PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 28, 2015
This bill amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) to allow a permittee under the Act to satisfy compensatory mitigation requirements for discharging dredged or fill material into the waters of the United States (permitted activity) by entering into a preservation lease with a state or Indian tribe whose wetlands are affected.
A preservation lease is an agreement under which a permittee leases wetlands or other aquatic sites on state or Indian land for the sole purpose of preserving the wetlands or other aquatic sites in an undisturbed state during the term of the lease to mitigate for a permitted activity. The term of the lease may not be less than the life of the permitted activity and must be adjusted to account for the cessation of the impacts caused by such activity.
If a permittee enters into a preservation lease and subsequently ceases to maintain the permitted activity, or seeks to abandon the permitted activity without a good faith transfer, the permittee must obtain a permit modification from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which may require restoration and rehabilitation of the area.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
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: Jan 3, 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.3271 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.3271 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.3271 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.3271 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.