Overview
Title
To phase out production of nonessential uses of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances, to prohibit releases of all perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 8074 is like a plan to clean up and stop using certain super sticky chemicals found in many products, so people and the planet stay safe. It sets rules for companies to follow, encourages finding safer replacements, and helps researchers figure out how to clean and detect these chemicals better.
Summary AI
H.R. 8074, titled the "Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024," aims to phase out the production and release of nonessential perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often referred to as "forever chemicals," over ten years. It proposes strict regulations, including monitoring and reporting by manufacturers and users, and outlines methodologies to define essential uses with the help of the National Academies. The bill seeks to eliminate these harmful substances from consumer products and federal procurement, promote safer alternatives, and set up research centers to advance PFAS detection and remediation technologies. Additionally, it addresses enforcement measures, penalties, and citizen suits for violations, along with provisions for the waiving of statues of repose in legal claims involving hazardous substances.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The bill titled "Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024" aims to address the environmental and health concerns posed by perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), commonly known as "forever chemicals." These substances have been widely used in various industries due to their resistant properties, but they have also been linked to significant health risks. The proposed legislation seeks to phase out nonessential uses of PFAS, prohibit releases of these substances, and establish guidelines for research, monitoring, and remediation.
Summary of Significant Issues
The bill presents several concerns related to timelines and definitions. One major issue is the extended timeline for the phaseout process, with certain provisions allowing up to a decade before stringent rules are enacted. This delay can potentially slow down efforts to mitigate the environmental and health impacts of PFAS. Furthermore, the language in the bill is often complex and heavily technical, which might make it challenging for the general public to understand and engage with the proposed regulations.
There is also significant delegation of authority to the Administrator responsible for overseeing certain aspects of the bill, such as determining essential uses and setting regulations. This discretionary power, coupled with the lack of clear guidelines, raises questions about transparency and consistency, which could lead to challenges or dissatisfaction from stakeholders who feel excluded from the decision-making process.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
The general public stands to benefit from the bill's efforts to reduce PFAS contamination in consumer products and environmental releases. By eliminating these chemicals from everyday items, public health risks associated with exposure may decrease, offering a safer and healthier environment. However, the lengthy phaseout timeline could delay these potential public health benefits.
For industries and manufacturers, the bill may pose challenges due to its reporting requirements and phaseout programs. Industries involved with PFAS production or usage may face financial and operational burdens as they seek alternative substances or adjust practices to comply with new regulations. On the other hand, opportunities may arise for entities involved in developing safer alternatives or remediation technologies, fostering innovation and potentially leading to economic benefits in those sectors.
The bill also includes measures to engage federal agencies and the scientific community in research and monitoring efforts. This could lead to better scientific understanding and improved remediation techniques for PFAS, contributing positively to environmental protection and public awareness. Stakeholders in the research field might find increased funding and collaboration opportunities due to these provisions.
Specific stakeholders, such as small manufacturers, may experience disproportionate impacts if fee structures and deadlines are not appropriately tailored to account for their capabilities and resources. The complexity of the fee determination and implementation processes could also create administrative challenges and resource allocation issues, which may affect regulatory compliance and efficiency.
Overall, while the bill aims to strike a balance between environmental protection and industry adaptation, its execution may face hurdles due to ambiguous language, extended timelines, and substantial reliance on discretionary authority without stringent oversight. These factors may impact its effectiveness and the extent to which stakeholders can engage with and adapt to the proposed changes.
Financial Assessment
The bill H.R. 8074, titled the "Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024," outlines several financial references and allocations related to the regulation of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The bill discusses various appropriations and fee structures aimed at supporting the objectives of the legislation over a specified period. This commentary delves into these financial aspects and how they intersect with some of the issues raised concerning the bill.
Financial Allocations and Spending
Appropriations for Centers of Excellence:
The bill authorizes a financial allocation of $25,000,000 from the amounts already authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2024. This funding is designated for the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program and the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, as specified in Section 201(h). These funds will be made available to the Administrator to carry out the establishment and operation of Centers of Excellence for PFAS research and remediation, with these funds remaining accessible until September 30, 2033. These centers are aimed at advancing research in detection and remediation technologies for PFAS.
Fee Structures
Supplemental Report and Petition Fees:
Section 113 of the bill introduces a fee structure to support the implementation of the Act. Notably, if the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency fails to establish final fee amounts within two years, a required fee of $100,000 per supplemental report or petition will be applied, which may be reduced for small manufacturers. The rulemaking process to finalize these fee amounts includes considerations like usage volume and known toxicological risks, aimed at ensuring financial contributions align with the regulatory objectives of the bill.
Relation to Identified Issues
Complexities and Delays:
The financial provisions, particularly the establishment of fees, introduce complexities that might result in delays in implementation (Issue 7). The rulemaking and workload assessment necessary to finalize these fees require careful consideration and resources, which could slow down the progress of the bill's objectives. This mirrors concerns about potential slowdowns mentioned with respect to other timelines and criteria in Sections 101 and 104 (Issues 1 and 2).
Administrative Costs:
The bill specifies administrative costs associated with implementing the Centers of Excellence. Up to 4% of the funds made available may be used by the Administrator for these purposes, potentially leading to discussions about efficient use and allocation of resources (Issue 7). Efficient management of these funds is critical to ensuring that the Centers can fulfill their intended roles without unnecessary financial strain.
Overall, while the bill sets aside significant funds and establishes fees to support its initiatives, it is essential that these financial structures are implemented thoroughly and efficiently to avoid the delays and administrative burdens highlighted among the issues. Proper management and transparency around these financial elements could mitigate some of the concerns about the bill's execution and effectiveness.
Issues
The timeline for implementation and reporting in Sections 101, 102, and 104 may be too extended, potentially delaying necessary actions on harmful substances. Extended timelines and vague criteria could slow down the phaseout of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances, which poses environmental and health risks.
The delegation of significant discretionary power to the Administrator in Sections 101 and 102 without clear guidelines might lead to inconsistencies or arbitrary decision-making, particularly in terms of determining essential uses and overseeing the phaseout process. This could lead to public dissatisfaction and concerns over transparency and accountability.
The provision in Section 104 allowing a potential 10-year window before it becomes unlawful to release perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances above the threshold of detection may delay necessary environmental protections, possibly putting human health and ecosystems at risk.
The lack of clear definitions for key terms such as 'essential use' in Sections 2 and 101, and 'unreasonable risk' in Section 105, could lead to subjective or inconsistent interpretations, potentially causing legal challenges and public confusion.
The authority given in Section 110 to exempt covered agencies from compliance with the requirements if deemed in the paramount interest of the United States could be abused due to its vague criteria and lack of oversight, potentially undermining environmental regulations in politically sensitive situations.
The complex and overly technical language used throughout sections such as 109 (Imminent hazard), 110 (Application of Federal, State, and local law to Federal agencies), and 111 (Judicial review), might make the bill difficult to understand for the average reader, potentially limiting public participation and engagement.
Section 113's processes for determining and establishing fees are complex and involve various assessments and criteria, potentially leading to delays in implementation and increased administrative costs, which might not align with congressional or public expectations about efficient government spending.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title; table of contents Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024 outlines plans for the gradual elimination of nonessential chemicals known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It includes provisions for a phaseout program, policies on use and release, enforcement, inspections, and the involvement of federal and state laws, while also establishing centers for PFAS water assessment and remediation solutions.
2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for key terms related to the handling and regulation of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), detailing what constitutes a "manufacturer," "essential use," and "safer alternative," among others. It aims to clearly define responsibilities and considerations for managing PFAS, including who is considered a "user" and what is meant by "Centers of Excellence" and other relevant entities.
101. Agreement with the National Academies concerning the essential uses of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines an agreement between the Administrator and the National Academies to study the essential uses of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, in order to assess their necessity and safety. This involves reviewing scientific evidence, community engagement, and collaboration with federal agencies, with provisions for reporting, making recommendations for additional studies, and potentially partnering with an alternative scientific organization if needed.
102. Manufacturing and use phaseout program Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The document outlines a plan to gradually eliminate the use of perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances over the next decade by requiring manufacturers and users to monitor their usage and report to the government, create phaseout plans, and follow specific deadlines for discontinuing these chemicals in various products. Additionally, it includes a process for designating certain uses as either essential or nonessential, with nonessential uses being prohibited after 10 years, and provides avenues for transferring substances to research institutions for further study and disposal.
103. United States perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substance policy Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The policy outlined in this section aims to reduce the harm caused by chemicals known as perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by cleaning up contaminated sites, eliminating their use in consumer products, and ensuring federal agencies do not purchase products containing these substances. It emphasizes using safer alternatives and making decisions based on the best available science, without overriding any existing federal laws.
104. Perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substance release phaseout Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines a law making it illegal for manufacturers or users to release certain harmful chemicals called perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances into the environment 10 years after the law is passed. It requires setting rules for phasing out these releases within 7 years, along with creating testing methods and detection limits, while allowing for updates and potential earlier restrictions.
105. Use for research Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section allows the Administrator to permit the use and release of certain chemical substances for research purposes if it does not pose a significant risk to health or the environment. Manufacturers with existing stocks of these substances can create agreements for their use in research, but it's illegal to make these chemicals only for research unless deemed necessary by the Administrator.
106. Inspections, monitoring, and entry Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the authority of the Administrator to conduct inspections and collect information from manufacturers, users, or other relevant parties to ensure compliance with regulations. The Administrator can require monitoring, record-keeping, and reporting, and has the right to enter premises and access records, with collected information being made available to the public when appropriate.
107. Enforcement Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text outlines the powers of the Administrator to enforce compliance with environmental laws. If someone breaks these laws, the Administrator can issue orders for penalties, require law compliance, or start a lawsuit. The Administrator can consider various factors when deciding on penalties and may work with states before taking action. Additionally, the text provides guidelines for criminal penalties and states that these laws will be carried out in line with existing major environmental laws.
108. Citizen suits Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Anyone can file a civil lawsuit against a manufacturer, user, or government body for violating laws related to perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances if it endangers health or the environment; they can also sue if officials fail to fulfill legal duties. These lawsuits have specific rules, like providing notice before suing, not suing if another case is already in progress, and paying legal fees or bonds as decided by the court.
109. Imminent hazard Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section gives the Administrator the authority to intervene if a chemical called perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl poses a serious risk to public health or the environment. The Administrator can order the responsible companies to stop using the chemical, take necessary actions, notify and update the public, and hold community meetings to discuss the risks and safety measures.
110. Application of Federal, State, and local law to Federal agencies Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section states that federal agencies must follow all laws related to perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances just like anyone else and waives any government immunity from penalties related to these laws. However, the President can exempt an agency from these laws if it's in the country's best interest, but such an exemption can't be due to lack of funds, and the public must be informed unless it jeopardizes national security.
111. Judicial review Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section outlines how judicial reviews of final regulations and certain petitions related to this title should be conducted, specifying the court of appeal and time limits for filing a petition. It also ensures that other statutory or common law rights and actions by state or local authorities are not restricted by this title.
112. Regulatory authority Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Administrator has the power to create rules and regulations needed to implement this title and its amendments, following the guidelines in section 103(a). When making any rule that requires notice and the chance for public comment, the process must follow specific procedures outlined in section 553 of title 5 of the U.S. Code.
113. Funding Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the authorization of funding and the collection of fees related to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) use. It specifies the establishment of fees for petitions and reports, provides details on potential fee adjustments and waivers for certain agencies, and describes the creation and use of two specific funds to manage and utilize these fees.
Money References
- (ii) REQUIRED FEE.—If the Administrator fails to finalize the amount of the supplemental report fee and the petition fee within the 2-year period described in clause (i)— (I) the amount of the supplemental report fee shall be $100,000 for each supplemental report submitted under subparagraph (B) of section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(7)), which may be lower for small manufacturers as determined by the Administrator; and (II) the amount of the petition fee shall be $100,000 for each petition submitted under section 102(c), which may be lower for small manufacturers as determined by the Administrator.
114. Severability Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
If any part of this title or its amendments is found to be unconstitutional, the rest of the title and the amendments will still remain in effect for other people and situations.
115. Retention of State authority Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section clarifies that states cannot impose rules that are less strict than the federal requirements introduced by this title. However, if a court delays or blocks these federal requirements, states can apply their own rules temporarily. States are also allowed to implement stricter rules if they choose to do so.
201. Centers of Excellence for Assessing Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Water Sources and Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance Remediation Solutions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section establishes Centers of Excellence to advance research and technologies related to detecting and cleaning up perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in water. These centers, located at research universities and national laboratories, will focus on developing methods to measure and remove these substances, and will work with other federal agencies to share their findings and resources. The centers are scheduled to operate until 2033, with potential extensions if necessary, and are funded by the Department of Defense with $25 million allocated initially.
Money References
- (b) Definitions.—In this section: (1) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS.—The term “appropriate committees of Congress” means— (A) the congressional defense committees (as defined in section 101(a) of title 10, United States Code); (B) the Committee on Environment and Public Works, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of the Senate; and (C) the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on Natural Resources, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of the House of Representatives. (2) CENTER.—The term “Center” means the Center of Excellence for Assessing Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Water Sources and Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance Remediation Solutions established under subsection (c)(1)(A). (3) CENTERS.—The term “Centers” means— (A) the Center; and (B) the Rural Center. (4) ELIGIBLE RESEARCH UNIVERSITY.—The term “eligible research university” means an institution of higher education (as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a))) that— (A) has annual research expenditures of not less than $750,000,000; and (B) is located near a population center of not fewer than 5,000,000 individuals.
- (h) Funding.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2024 for the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program and the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program of the Department of Defense, $25,000,000 shall be made available to the Administrator to carry out this section, to remain available until September 30, 2033.
202. Actions under State law for damages from exposure to hazardous substances Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act to address how state laws handle time limits for lawsuits about harm from hazardous substances. It introduces changes to include statutes of repose in addition to statutes of limitations, allowing certain lawsuits to start later if state rules originally set a start time earlier than federal requirements.
203. Bankruptcy provision relating to persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals defendants and debtors Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section of the bill introduces a new bankruptcy rule that impacts defendants and debtors involved with persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemical claims. It specifies that certain legal actions against entities not undergoing bankruptcy can continue, even if there's a related bankruptcy petition, and outlines the rule's immediate applicability to existing and future cases without affecting previously finalized decisions.
313. Special provision relating to persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals defendants and debtors Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section explains definitions related to claims and entities concerning persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals. It also states that filing a petition does not stop legal or administrative actions against entities not classified as debtors concerning claims related to these harmful substances.