federal and non-Federal shares. Directs the Administrator to make public a document describing in detail projects funded for the current and previous years. Requires any Federal agency that owns or operates a facility within the Bay watershed to: (1) participate in regional and subwatershed planning and restoration programs; and (2) report to the President and the Council on expenditures to carry out such programs.Requires the Administrator to: (1) ensure that management plans are developed and that implementation is begun by signatories to the Agreement to achieve specified water nutrient and quality goals and habitat restoration and protection; and (2) offer technical assistance and assistance grants for a small watershed grants program within the Bay.Directs the Administrator to study and report to Congress on the state of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem and on Program strategies. Requires a five-year study to establish and expand understanding of Bay ecosystem living resources response to water quality improvements resulting from the Program.Authorizes appropriations for FY 2000 through 2005.
People & committees
Rep. Bateman, Herbert H. [R-VA-1] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 507.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 418 - 7 (Roll no. 121).
House roll call 121 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 418 - 7 (Roll no. 121).
House roll call 121 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2164)
PROCEEDINGS POSTPONED - The Chair put the question on passage of the bill by voice vote and announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Shuster objected to the voice vote and demanded the yeas and nays. The Chair postponed further proceedings on the bill until later in the legislative day.
The House adopted the amendment as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 3039.
DEBATE - The Committee is debating the amendment offered by Mr. Traficant.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 3039.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Paul E. Gillmor to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 470 and Rule XXIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3039 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 470. (consideration: CR H2156-2163; text of measure as reported in House: CR H2161-2162)
Rule H. Res. 470 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 470 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3039 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 299.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 106-550.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 106-550.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment Held Hearings Prior to Referral (July 13, 1999).
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 2025. 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.3039 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.3039 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.3039 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.3039 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.