Small Community Options for Regulatory Equity Act of 2010
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 9, 2010
Small Community Options for Regulatory Equity Act of 2010 - Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to require states exercising primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems to exempt any nonprofit small public water system (serving 10,000 or fewer persons) that so requests in accordance with this Act from the requirements of any national primary drinking water regulation for naturally occurring contaminants, including arsenic, radon, radium, uranium, and specified disinfection byproducts.
Requires exemption requests to include a finding that the system's compliance with applicable national primary drinking water regulations is not economically feasible. Precludes judicial or administrative review of such findings.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4798 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4798 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4798 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4798 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.