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 · May 13, 1993
Reduction of Metals in Packaging Act - Prohibits the intentional introduction of lead, cadmium, mercury, or hexavalent chromium into a package or packaging component during manufacturing or distribution. Sets forth the maximum allowable concentration level of the sum of such elements in packaging. Makes such prohibition inapplicable for packaging: (1) that was manufactured prior to this Act's effective date; or (2) that would not exceed maximum concentration levels but for the addition of recycled materials. Provides for two-year exemptions from requirements for packaging to which lead, cadmium, mercury, or hexavalent chromium has been added to comply with Federal health or safety requirements or, because it is essential for the protection, safe handling, or function of the package contents. Permits for the renewal of exemptions. Requires packaging manufacturers or suppliers to furnish certificates of compliance (with respect to this Act's requirements) to purchasers. Makes certificates of compliance available to the public upon request. Authorizes the assessment of civil penalties for violations of this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ] · D–NJ
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 S5953-5954)
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.966 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.966 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.966 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.966 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.