Bill
HR 381
Creates a Clean Water Task Force to study Shreveport's public water system and deliver findings with recommended improvements and funding options.
Important note on source material
- The document content you provided contains multiple, unrelated resolutions also labeled “HR 381” (honoring a retiree in Alabama; a Georgia literacy recognition; an Illinois public-media resolution) and a long list of sponsors from different jurisdictions. I could not find the actual bill text for a federal or state “Clean Water Task Force” specific to Shreveport in the provided materials.
- Because the legislative text creating a Shreveport Clean Water Task Force was not included, the summary below (1) states the bill’s stated purpose exactly as you provided, (2) summarizes the elements such a bill typically contains, and (3) notes what is unknown and what would need to be checked in the official bill text.
If you can provide the actual bill text, I will produce a precise clause-by-clause summary.
Purpose and intent
- Primary purpose (as stated): to create a “Clean Water Task Force” charged with studying the public water system in Shreveport.
- Likely intent: to identify water-quality problems, infrastructure deficiencies, operational or regulatory issues, and funding or policy solutions to ensure safe, reliable drinking water for Shreveport residents.
Key provisions likely included (typical for task‑force resolutions/acts)
- Establishment: creation of a named Task Force (e.g., “Clean Water Task Force for Shreveport”).
- Membership: specified members (state/local officials, public-health officials, water utility managers, engineers, environmental experts, community representatives and possibly federal or state agency liaisons).
- Scope of study: review of water-quality data, treatment and distribution infrastructure, source-water status, regulatory compliance (SDWA/ state regs), past incidents, and emergency-response capacity.
- Activities: data collection, facility/site visits, stakeholder hearings/public meetings, consultation with EPA/state health/environmental agencies, and solicitation of community input.
- Deliverables: a written report with findings and recommendations (infrastructure repairs, treatment upgrades, funding needs, policy/regulatory changes, timelines, and estimated costs).
- Timeline: a required deadline for interim and final reports (commonly 90–180 days for interim; 6–12 months for final), and designation of the entity to receive the report (legislature, governor, mayor, state agency).
- Funding/authority: whether the Task Force has an appropriation, limited staff support, or is advisory only (often advisory with no direct spending unless expressly funded).
- Sunset/termination: an end date for the Task Force or a schedule for follow‑up.
Who would be affected
- Primary: residents of Shreveport (water consumers), parish/city government, and the local water utility or public water system operators.
- Secondary: state environmental and public-health agencies, regional contractors/engineers, community groups (advocacy, health, environmental), and potentially ratepayers if recommended infrastructure projects require funding or rate changes.
Potential impacts
- Short term: centralized review and public documentation of system strengths/weaknesses; greater transparency and community engagement.
- Medium/long term: recommendations could lead to capital projects, regulatory changes, emergency-response improvements, or funding requests to state/federal sources (e.g., SRF, FEMA, EPA grants); potential rate impacts if capital upgrades are funded through utility rate adjustments.
- Public-health and environmental benefit if recommendations are implemented (reduced contamination risk, improved service reliability).
Procedural status (based on the metadata you supplied)
- Introduced: January 14, 2025 (per your Bill Information).
- Listed status: “Taken by the Clerk of the House and presented to the Secretary of State in accordance with the Rules of the House.” (This language suggests final clerical processing in a state legislative context; verify jurisdiction.)
- Committee referral: referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce (per your actions list) — confirm committee and chamber, because naming and sponsor lists in your materials are inconsistent.
- Note: the action history and sponsor lists in the materials mix multiple, unrelated HR 381 items; please provide the specific bill text or official bill number with jurisdiction (federal vs. state, chamber) for a definitive procedural history.
What to check next / recommended follow-up
- Provide the full bill text (all sections) or an official bill link (state legislature or Congress) so I can summarize exact membership, duties, timelines, and any funding provisions.
- Confirm jurisdiction (City of Shreveport, State of Louisiana legislature, or U.S. Congress) and the bill’s sponsor(s).
- If available, attach committee reports or staff analyses which often contain estimates of costs and intended implementation steps.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
