PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 13, 1995
Comprehensive One-Call Notification Act of 1995 - Directs the Secretary of Commerce to provide for the establishment of a nationwide toll-free telephone number to be used by State one-call notification systems to protect underground facilities from excavation damage. Requires each State to consider whether to adopt a comprehensive statewide one-call notification program containing all elements required under this Act. Outlines required elements of the program, including prior notification of any intended excavations and its application to all excavators and underground facility operators. Permits a State to elect not to require a person to contact the one-call notification system if the person owns or leases the property and operates all underground facilities at the excavation site. Provides penalties for violations of the requirements of a program, as well as enforcement procedures. Directs the Secretary to make grants to States (or to operators of State notification systems) which have elected to adopt or establish and maintain a notification system with all required elements. Allows grants for alternative programs if they are at least as protective of the public health and safety and environment as a State program under this Act. Directs the Secretary to: (1) coordinate the implementation of this Act with appropriate Federal agencies; (2) review and report to the Congress on the extent to which Department of Commerce programs and procedures could be used to achieve the purposes of this Act; (3) develop and make available to States a model State one-call notification program, with suggested elements; and (4) develop public service announcements and other materials to educate the public about one-call notification systems and the national phone number. Requires each State to provide an initial and annual status reports on progress made in implementing a State program. Allows States to implement more protective notification systems than that required under this Act. Expresses the sense of the Congress that equipment and products purchased with funds made available under this Act should be American-made. Requires notification of such preference to the recipients of assistance under this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Pallone, Frank, Jr. [D-NJ-6] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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 21, 2025. 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.2482 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.2482 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.2482 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.2482 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.