Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 27, 1999
Drinking Water Right-to-Know Act of 1999 - Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to require a national primary drinking water regulation for radionuclides to require the testing of drinking water for the presence of radium 224 no later than 48 hours after taking a sample. Requires annual consumer confidence reports by community water systems to include a report on the level of each contaminant that may be difficult to detect in finished water and present at levels that present a public health concern in such water. Requires regulations regarding such reports to direct public water systems to mail such reports to residential consumers and such reports suitable for posting to customers providing water to non-residential consumers. Provides that certain procedures for systems serving smaller communities that are not required to mail such report to consumers shall require such systems to notify consumers of new contamination or a significant increase in contamination by a regulated contaminant that is above the maximum contaminant level goal for the contaminant or of such contamination or increase by an unregulated contaminant. Requires State source water assessment programs to assess the susceptibility of each public water system in the delineated areas to any contaminant that is: (1) subject to a national primary drinking water regulation; (2) included on a specified list of unregulated contaminants; (3) the subject of a health advisory published by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; (4) monitored under such programs; (5) known or suspected to be from a pollution source; or (6) monitored by the U.S. Geological Survey under the National Water Quality Assessment program. Requires such programs to: (1) identify contaminants described in the preceding paragraph that the State determines present a public health threat; (2) require monitoring for such contaminants if a contaminant may have been released by a potentially significant source; (3) identify known or suspected sources of pollution that may threaten public health; (4) apply to wellheads, groundwater recharge areas, watersheds and other areas determined to be appropriate; and (5) be developed, updated, and implemented in cooperation with the public served by the source water assessment areas included in such programs. Directs States to submit plans for such programs to the Administrator. Provides for plan updates every five years.
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
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 S.1149 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 S.1149 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 S.1149 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 S.1149 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.