PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 24, 2007
Marine Vessel Emissions Reduction Act of 2007 - Amends the Clean Air Act to direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to promulgate regulations that, effective beginning on December 31, 2010, require specified marine vessels to use fuel that contains not more than 1,000 parts per million of sulfur in their main and auxiliary engines. Authorizes the Administrator to promulgate interim regulations upon determining that compliance with such requirement is not technically feasible by such date.
Authorizes the Administrator to provide for an alternative mechanism of compliance for a marine vessel if: (1) the vessel employs a control technology that reduces emissions of sulfur oxides and particulate matter to at least the same degree as the reduction that would be achieved through compliance with the applicable fuel sulfur content limitation; and (2) the emission reductions achieved are in addition to any reductions required to achieve compliance with an applicable engine emission standard.
Requires: (1) the Administrator, no later than December 15, 2008, to establish and periodically revise standards for emissions of oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide from newly-manufactured and in-use main and auxiliary engines in oceangoing marine vessels that enter or leave a U.S. port or offshore terminal; and (2) such standards to require, beginning January 1, 2012, that the engines achieve the greatest degree of emission reduction achievable through the application of available technology.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Administrator, upon determining that the maximum level of control required by regulations applicable to on-road, nonroad, and stationary engines or achieved by sources from which control technologies may be transferred, including sources that use advanced aftertreatment technologies, will not be technically achievable by January 1, 2012, to promulgate: (1) standards that require the level of control that will be technically achievable by that date; and (2) additional standards that require either such maximum level of control or the level that will be technically achievable beginning January 1, 2016.
People & committees
Rep. Solis, Hilda L. [D-CA-32] · D–CA
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 Air Quality.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Nov 30, 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.2548 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.2548 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.2548 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.2548 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.