HB6075, titled the Water Infrastructure Modernization Act of 2025, would amend Section 220 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize and expand a pilot grant program for alternative water source projects. The bill broadens the program’s scope by defining “intelligent water infrastructure technology” to include a wide range of digital, sensor-based, and AI-enabled tools for wastewater treatment, stormwater management, leak detection, predictive maintenance, advanced metering, groundwater banking, and resilient water supply operations.
The bill also revises how grant funds may be used. In addition to engineering, design, construction, and final testing of alternative water source projects, grants could be used for implementation, training, and operations tied to intelligent water infrastructure technology. At the same time, the bill continues to bar grant use for planning, feasibility studies, and ordinary operation or maintenance, while clarifying that costs associated with intelligent water infrastructure technology are not treated as operation or maintenance costs for purposes of that prohibition.
HB6075 would require the EPA Administrator to submit an initial report within 180 days of enactment and annual reports thereafter describing funded projects, resilience improvements, and recommendations for improving the grant program. The initial report would also have to identify denied applications for intelligent water infrastructure projects and explain the reasons for denial. The bill increases the program authorization from $25 million to $50 million and extends it from 2026 to 2028.
The bill’s impact on state and local water systems would be to encourage modernization of wastewater, stormwater, and drinking water infrastructure through federal grant support, especially for utilities adopting real-time monitoring, data analytics, and other advanced technologies. It could affect municipalities, water districts, and other public water operators seeking funding for drought resilience, leak reduction, aquifer recharge, and system reliability improvements. Because the bill amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, it would primarily change federal grant authority rather than directly mandate state law changes.
Overall sentiment appears favorable and technocratic, with the bill framed as an infrastructure modernization and resilience measure rather than a controversial regulatory expansion. No committee transcript or vote data is available, so there is no recorded opposition or amendment debate in the provided materials. The main likely points of contention are the expanded use of federal funds for technology and operations-related activities, the inclusion of artificial intelligence and digital tools, and whether the broader grant authority and higher authorization level are justified relative to traditional infrastructure spending.
The bill amends Section 220 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to expand and reauthorize a federal pilot grant program for alternative water source projects and intelligent water infrastructure technologies. It increases the authorization from $25 million to $50 million and extends the authorization period through 2028. The measure would affect EPA grant administration and the eligibility of public water and wastewater entities, but it does not directly impose new requirements on state law; instead, it changes federal funding rules that states, local governments, and utilities may use for infrastructure projects.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes, the overall sentiment appears supportive and forward-looking. The bill is presented as a modernization effort focused on resilience, efficiency, and water-supply reliability, with bipartisan sponsorship indicated by introduction from members of both parties. There is no evidence in the provided record of organized opposition, though the expanded role for AI, digital monitoring, and grant-funded operational activities could draw scrutiny from fiscal conservatives or those wary of federal program expansion.
No formal contention is documented in the provided materials because there are no committee transcripts or votes. Potential areas of debate include whether federal grants should cover implementation and operations for intelligent water infrastructure, whether AI and advanced digital systems are appropriate uses of public funds, and whether doubling the authorization level is necessary. Another possible point of concern is the reporting requirement on denied applications, which may be viewed as increasing administrative burden, though it also adds transparency.