PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 25, 1999
Environmental Crimes and Enforcement Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal criminal code to require that, on motion of the United States, a person convicted of an environmental crime (defined as a violation of specified statutes, including provisions of the Toxic Substances Control Act, Solid Waste Disposal Act, and Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986) be ordered to pay the costs incurred by a State, local, or tribal government in assisting in the investigation and prosecution of the case by the United States. Directs that sums paid under this provision be used solely for the enforcement of environmental laws. (Sec. 3) Sets penalties for persons convicted of an environmental crime that is the proximate cause of serious bodily injury to or the death of any person. (Sec. 4) Environmental Crimes Training Act of 1999 - Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to establish within the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance a State, Local, and Tribal Environmental Enforcement Training Program to train State, local, and tribal law enforcement personnel to investigate environmental crimes. (Sec. 5) Sets a five-year statute of limitations (longer in cases of concealment of the offense by an affirmative act) for commission of, or a conspiracy to commit, specified Federal environmental crimes. (Sec. 6) Amends various Federal environmental laws to cover attempts to engage in proscribed conduct. (Sec. 7) Amends the 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 municipality or other political subdivision in which the pollution occurred or in which the damage was suffered, whether or not any person residing or doing business in the political subdivision is identified as having suffered damage. (Sec. 8) Authorizes the court to issue prejudgment orders to secure payment for environmental damage.
People & committees
Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] · D–NY
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 Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2022)
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: Aug 10, 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.481 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.481 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.481 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.481 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.