PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 14, 2006
Cleanup Assurance and Polluter Accountability Act of 2006 - Directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to: (1) finalize regulations under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) that require facilities to establish and maintain evidence of financial responsibility for the risk associated with the production, transportation, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous substances; (2) publish proposed financial assurance rules for classes of facilities that present the highest risk associated with such substances; and (3) annually promulgate financial assurance rules for additional classes of facilities, giving highest priority to classes that may contain sites at which unreimbursed response costs are at least $12,000.
Requires facilities subject to financial assurance requirements to submit to the EPA: (1) a notification of filings for bankruptcy protection; (2) an estimate of environmental impacts resulting from their activities; and (3) a description of their corporate relationships. Requires the EPA to give priority to the development of requirements for facilities or industries whose prior actions indicate a high risk of default on environmental liabilities.
Directs the EPA to require that each affected person: (1) enter a financial assurance agreement that reflects the hazardous substances risk; and (2) provide financial assurances to cover potential response costs and damages. Sets forth factors for the EPA to consider in determining whether to accept financial assurances.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the EPA to: (1) make full use of administrative offsets and liens on assets for enforcement purposes; and (2) issue guidance for enforcement of requirements for use of such offsets and liens.
Authorizes a trustee in bankruptcy proceedings to avoid any transfer of a debtor's interest in an asset made during the 10 years before the bankruptcy petition is filed, if: (1) the debtor had environmental liability under CERCLA; and (2) the debtor made such transfer with intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any person with respect to such liability.
Requires the EPA to report methods to strengthen the government's ability to secure assets needed to pay for response costs at sites contaminated with hazardous substances. Requires the National Bankruptcy Review Commission to evaluate the interaction between bankruptcy and CERCLA and to provide recommendations for action.
People & committees
Sen. Cantwell, Maria [D-WA] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5878-5879)
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.3515 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.3515 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.3515 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.3515 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.