PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 29, 2002
Water Quality Investment Act of 2002 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) to increase the limit on amounts authorized for grants for development of waste management plans and sewage treatment works to serve Indians.Revises State water pollution control revolving fund provisions concerning: (1) project eligibility; (2) loan payments and subsidization; (3) community development conditions; (4) priorities; (5) strategies for technical, managerial, operations, maintenance, and capital investments and sustaining compliance with applicable laws; (6) project restructuring conditions; (7) technical assistance for small treatment works; (8) competitive bidding; (9) funding; and (10) intended use plans and progress reports.Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) to revise State revolving loan fund provisions concerning: (1) project restructuring conditions; (2) intended use plans; (3) uses of assistance; (4) community development conditions; (5) additional authorized activities; (6) loan subsidization for disadvantaged users; (7) capital improvement needs surveys; (8) competitive bidding; and (9) funding.Includes technology assessment among the responsibilities of small public water system technology assistance centers and imposes review requirements.Extends funding for university-based environmental finance centers.Amends FWPCA and SDWA to allow a Governor to reserve and transfer a specified percentage of capitalization grants made under each Act between the water pollution control and drinking water treatment revolving funds.Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to establish a demonstration program to promote technological innovations and alternative approaches to water quality management or water supply and to reduce municipalities' FWPCA and SDWA compliance costs.Directs the National Academy of Sciences to study public water system and treatment works rate structures of selected communities.Directs the Administrator to identify ways to streamline and improve the application and review process for the provision of assistance from State water pollution and drinking water revolving funds.Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the United States Geological Survey, to: (1) assess the state of the Nation's water resources; and (2) coordinate a process to develop and publish a list of water resource research priorities focusing on monitoring and improving the quality of information available to water resource managers and a process to develop an effective system to communicate water resource information.
People & committees
Sen. Smith, Bob [R-NH] · R–NH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S7470-7471)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.2813 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 S.2813 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 S.2813 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 S.2813 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.