FLOWS Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Crawford, Eric A. "Rick" [R-AR-1]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 20, 2026
Bottom line
The FLOWS Act of 2026 creates a new EPA grant program to modernize rural water infrastructure with digital technology, focusing on efficiency, cybersecurity, and support for small, underserved communities.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a grant program within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to help rural areas adopt digital infrastructure technology for their water systems. It provides funding for designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining digital water infrastructure, offering training for its use, and mitigating cybersecurity risks. The program prioritizes smaller water systems and communities identified as most in need.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that modernizing rural water infrastructure with digital technology is crucial for improving efficiency, reducing water loss, enhancing resilience against cyber-attacks, and ensuring access to safe and affordable water. They contend that this bill specifically targets the most vulnerable and underserved rural communities, providing essential resources for long-term sustainability and operational effectiveness.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that while the goal of modernizing water infrastructure is laudable, a new federal grant program might add another layer of bureaucracy and could be less efficient than other funding mechanisms. Concerns could also be raised about the long-term maintenance costs of advanced digital systems for small rural utilities once initial grant funding is expended, potentially creating new financial burdens.
The bill is concise and straightforward, making it accessible for a reader to evaluate its core provisions within a short timeframe.
Section 2(b)(1) and (2)
Establishment of Rural Digital Infrastructure Grant Program
This provision directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to create a grant program. The grants will help eligible rural entities design, build, operate, and maintain digital infrastructure technology for various water projects, including drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater systems. It also covers training for managing these projects and cybersecurity measures to protect digital infrastructure from attacks.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that this program is essential for bringing critical digital advancements to rural water systems, which often lack the resources for such upgrades. They highlight that the grants will improve operational efficiency, reduce water loss, and enhance the security of vital water infrastructure against modern threats like cyber-attacks.
Critics contend
Opponents might contend that while the intent is good, the program could lead to a patchwork of technologies without sufficient standardization, potentially creating interoperability challenges. Some may also argue that the focus on digital technology might divert funds from more fundamental infrastructure repairs or upgrades.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the need for technological advancement with the practical challenges faced by rural utilities, including funding and technical expertise. A tension exists between rapid adoption of new tech and ensuring long-term sustainability and compatibility for smaller systems.
Section 2(b)(3)
Prioritization for Grant Recipients
This section outlines specific criteria the EPA Administrator must use when selecting grant recipients. Priority is given to eligible entities that own or operate water systems serving fewer than 3,300 people. Additionally, priority is given to entities serving communities deemed 'most in need,' such as pre-fabricated home community organizations or other community-member-owned water systems, specifically excluding investor-owned entities.
Section 2(d) and (e)
Digital Transformation Study and Report
This provision mandates the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a comprehensive study within five years of the bill's enactment. The study will assess the impact of digital infrastructure technology in rural water projects, identifying issues like water loss and bottlenecks, and evaluating effective models. It will also provide recommendations for water resource management, infrastructure prioritization, interoperability, cost reduction, sustainability, and affordability. A report detailing the study's findings and the program's results is required to be submitted to Congress by December 31, 2030.
The definition of 'Digital infrastructure technology' is very specific, encompassing remote sensing, real-time monitoring, industrial control systems (SCADA), artificial intelligence, hydraulic analysis, and digital design/construction management software.
Section 2(a)(2)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to define terms upfront, but its specificity dictates the entire scope of the grant program.
Case for: Supporters would argue that a precise definition is necessary to ensure that grant funds are used for genuinely advanced and impactful technologies, preventing misuse or funding of outdated systems.
Case against: Critics might suggest that such a prescriptive definition could limit flexibility for rural areas to adopt innovative technologies not explicitly listed or to tailor solutions to highly specific local needs that fall outside these categories.
Estimated impact: This definition directly shapes how the authorized $250 million in grants can be spent, determining the types of projects and technologies eligible for funding.
This subparagraph explicitly allows grant funds to be used for the initial acquisition of software, notwithstanding any other provision of law.
Section 2(b)(2)(B)
Why it matters:This is a technical detail that addresses a common funding challenge for software, often treated differently from hardware in federal grants. Its placement is typical for such clarifications.
Case for: Proponents would highlight this as a practical and essential detail, recognizing that software is a significant component of digital infrastructure and its initial cost can be a barrier for small utilities.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against this type of clarification, as it facilitates the program's intent. However, some might argue for clearer guidelines on recurring software licensing costs.
Estimated impact: This provision ensures that a critical component of digital infrastructure is eligible for funding, making the grant program more effective in enabling full digital transformation.