PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

A bill to facilitate the remediation of contaminated sediments in the waters of the United States.

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 6, 1997

Amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) to require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to establish final numerical sediment quality criteria for the ten toxic, persistent, or bioaccumulative substances that are most likely to adversely affect human health and the environment. Provides for review and revision of the list of such substances every three years. Directs the Administrator to revise the hazard ranking system (part of the national hazardous substance response plan under CERCLA) to ensure that the system more accurately assesses the health and environmental risks from aquatic sites with contaminated sediments (as such term is applied under provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) dealing with contaminated sediments in the Great Lakes). Prohibits such assessment from including consideration of costs of carrying out response actions or requiring identification of the source of a hazardous substance release. Authorizes the Administrator to expend up to $3 million per fiscal year out of the Hazardous Substance Superfund to carry out response and other corrective actions at facilities containing contaminated sediments (as such term is applied under the Clean Water Act provisions). Requires the Administrator, from the national survey of data regarding aquatic sediment quality conducted under the Water Resources Development Act of 1992, to identify the 20 facilities containing contaminated sediments (as such term is applied under the Clean Water Act provisions) that are most likely to adversely affect health and the environment and that have not been the subject of Federal or State response actions or other corrective actions. Directs the Administrator to prepare and submit to the Congress a comprehensive scoring package under the hazard ranking system for each facility unless a State or remedial action planning committee objects to the assessment necessary for scoring in an area or watershed under its jurisdiction. Provides that criteria for determining priorities among hazardous substance releases for purposes of taking remedial action shall not be based on the extent to which the President can identify potentially responsible parties or specific sources of a release. Requires the Administrator to report to the Congress on the extent to which the hazard ranking system (as revised in 1990) has achieved certain objectives regarding accurate assessment of health and environmental risks posed by facilities and water contamination risks.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Levin, Carl [D-MI] · D–MI

Committees

  • Environment and Public Works Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

  2. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11871-11872)

  3. Introduced in Senate

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

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 S.1386 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 S.1386 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 S.1386 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 S.1386 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.

View full prompt & sources