PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 20, 1996
Wetlands Restoration and Improvement Act of 1996 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to declare that it is national policy to: (1) achieve, through regulatory and nonregulatory opportunities involving all levels of government and supported by private initiatives, the conservation and restoration of wetlands to increase the quantity and quality of, and no overall net loss of, the wetlands resource base of the United States; and (2) foster wetlands mitigation banking as a means to mitigate wetlands loss by providing a stable, practical, and workable regulatory framework for the use of mitigation banking, making appropriate use of existing, successful State programs for mitigation banking, taking into account regional variations in wetlands conditions. Directs the Secretary of the Army to issue a mitigation bank charter to a person whose application satisfies specified criteria. Requires an applicant to submit an application signed by a responsible official which contains specified information, including: (1) the proposed restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation projects proposed to be included in the scope of the charter; (2) the proposed service area for each proposed project; (3) reliable assurances of an adequate source of water; (4) adequate legal control over the real property in the proposed project; (5) adequate financial assurances; (6) an adequate operations and maintenance plan to assure continued viability of the proposed project after completion of project construction; and (7) adequate legal protection to assure permanent protection of the wetlands in the mitigation bank that are used as the basis for selling credits. Sets forth provisions regarding annual reports, decision deadlines, and other procedural matters, including State approval of mitigation bank projects. Authorizes a mitigation bank, upon receipt of its charter, to offer mitigation credits for sale, subject to specified requirements. Directs the Secretary to propose regulations which set forth objective criteria by which: (1) the number of credits to be yielded by a mitigation banking project may be determined; and (2) mitigation bank service areas are to be determined. Requires such regulations to establish a preference for in-kind compensation of wetland impacts. Directs the Secretary to develop a State-by-State implementation strategy. Sets forth reporting requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3] · R–NC
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: Aug 21, 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.3692 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.3692 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.3692 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.3692 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.