PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 23, 1995
Amends the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to revise general financial responsibility requirements for offshore facilities. Requires responsible parties (except as provided in provisions regarding deepwater ports) to maintain financial responsibility as described by this Act with respect to offshore facilities seaward of the U.S. coastline that are used for drilling for, producing, or processing oil or that have the capacity to transport, store, transfer, or handle more than 1,000 barrels of oil at any one time. Sets the general amount of financial responsibility at $35 million. Provides that if the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating determines that an amount of financial responsibility greater than such amount is appropriate based on an assessment of the facility's risk, the amount of financial responsibility required is equal to the lesser of: (1) the amount of liability for oil pollution to which the responsible party could be subjected with respect to the facility in a case in which the party would be entitled to limit liability; or (2) $75 million. Provides that in cases where a person is the responsible party for more than one facility, evidence of responsibility need be established only to meet the maximum liability applicable to the facility having the greatest maximum liability.
People & committees
Rep. Hayes, James A. [D-LA-7] · D–LA
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 Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.633 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.633 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.633 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.633 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.