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 · Jan 4, 1995
Alaska Wetlands Conservation Credit Procedures Act of 1994 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to provide that specified guidelines for disposal sites for the discharge of dredged and fill material into navigable waters for States with substantial conserved wetlands areas: (1) shall not include requirements or standards for mitigation to compensate for wetlands loss and adverse impacts to wetlands; (2) may include requirements or standards for minimization of such adverse impacts; and (3) may include standards or requirements for avoidance of impacts only if the discharge permit applicant is not required to establish that upland alternative sites do not exist. Directs the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers and at the request of a State with substantial conserved wetlands areas, to issue general permits for such States which contain a regulatory standard for such discharges that is no greater than the standard contained in the guidelines described above. Makes the discharge of dredged or fill material in connection with the following activities exempt from regulation under related provisions governing permits: (1) airport safety in a State with substantial conserved wetlands areas and in any case necessary for public safety; (2) construction and maintenance of log transfer facilities; (3) construction of tailings impoundments utilized for treatment facilities; and (4) construction of ice pads and ice roads and for snow storage and removal purposes. Requires the Secretary to issue individual and general permits pursuant to the standards and requirements of this Act for a State with substantial conserved wetlands areas. Directs the Secretary, for permits issued for economic base lands (specified lands conveyed to or owned by Alaska Native entities or the State of Alaska), to: (1) balance the standards and policies of this Act against U.S. obligations to allow such lands to be used to create and sustain economic activity; (2) give substantial weight to the social and economic needs of Alaska Natives; and (3) account for regional differences in the abundance and value of wetlands. Requires the Secretary, for lands owned by Alaska Native villages, to issue general permits for disposition of dredge and fill material for critical infrastructure in rural villages without a determination that activities authorized by such a permit cause only minimal adverse environmental effects.
People & committees
Sen. Stevens, Ted [R-AK] · R–AK
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 S272-273)
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.49 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.49 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.49 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.49 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.