PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 15, 2017
Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 2016
This bill amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to revise regulations for drinking water contaminants, including by:
requiring the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine whether or not to regulate no fewer than 10 contaminants every 3 years (current law requires 5 contaminants every 5 years);
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
revising the process and requirements for setting maximum containment levels in national primary drinking water regulations;
directing the EPA to revise national primary drinking water regulations for lead and copper;
setting deadlines for the EPA to publish maximum contaminant level goals and promulgate national drinking water regulations for perchlorate, perfluorinated compounds, and microcystin (algal) toxin;
establishing grant programs for reducing lead in drinking water in schools;
requiring community water systems to assess their vulnerabilities to contamination, including vulnerabilities from climate change or sabotage, and develop plans for addressing those vulnerabilities;
establishing the Drinking Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability Program, under which the EPA may award grants for community water systems to increase their resiliency to those threats;
removing a regulatory exemption for hydraulic fracturing;
requiring the EPA to develop a strategic plan for assessing and managing the risks of drought to drinking water provided by public water systems;
revising requirements for the drinking water state revolving fund (SRF);
creating a process for consolidating water systems that repeatedly fail to comply with drinking water standards;
requiring the EPA to create an inventory of data about drinking water violations;
directing the EPA to revise regulations for consumer confidence reports;
establishing research grants for monitoring technology; and
requiring the EPA to study the presence of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in drinking water sources.
The bill reauthorizes specified programs under the Act, including reauthorizing through FY2022 the SRF.
People & committees
Rep. Pallone, Frank, Jr. [D-NJ-6] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 2025. 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 H.R.1068 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 H.R.1068 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 H.R.1068 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 H.R.1068 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.