Bill Overview
Title: Federal PFAS Research Evaluation Act
Description: This bill requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enter into an agreement with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to complete various studies and reports related to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly referred to as PFAS. PFAS are man-made and may have adverse human health effects. A variety of products contain the compounds, such as nonstick cookware or weatherproof clothing. Specifically, the bill requires the EPA to enter into an agreement with NASEM to (1) study and report on research and knowledge gaps identified by the Federal Government Human Health PFAS Research Workshop (October 26 and 27, 2020); and (2) identify research and development needed to identify, categorize, evaluate, and address individual or total PFAS. Additionally, the EPA and other relevant federal agencies must enter into an agreement with NASEM to submit a study and report to better understand the research and development needed to better understand the extent and implications of human and environmental contamination by PFAS and any management and treatment options. After NASEM submits the required reports, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy must submit an implementation plan to Congress for increased collaboration and coordination of federal PFAS research, development, and demonstration activities.
Sponsors: Rep. Fletcher, Lizzie [D-TX-7]
Target Audience
Population: People exposed to PFAS substances globally
Estimated Size: 300000000
- PFAS are used globally in many consumer products which suggests that billions of people may have exposure to PFAS.
- PFAS contamination has been found in water supplies worldwide, indicating potential exposure to global populations.
- The bill aims to study and manage PFAS, potentially affecting policy and safety standards that protect international consumers.
Reasoning
- To simulate interviews, we consider a diverse range of demographics to capture broad perspectives on the policy's impact.
- Focus is on those potentially exposed to PFAS, like those in areas with known contamination or frequently using products with PFAS.
- The target estimate suggests 300 million Americans may be exposed, requiring a mix of high, medium, low, and no impact scenarios across socioeconomic and demographic backgrounds.
- Policy effects are likely indirect initially, with long-term benefits as research informs regulation and alternatives are developed.
- Our budget limits prevent direct interventions but enable critical groundwork for future health and environmental safety policies.
Simulated Interviews
Restaurant Manager (Flint, Michigan)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am concerned about the long-term health effects of PFAS on my family.
- I hope this policy will bring more safety to our water supply.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Factory Worker (Greensboro, North Carolina)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's about time we understood more about these chemicals.
- I worry about how they affect my health working daily with these substances.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Environmental Scientist (San Francisco, California)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step forward in understanding PFAS.
- As a scientist, I am excited about the public impact of the research.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Public Health Official (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- PFAS research is vital for proactive public health measures.
- This could lead to significant policy advancements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Retired Farmer (Rural Iowa)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't know much about PFAS or if it affects me.
- Seems like an issue for bigger towns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Clothing Designer (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial for designers to understand PFAS alternatives.
- I'd like the industry to shift towards safer materials.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Oil and Gas Engineer (Houston, Texas)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More research into these substances is necessary, but it's not currently my focus.
- I'll follow the science and adjust practices as recommended.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
College Student (Miami, Florida)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It’s important for my generation to push forward understanding of PFAS.
- I aim to be part of the solution through my studies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Elementary School Teacher (Newark, New Jersey)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this is a critical issue that affects our schools.
- I hope more research will make our children safer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Freelance Journalist (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could become a landmark policy driving safer regulations.
- I look forward to covering the developments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $35000000)
Year 2: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $35000000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- PFAS research is crucial due to the pervasive nature of these substances and potential health risks.
- The collaboration with prestigious scientific bodies like NASEM might enhance the credibility and thoroughness of the research findings.
- Immediate tangible benefits are limited to research outputs; practical applications and regulation might follow after the studies' conclusions.
- Cost estimate assumes a two-year concentrated research effort as per the bill's structure.