A bill to provide for increased energy savings and environmental benefits through the increased use of recovered mineral component in federally funded projects involving procurement of cement or concrete.

Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 394.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Nov 17, 2003

Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and each agency head to implement fully all procurement requirements and incentives, including Federal procurement guidelines, that provide for the use of cement and concrete incorporating recovered mineral component in cement or concrete projects.

Requires each agency head to give priority to achieving greater use of recovered mineral component in cement or concrete projects for which recovered mineral components historically have not been used or have been used only minimally.

Instructs the Administrator, in cooperation with the Secretary of Transportation and the Secretary of Energy, to study and report to Congress on the extent to which current procurement requirements may realize energy savings and environmental benefits attainable with substitution of recovered mineral component in cement used in cement or concrete projects.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Instructs the Administrator to establish criteria (including an evaluation of whether to establish a numerical standard for concentration of lead and other hazardous substances) for the safe and environmentally protective use of granular mine tailings from the Tar Creek, Oklahoma, Mining District, known as "chat," for: (1) cement or concrete projects; and (2) transportation construction projects (including transportation construction projects involving the use of asphalt) that are carried out, in whole or in part, using Federal funds.

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.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Sen. Byrd, Robert C. [D-WV] · D–WV

Committees

Environment and Public Works Committee

2 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

Nov 17, 2003
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 394.
Nov 17, 2003
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Inhofe with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 108-198.
Nov 17, 2003
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Inhofe with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 108-198.
Jul 30, 2003
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Apr 7, 2003
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Apr 7, 2003
Introduced in Senate

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Reported to Senate · Nov 17, 2003 Formatted Text PDF
Introduced in Senate · Apr 7, 2003 Formatted Text PDF

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: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

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.793 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

Discuss S.793, 108th Congress: A bill to provide for increased energy savings and environmental benefits through the increased use of recovered mineral component in federally funded projects involving procurement of cement or concrete.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/793

Text version to examine: Reported to Senate · 2003-11-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/s793/BILLS-108s793rs.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2026-09-08T18:12:22Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze S.793 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.793 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

Discuss S.793, 108th Congress: A bill to provide for increased energy savings and environmental benefits through the increased use of recovered mineral component in federally funded projects involving procurement of cement or concrete.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/793

Text version to examine: Reported to Senate · 2003-11-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/s793/BILLS-108s793rs.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2026-09-08T18:12:22Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.793 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.793 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

Discuss S.793, 108th Congress: A bill to provide for increased energy savings and environmental benefits through the increased use of recovered mineral component in federally funded projects involving procurement of cement or concrete.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/793

Text version to examine: Reported to Senate · 2003-11-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/s793/BILLS-108s793rs.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2026-09-08T18:12:22Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.793 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.793 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

Discuss S.793, 108th Congress: A bill to provide for increased energy savings and environmental benefits through the increased use of recovered mineral component in federally funded projects involving procurement of cement or concrete.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/793

Text version to examine: Reported to Senate · 2003-11-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/s793/BILLS-108s793rs.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2026-09-08T18:12:22Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.793 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.