PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 21, 1995
Voluntary Environmental Audit Protection Act - Provides that an environmental audit report constituting part of an environmental audit shall not be subject to discovery and admitted into evidence in civil or criminal actions or administrative proceedings before a Federal court or agency or under Federal law. Makes such exclusion inapplicable to information: (1) required to be collected or reported to a regulatory agency pursuant to specified Federal environmental laws (covered laws); (2) obtained by observation, sampling, or monitoring by a regulatory agency; or (3) obtained from a source independent of the audit. Makes such exclusion inapplicable if: (1) the owner or operator of the facility that initiated the audit expressly waives the right of the person or government entity that prepared the report to exclude such material from the evidence or proceeding; (2) after an in camera hearing, the appropriate Federal court determines that the environmental audit report provides evidence of noncompliance with a covered environmental law and efforts to achieve compliance were not pursued with diligence; or (3) the person or government entity is asserting the exclusion for a fraudulent purpose. Places the burden of proof regarding the applicability of the exclusion on the person invoking its protection. States that a person or entity that performs an audit may not be required to give testimony in a Federal court or an administrative proceeding of a Federal agency without his or her consent. Sets forth conditions under which disclosures of information relating to a covered Federal law to an appropriate Federal or State agency are considered voluntary. Considers such disclosures involuntary if the person or government entity making the disclosure has committed repeated violations of Federal or State laws relating to environmental quality due to separate events giving rise to the violations during the three-year period prior to disclosure. Presumes disclosures to be voluntary if the person or entity provides information supporting a claim that the information is a voluntary disclosure and makes such persons or entities immune from administrative, civil, or criminal penalties for violations unless such presumption is rebutted. Places the burden of rebuttal on Federal agencies.
People & committees
Sen. Hatfield, Mark O. [R-OR] · R–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4264-4273)
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: Aug 10, 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.582 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.582 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.582 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.582 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.