PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 19, 1996
Environmental Crimes and Enforcement Act of 1996 - Provides that, upon motion of the United States, any person found guilty of a criminal violation of specified Federal environmental laws, or conspiracy to violate such laws, may be ordered to pay the costs incurred by a State, local, or tribal government or an agency thereof for assistance to the Federal Government's investigation and criminal prosecution of the case, with the payments used solely for environmental law enforcement. Sets penalties for individuals and organizations that commit a criminal violation of listed Federal environmental laws which causes "serious bodily injury" to or the death of any other person, including a Federal, State, local, or tribal government employee performing official duties as a result of the violation. Environmental Crimes Training Act of 1996 - Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish within EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance a State, Local, and Tribal Enforcement Training Program to train State, local, and tribal law enforcement personnel in the investigation of environmental crimes. Sets a five-year statute of limitations (longer in cases of concealment of the offense by an affirmative act) for violation of, or a conspiracy to violate, specified Federal environmental laws. Amends various Federal environmental laws to cover attempts to engage in proscribed conduct. Amends the Federal criminal code to authorize the court to order restitution for listed Federal environmental crimes, including, in the case of an offense resulting in pollution of or damage to the environment, payment for removal and remediation of the pollution or damage and restoration of the environment. Defines "victim" of the offense in such cases to include a community or communities, whether or not the members are individually identified.
People & committees
Sen. Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11036-11037)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.2096 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 S.2096 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 S.2096 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 S.2096 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.