PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 24, 2007
Water Use Efficiency and Conservation Research Act - Requires the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Assistant Administrator for Research and Development to establish a research and development program to promote water use efficiency and conservation, including: (1) technologies and processes that enable the collection, treatment, and reuse of rainwater and greywater; (2) water storage and distribution systems; and (3) behavioral, social, and economic barriers to achieving greater water use efficiency.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to: (1) facilitate the adoption of technology and processes to increase water use, water efficiency, and conservation; and (2) collect and disseminate information on technologies and processes to increase water use and conservation, including information on incentives and impediments to development and commercialization, best practices, and anticipated increases in water use efficiency resulting from the implementation of specific technologies and processes.
People & committees
Rep. Matheson, Jim [D-UT-2] · D–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7605)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7605)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3957.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7604-7606)
Mr. Matheson moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 519.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science and Technology. H. Rept. 110-802.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science and Technology. H. Rept. 110-802.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Science and Technology.
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: 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 H.R.3957 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.3957 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.3957 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.3957 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.