PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 113-45.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 15, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Authorizes the Secretary of Transportation (DOT) to implement or enforce a requirement providing for the screening, testing, or treatment of individuals operating commercial motor vehicles for sleep disorders (including obstructive sleep apnea) only if it is adopted pursuant to a rulemaking proceeding.
Applies this Act only to a requirement adopted on or after September 1, 2013.
People & committees
Rep. Bucshon, Larry [R-IN-8] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 113-45.
Became Public Law No: 113-45.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7213)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S7213)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 0 (Roll no. 486). (text: CR 9/25/2013 H5815)
House roll call 486 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 0 (Roll no. 486).(text: CR 9/25/2013 H5815)
House roll call 486 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5846-5847)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3095.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5815-5816)
Mr. Petri moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 165.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 113-225.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 113-225.
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
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: Dec 5, 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.3095 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.3095 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.3095 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.3095 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.