PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 18, 2014
Assistance, Quality, and Affordability Act of 2014 - Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to reauthorize, revise, and increase funding for the drinking water state revolving fund (SRF) for FY2015-FY2017. (The Drinking Water SRF program awards capitalization grants to states, which in turn provide financial assistance to public water systems for infrastructure improvements.) Expands the list of activities for which the SRF may be used and revises the process for prioritizing applications for SRF funds.
Sets forth requirements concerning SRF funded projects using goods produced in the United States and giving prevailing wages to laborers and mechanics.
Revises requirements for state Intended Use Plans for SRF funds, in part by requiring the plans to list systems that are not in compliance with national primary drinking water regulation and reserve a specified amount of funding for assistance for disadvantaged communities.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Raises the cap on SRF funding that may be used for projects in American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.
Repeals requirements for regulations on variance technologies. Repeals state authority to grant variances for compliance with a drinking water regulation requirement specifying a maximum contaminant level or treatment technique.
Directs the EPA to:
study the presence of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in drinking water sources,
establish requirements for electronic submission of compliance monitoring data by public water systems,
collect data on best practices for administration of SRF programs, and
implement a voluntary certification program for effective water loss and leak control technology.
Reauthorizes a program to provide technical assistance to enable small public water systems to achieve and maintain compliance with applicable national primary drinking water regulations for FY2015-FY2019.
People & committees
Rep. Tonko, Paul [D-NY-20] · D–NY
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 and the Economy.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.5534 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.5534 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.5534 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.5534 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.