PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 5, 1993
Chlorine Zero Discharge Act of 1993 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to require pulp and paper manufacturing facilities to achieve zero discharge into water of organochlorine compounds, byproducts, or metabolites formulated as a result of the use of chlorine or any other chlorinated oxidizing agent in the pulp and paper manufacturing process. Requires permits for paper and pulp mills which use chlorine or chlorinated oxidizing agents to require compliance with the zero discharge requirement. Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to: (1) evaluate alternatives to the use of organochlorines in pulp and paper manufacturing and to publish a report on the transfer to chlorine-free technology in the pulp and paper industry as a model for pollution prevention; and (2) provide technical information and support to assist permit applicants in the use of such alternatives.
People & committees
Rep. Richardson, Bill [D-NM-3] · D–NM
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 Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Public Works + Transportation.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2006-2007)
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 26, 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.2898 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.2898 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.2898 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.2898 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.