PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 30, 1993
Rural Community Environmental Assistance Act of 1993 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to extend the authorization of appropriations for State water pollution control revolving funds through FY 2000. Requires each State to establish a rural community environmental assistance account in such fund to be used only for the construction of wastewater treatment works and public water systems in economically distressed rural communities, subject to certain loan and grant conditions. Requires States to establish grant eligibility criteria. Permits assistance to be provided only if: (1) the wastewater treatment works is consistent with planning requirements under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; and (2) the public water system is approved by the State agency with primary enforcement authority under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Requires States, in providing such assistance, to give priority to an economically distressed rural community in which: (1) there is a need for collector sewers and interceptors to improve access to wastewater treatment facilities; (2) residents rely on inadequate wastewater treatment facilities or drinking water systems that are determined by public health officials to be a hazard; or (3) residents rely on public water systems which do not meet requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Requires States to submit plans for the intended uses of amounts in rural community environmental assistance accounts to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for approval. Permits the submission of a plan only if it has been approved by a State Rural Environmental Infrastructure Advisory Panel. Withholds payments from States that fail to comply with requirements for rural community environmental assistance accounts. Directs the Administrator to: (1) make grants to regional, State, and local agencies and not-for-profit organizations to assist economically distressed rural communities by providing technical assistance for the financing, operation, and maintenance of wastewater treatment works and public water systems; and (2) set aside appropriations for such grants.
People & committees
Rep. Rahall, Nick J., II [D-WV-3] · D–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
See H.R.3948.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Public Works + Transportation.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E827)
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 26, 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.1544 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.1544 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.1544 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.1544 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.