PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Environment and Public Works. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Nov 13, 1997
Coastal Pollution Reduction Act of 1997 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to require the owner or operator of the Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, publicly owned treatment works, in order to be eligible to apply for a waiver of secondary treatment requirements, to transmit to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency the results of a study of the marine environment of coastal areas in the Mayaguez area to determine the feasibility of constructing a deep ocean outfall for the treatment works. Authorizes the owner or operator of such treatment works to submit an application for modification of secondary treatment requirements. Prohibits the filing of such application unless the applicant has entered into a binding consent decree with the United States that includes certain minimum requirements for schedules of compliance, milestones, and a commitment to contribute a minimum amount to the Mayaguez Watershed Initiative. Bars the Administrator from granting a modification unless the outfall will use a well-designed and operated diffuser that discharges into unstressed ocean waters and is situated so as to avoid discharge to coral reefs, sensitive marine resources or recreational areas, and shorelines. Makes a modification effective only if the outfall is operational within four and a half years of the date of the Administrator's initial determination on the application. Permits certain grants for the development of estuary conservation and management plans to be used for the implementation of plans as well. Extends the authorization of appropriations for the National Estuary Program through FY 1998.
People & committees
Rescom. Romero-Barcelo, Carlos A. [D-PR-At Large] · D–PR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Hearings held.
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 motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to without objection.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H10943-10944)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Condit objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8088-8090)
Mr. Boehlert moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 134.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 105-237.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 105-237.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1475)
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.2207 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.2207 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.2207 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.2207 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.