PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

Black Lung Benefits Restoration Act

Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 103-514.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 23, 1993

Black Lung Benefits Restoration Act - Amends the Black Lung Benefits Act (the Act) to provide that, when black lung benefits are paid after an initial determination of eligibility, repayment of an overpayment will not be required even upon a final determination of ineligibility, if there was no fraud or deception by the claimant. Provides for refunds to claimants of any such repayments required before this Act. Provides for reimbursement by the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund to operators who made such benefit overpayments. Revises evidence requirements. Limits to three the number of medical examinations a claimant may submit, but authorizes an administrative law judge to require the claimant to submit to an additional medical examination. Prohibits the responsible operator or the Trust Fund from submitting or requiring more than the number of medical examinations conducted or submitted during the course of all proceedings by the claimant. Revises requirements for survivor benefits. Provides that a miner's death shall be considered to have occurred as a result of the pneumoconiosis if the miner was receiving benefits for, or was totally disabled by, pneumoconiosis at the time of death. Qualifies to receive survivor benefits any widow or widower of a miner who was married to the miner for at least nine months preceding the miner's death, or who had children as a result of such a marriage. Provides that widows or widowers of miners are not disqualified to receive survivor benefits if they remarry after attaining age 50; but prohibits them from receiving an augmentation in survivor benefits on any basis arising out of a subsequent marriage. Provides for notice and an opportunity for a hearing to appeal the Secretary's initial designation of liability as the responsible operator. Authorizes assessment of proceeding costs against any operator who does not have reasonable grounds to contest the designation. Requires that all reasonable legal costs and expenses incurred by the claimant be paid by the responsible operator, or the Trust Fund, after an administrative or judicial determination that the claimant is entitled to black lung benefits. Requires the Secretary or court to take action to assure that they are paid within 45 days after such determination. Requires the Trust Funds to pay any operator the legal costs the operator paid to a claimant determined in a later proceeding to be ineligible for benefits. Prohibits a claimant or respondent from appealing to the Benefits Review Board any order unless it has been made by an administrative law judge. Allows any claim filed under the Act after January 1, 1982, but before enactment of this Act, to be refiled after enactment of this Act for a de novo review on the merits. Provides for coverage of coke oven operators (or operators of machine shops or other operations reasonably related to coke ovens) under the Act and the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act. Revises provisions for compensation of: (1) the Benefits Review Board, under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act; and (2) the Employee's Compensation Appeals Board, under Federal law relating to Federal employees.

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. Simon, Paul [D-IL] · D–IL

Committees

  • Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee
7 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. Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 103-514.

  2. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.

  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: Aug 26, 2025. 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.1781 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.1781 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.1781 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.1781 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