S. 492 (106th): Chesapeake Bay Restoration Act of 1999

Mar 02, 1999 (106th Congress, 1999–2000)
Died (Reported by Committee)
See Instead:

H.R. 3039 (same title)
Passed House — Apr 12, 2000

Paul Sarbanes
Senator from Maryland
Read Text »
Last Updated
Oct 13, 1999
17 pages
Related Bills
S. 618 (105th) was a previous version of this bill.

Referred to Committee
Last Action: Apr 17, 1997

H.R. 3039 (identical)

Passed House
Last Action: Apr 12, 2000


This bill was introduced on September 29, 1999, in a previous session of Congress, but was not enacted.

Introduced Mar 02, 1999
Referred to Committee Mar 02, 1999
Reported by Committee Sep 29, 1999
Full Title

A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Act to assist in the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay, and for other purposes..


No summaries available.

4 cosponsors (2D, 2R) (show)

Senate Environment and Public Works

The committee chair determines whether a bill will move past the committee stage.

Primary Source

THOMAS.gov (The Library of Congress)

GovTrack gets most information from THOMAS, which is updated generally one day after events occur. Activity since the last update may not be reflected here. Data comes via the congress project.


Get a bill status widget for your website »


Click a format for a citation suggestion:


S. stands for Senate bill.

A bill must be passed by both the House and Senate in identical form and then be signed by the president to become law.

The bill’s title was written by its sponsor.

GovTrack’s Bill Summary

We don’t have a summary available yet.

Library of Congress Summary

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.

Chesapeake Bay Restoration Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to:
(1) continue the Chesapeake Bay Program; and
(2) maintain a Program Office to provide specified support to the Chesapeake Executive Council. Authorizes the Administrator to provide technical assistance and assistance grants to nonprofit private organizations and individuals, State and local governments, colleges and universities, and interstate agencies to carry out the Program. Provides the Federal and non-Federal share of various Program costs.
Provides for Chesapeake Bay Agreement (an agreement among signatory members to restore and protect the Bay's ecosystem) implementation and monitoring grants, with specified Federal and non-Federal shares.
Directs the Administrator to make public a document describing in detail projects funded for the current and previous years.
Requires any Federal agency that owns or operates a facility within the Bay watershed to:
(1) participate in regional and subwatershed planning and restoration programs; and
(2) report to the President and the Council on expenditures to carry out such programs.
Requires the Administrator to:
(1) ensure that management plans are developed and that implementation is begun by signatories to the Agreement for the Bay tributaries to achieve specified water nutrient and quality goals and habitat restoration and protection; and
(2) offer technical assistance and assistance grants for a small watershed grants program within the Bay. Directs the Administrator to study and report to the Congress on the state of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem and on Program goals, effects, and strategies.
Requires a five-year study to establish and expand understanding of Bay ecosystem living resources response to water quality improvements resulting from the Program. Authorizes appropriations for FY 2000 through 2005.

House Republican Conference Summary

The summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.

No summary available.

House Democratic Caucus Summary

The House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.

So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference’s summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That’s because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.

We’ll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.

Use the comment space below for discussion of the merits of S. 492 (106th) with other GovTrack users.
Your comments are not read by Congressional staff.

comments powered by Disqus