PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 17, 2003
Underground Storage Tank Compliance Act of 2003 - Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to distribute to States at least 80 percent of the funds authorized to be appropriated under this Act from the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund to pay the reasonable costs incurred under cooperative agreements of: (1) certain corrective actions and compensation programs; (2) directly related administrative expenses; or (3) enforcement of State or local requirements regulating underground storage tanks (USTs). Allows undistributed funds to be used for enforcing UST regulations. Requires the Administrator or a State with an approved program to require compliance inspections of USTs at least once every two years.Directs the Administrator to publish operator training guidelines and States to develop and implement a training strategy consistent with stated requirements.Authorizes the use of funds made available for the petroleum response program to carry out corrective actions with respect to methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) releases.Permits the consideration of an owner or operator's violation history when a State or the Administrator enforces compliance.Authorizes a State or the Administrator to prohibit the delivery of regulated substances (motor fuels) to non-compliant tanks. Provides temporary relief for certain tanks in remote locations.Requires implementation reports by any Federal or State agency responsible for USTs.Requires the Administrator and Indian Tribes to correct UST releases on Indian lands.Permits States to establish requirements more stringent than the Federal requirements.
People & committees
Sen. Chafee, Lincoln [R-RI] · R–RI
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 Environment and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5684-5689; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S5684-5686; text as passed Senate: CR S5686-5689)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S5684-5689; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S5684-5686; text as passed Senate: CR S5686-5689)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 25.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Inhofe with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 108-13.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Inhofe with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 108-13.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1149-1151)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1148-1149)
Introduced in Senate
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.195 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 S.195 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 S.195 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 S.195 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.