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 · Feb 3, 1995
Comprehensive Wetlands Conservation and Management Act of 1995 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to prohibit, unless such activity is undertaken pursuant to a permit issued by the Secretary of the Army: (1) the discharge of dredged or fill material into U.S. waters; or (2) the draining, channelization, or excavation of wetlands. (Sec. 3) Requires the Secretary, upon receiving permit applications, to: (1) classify as Type A wetlands those that are of critical significance to the long-term conservation of an ecosystem and meet other specified conditions; (2) classify as Type B wetlands those that provide habitat for a significant population of wildlife or provide other significant wetlands functions and values; and (3) classify as Type C wetlands those that serve marginal functions but exist in such abundance that regulation of activities is not necessary to conserve wetlands values and functions, are prior converted cropland, are fastlands, or are lands within areas that do not serve significant wetlands functions and values. Prohibits more than 20 percent of any county, parish, or borough from being classified as Type A wetlands. Permits owners of interests in Type A wetlands to seek compensation for the fair market value of such lands. Provides that title for such lands shall pass to the United States on acceptance of an offer for compensation. Requires the Secretary to deny a permit authorizing activities in Type A wetlands unless: (1) such activities can be undertaken with minimal alteration or disturbance; or (2) the proposed use of the land will result in overall environmental benefits. Authorizes the Secretary to issue a permit for activities in Type B wetlands subject to conditions that ensure that the wetland ecosystem does not suffer loss or degradation. Imposes requirements for mitigation when such activities result in permanent wetland loss or degradation. Directs the Secretary to establish a mitigation banking program in each State to ensure compensation for loss and degradation of wetlands. Requires the primary objective of such programs to be to provide for the restoration, enhancement, or creation of ecologically significant wetlands on an ecosystem basis. Exempts specified activities from this Act's requirements. Authorizes the Secretary to establish standards to govern the delineation of wetlands, to be binding on all Federal agencies. Requires the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct a project to identify and classify U.S. wetlands. Authorizes civil actions and prescribes penalties for permit violations. Authorizes States to administer permit programs for activities covered by this Act, subject to the Secretary's approval.
People & committees
Sen. Pressler, Larry [R-SD] · R–SD
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 S2126, S2133)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.352 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.352 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.352 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.352 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.