Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 25, 2008
Emergency Fueling Station Designation Act of 2008 - Amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to direct the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to establish a program to address the shortage of fuel along hurricane evacuation routes by providing funds to eligible states (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia) to assist in the purchase and installation of transfer switches and generators at designated emergency fueling stations.
Requires states applying for funds to provide: (1) identification of hurricane zones and evacuation routes; (2) the estimated number of designated and adjacent emergency fueling stations determined to be necessary by such state using population figures along hurricane evacuation routes as a guide in selecting stations; and (3) specified assurances, including that a fueling station will not be selected as a designated emergency fueling station unless it has not less than 10 fueling positions and is located within one mile of a hurricane evacuation route.
Directs the Administrator to make available to an eligible state that applies for funds 50% of the cost for the purchase and installation of transfer switches and generators for designated emergency fueling stations, and 30% of that cost of adjacent emergency fueling stations, selected by the state.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.7075 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.7075 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.7075 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.7075 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.