PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 3, 2003
Clean Water Enforcement and Compliance Improvement Act of 2003- Amends enforcement provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) regarding: (1) findings concerning harm caused and citizen suits; (2) compliance under State permits; (3) recordkeeping, effluent monitoring, and notice of pollution information; (4) priority areas (with a high degree of economic distress or social disenfranchisement); (5) violations of pretreatment requirements; (6) amounts of penalties; (7) the effect of State actions upon Federal ones; (8) inspection of significantly noncomplying facilities; and (9) the scope of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emergency powers.Revises State pollutant discharge permit program requirements concerning program approval, inspection, monitoring, introduction of pollutants into publicly owned treatment works, poor compliance histories, submission of pollution prevention plans, and reporting.Restricts the duration of permits that modify effluent limitations for toxic pollutants to two years and requires a hearing concerning owner-operator control and reasonable progress.Authorizes citizen suits for past violations of effluent standards or limitations if there is evidence of repeated violations.Includes in employee protections a prohibition against harassment or prosecution of, or discrimination against, persons for assisting in achieving compliance with, or refusing to violate, FWPCA.Expands EPA subpoena authority and subjects additional actions under FWPCA to judicial review.Establishes the Clean Water Trust Fund for mitigation projects.Makes Federal agencies subject to all Federal, State, and local water pollution control and abatement requirements in the same manner as any other person. Waives sovereign immunity of the United States with respect to such requirements.
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 Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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: Aug 18, 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.1624 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.1624 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.1624 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.1624 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.