PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 28, 1995
San Diego Coastal Corrections Act of 1995 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to deem a municipal wastewater treatment facility the equivalent of a secondary treatment facility if: (1) the facility uses chemically enhanced primary treatment; (2) the facility discharges the wastewater through an ocean outfall into an open marine environment more than four miles offshore into a depth greater than 300 feet; and (3) the facility's discharge complies with all local and State water quality standards and will be subject to an ocean monitoring program acceptable to relevant Federal and State regulatory agencies.
People & committees
Rep. Bilbray, Brian P. [R-CA-49] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote (3/5 required): 269 - 156 (Roll no. 564).
House roll call 564 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote (3/5 required): 269 - 156 (Roll no. 564).
House roll call 564 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 179 - 245 (Roll no. 563). (consideration: CR H7575)
House roll call 563 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the motion to recommit.
Mr. Mineta moved to recommit with instructions to Transportation.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - Pursuant to clause 4 of rule XIII, the House proceeded with one hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by Mr. Shuster and Mr. Mineta.
Considered from the Corrections Calendar. (consideration: CR H7562-7576)
Called up from the Corrections Calendar for consideration.
Placed on the Corrections Calendar, Calendar No. 1.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 97.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 104-192.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 104-192.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 35 - 21.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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 H.R.1943 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 H.R.1943 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 H.R.1943 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 H.R.1943 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.