PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, and Nuclear Safety. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 13, 2003
Fuels Security Act of 2003 - Amends the Clean Air Act to require that gasoline contain a specified volume of renewable fuel. Provides for annual increases in the applicable volume through 2012. Establishes a ratio for determining the volume required from 2013 onward.Defines renewable fuel to include motor vehicle fuel produced from biomass (e.g. grain) or natural gas produced from a biogas (e.g. landfill) source.Establishes a system of credits for gasoline which contains more renewable fuel than required.Requires studies concerning these renewable fuel requirements, specifically: (1) seasonal variations in renewable fuel availability; (2) the impact on consumers; and (3) the impact on small refineries.Establishes a system of waivers for States claiming and proving economic or environmental hardship.Establishes a Federal agency ethanol-blended gasoline and biodiesel purchasing requirement.Establishes a commercial byproducts from municipal solid waste loan guarantee program.Requires data collection concerning the monthly consumption of renewable fuels.Federal Reformulated Fuels Act of 2002 - Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to permit the use of the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund for methyl tertiary butyl ether (MBTE) remediation purposes.Amends the Clean Air Act to revise guidelines pertaining to: (1) water quality protection from fuels; (2) oxygen content requirements for reformulated gasoline; (3) public health and environmental impacts of fuels and fuel additives; (4) analyses of motor vehicle fuel changes; (5) additional opt-in areas under the reformulated gasoline program; and (6) Federal enforcement of State fuels requirements.Requires a joint study of Federal, State and local requirements concerning motor vehicle fuels.Requires a review of Federal procurement initiatives relating to use of recycled products and fleet and transportation efficiency.
People & committees
Sen. Daschle, Thomas A. [D-SD] · D–SD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, and Nuclear Safety. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2458-2459)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.385 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.385 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.385 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.385 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.