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
The Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024 is a rule to help clean the environment by stopping the making and letting go of certain harmful chemicals called PFAS that don’t break down easily, and it helps find safer ways to deal with these chemicals.
Summary AI
The Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024 aims to phase out the production of nonessential uses of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often referred to as "forever chemicals," due to their persistence in the environment. The bill seeks to prohibit the release of these substances into the environment and requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to guide the transition to safer alternatives. It establishes Centers of Excellence for research and technology development to address PFAS contamination and provides support for states and communities impacted by PFAS pollution. The act also outlines legal actions and penalties for manufacturers and users who do not comply with its regulations.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The bill under discussion, titled the Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024, aims to address the environmental and health issues posed by perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly referred to as PFAS or "forever chemicals." These substances are a group of man-made chemicals known for their persistence in the environment and potential health risks. The bill seeks to phase out the production and use of nonessential PFAS, restrict their release, and involve multiple levels of government and the public in managing these substances.
General Summary
This legislation is designed to reduce the harmful impact of PFAS by implementing a phased approach to eliminate their nonessential uses, prohibit new releases, and seek safer alternatives where necessary. It sets forth a comprehensive framework that incorporates scientific evaluations, collaborative efforts with various stakeholders, and strict timelines. Additionally, the bill outlines the establishment of Centers of Excellence to spearhead research and technological advancements in PFAS detection and remediation. Federal agencies are also mandated to stop procuring products containing these substances, thereby pushing a broader shift towards safer materials in government procurement.
Significant Issues
One primary issue with the bill is the notable discretion granted to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to define critical terms such as "user" and "manufacturer." Without clear guidelines, there is potential for inconsistent or arbitrary regulatory compliance, which could affect stakeholders' operations across industries. The bill relies on terminology and guidelines from external documents like the PFAS Act of 2019, which could lead to confusion if these definitions are altered or interpreted differently.
The timeline for implementation, especially concerning the phaseout processes and required public comment periods, might delay critical environmental protections. A substantial 180-day window for public feedback could slow essential feedouts. Moreover, the lack of explicit penalties for violations related to substance release restrictions might lead to ineffective enforcement and fail to deter non-compliance, undermining the bill's core objectives.
Impact on the Public
If effectively enforced, the bill could lead to significant improvements in public health and environmental quality by limiting the use and release of harmful PFAS. However, the broad discretion afforded to the Administrator and other federal entities without stringent oversight may lessen the transparency and accountability necessary for robust policy implementation. Public engagement and understanding could be hindered by complex language and ambiguities in the bill, potentially limiting the scope for citizen-driven accountability.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Industries reliant on PFAS in manufacturing face substantial changes. While larger corporations might adapt through robust compliance teams and resources, small manufacturers could struggle to meet the financial and administrative demands imposed by the bill's requirements. The fee structures, especially if high mandatory minimums are applied, present a potential financial burden.
Governments at local, state, and federal levels must take active roles in implementing and overseeing regulatory changes, including managing the Centers of Excellence. These centers will necessitate a considerable allocation of resources and inter-agency coordination, which could introduce efficiency challenges.
Finally, the stipulation allowing the President to exempt federal agencies from the bill's requirements under vague "paramount interest" criteria could lead to concerns about transparency and possible misuse, necessitating clear oversight mechanisms to prevent such outcomes.
In summary, the Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024 offers a structured approach to mitigating the risks associated with PFAS. However, the bill faces significant challenges regarding its implementation timelines, potential regulatory inconsistencies, and the financial impacts on smaller industry players. Careful oversight and transparency will be essential components to its success in protecting public health and the environment effectively.
Financial Assessment
The Forever Chemical Regulation and Accountability Act of 2024 addresses the regulation and phaseout of certain persistent chemicals known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The financial aspects of this act primarily involve authorizations for spending, fee collection, and allocation of federal funds.
Financial Allocations and Appropriations
One of the significant financial references in the bill is the authorization of $25,000,000 from the Department of Defense's budget for fiscal year 2024, directed to the Administrator. This amount is to be allocated to establish and maintain the Centers of Excellence for assessing PFAS in water sources and developing remediation solutions, which will be available until September 30, 2033. The goal of these centers is to advance research and technology in detecting and removing PFAS from the environment.
Fee Collection and Financial Mechanisms
The bill also establishes a framework for fee collection, including supplemental report fees and petition fees. If the Administrator fails to finalize these fees within two years, an automatic fee amount of $100,000 will be imposed for each supplemental report and petition, with a provision allowing for reduced fees for small manufacturers. This fee structure aims to ensure sufficient funding for the administration and oversight of the Act’s regulations.
Relationship to Identified Issues
The financial aspects of the bill intersect with some of the concerns identified in the legislative analysis:
Oversight and Accountability: While there is a significant allocation of funds for Centers of Excellence, the bill lacks a detailed breakdown of how these funds will be managed or overseen, raising concerns about potential unchecked spending. The absence of detailed financial oversight can impact the effectiveness and efficiency of research centers that are crucial to addressing PFAS contamination.
Use of Fees: The bill relies on collected fees to fund its administration. However, the lack of specificity in fee structures and how they relate to the administrative roles may lead to inefficiencies. The discretionary power granted to adjust or waive fees could lead to inconsistencies, affecting stakeholders such as small manufacturers differently, thus impacting overall compliance and regulatory success.
Balancing Resources: The allocation of funds from the Department of Defense underscores the importance of addressing PFAS contamination but also highlights a redistribution of resources that might strain other areas of federal research or security. Balancing priority across various federal mandates while ensuring transparency in how funds are utilized remains an ongoing concern.
Overall, while the financial elements in the bill are intended to support regulatory enforcement and research initiatives efficiently, they require clear guidelines and oversight to ensure that resources are utilized effectively and aligned with the broader objectives of public health and environmental safety.
Issues
The delegation of authority to the Administrator to define 'user' and 'manufacturer' (Section 2) could lead to inconsistent or arbitrary decision-making due to lack of clear guidelines, affecting stakeholders reliant on these definitions for regulatory compliance.
The timeline for implementing phaseout and review processes (Section 102) may delay necessary actions, particularly the 180-day window for public comments and possible extensions. This could slow down efforts to mitigate environmental and health risks associated with perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances.
The lack of clear definitions for important terms such as 'maximum extent practicable' and 'essential use' (Sections 103 and 101) may lead to subjective assessments and inconsistent policymaking, impacting how regulations are applied across different sectors.
The provision granting the President the power to exempt federal agencies from compliance due to 'paramount interest' (Section 110) is vague and could be subject to misuse or abuse without proper checks and balances, raising concerns over transparency and accountability.
The bill’s reliance on definitions and guidelines from external documents like the PFAS Act of 2019 (Section 2) without a cross-reference strategy might lead to ambiguities if these definitions change or are interpreted differently, complicating the legislation's implementation.
The extensive discretion granted to the Administrator in several sections, including Section 104 regarding substance release phaseouts, could lead to variable enforcement and potential bias without explicit oversight mechanisms.
Lack of specified penalties and enforcement mechanisms (Section 104) for releasing substances above detection thresholds could result in ineffective deterrence against violations, potentially hindering environmental protection efforts.
The requirement for Federal agencies to coordinate procurement to eliminate substances (Section 103) lacks specificity, which could lead to inefficiencies and hinder timely progress towards policy goals.
The complexity and potential ambiguity of the language in the sections related to judicial review and citizen suits (Sections 111 and 108) may limit public engagement and understanding, potentially restricting the ability for citizen-driven accountability.
The bill proposes significant financial implications, such as the establishment of Centers of Excellence requiring substantial funding, without a detailed breakdown of financial oversight or allocation (Section 201), raising concerns over potential unchecked 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
This section addresses funding and fees related to the management of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It explains how fees are established, potentially reduced for small manufacturers, adjusted for inflation, and includes waiver conditions. The collected fees are allocated to two specific funds for the assessment and use of PFAS, aiming to ensure financial resources are available for tracking and managing these substances.
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.