PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6286-6287)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 18, 1993
Hazardous Pollution Prevention Planning Act of 1993 - Requires owners or operators of facilities subject to toxic chemical release reporting requirements pursuant to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 to periodically prepare pollution prevention plans, summaries, and progress reports. Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish criteria pursuant to which owners or operators shall identify targeted production processes on which to focus pollution prevention strategies. Directs the Administrator to establish a small business pollution prevention compliance and technical assistance program. Provides for: (1) grants to States for programs to promote pollution prevention techniques by small businesses; and (2) the establishment of Small Business Pollution Prevention Panels within EPA regional offices. Exempts from plan preparation requirements research and development laboratories and pilot facilities. Permits the Administrator to provide technical assistance in pollution prevention planning to facilities within industrial categories identified as having the highest priority for pollution prevention. Authorizes States to exercise pollution prevention planning authorities, subject to the Administrator's approval. Requires the Administrator to carry out a pollution prevention research, development, and demonstration program in coordination with other Federal agencies. Prescribes civil penalties for failures to submit pollution prevention documents. Permits the Administrator or an authorized State to deny a permit under any environmental law to any owner or operator who fails to submit pollution prevention documents. Directs the Administrator to establish a demonstration program to provide regulatory incentives for achieving pollution prevention. Authorizes the Administrator, as part of such program, to modify requirements of existing permits or agreements. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Lieberman, Joseph I. [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6286-6287)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6042-6044)
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.980 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.980 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.980 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.980 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.