Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3851

Bill Overview

Title: VET PFAS Act

Description: This bill provides eligibility for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital care and medical services to veterans and their family members (including those in utero) who have specified conditions and resided at a military installation where individuals were exposed to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS. PFAS are man-made and may have adverse human health effects. Hospital care and medical services may not be furnished for a condition that is found to have resulted from a cause other than the exposure to PFAS at a military installation. The VA may provide reimbursement for hospital care or medical services provided to a family member only after the family member or provider has exhausted all claims and remedies otherwise available for payment of such care. For disability compensation purposes, the bill establishes a presumption of service-connection for specified conditions in veterans who served at a military installation at which individuals were exposed to PFAS. Under a presumption of service-connection, specific conditions diagnosed in certain veterans are presumed to have been caused by the circumstances of their military service. Health care benefits and disability compensation may then be awarded.

Sponsors: Sen. Stabenow, Debbie [D-MI]

Target Audience

Population: Veterans and family members exposed to PFAS at military installations

Estimated Size: 1500000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Retired veteran (Clarksburg, WV)

Age: 70 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful this policy will finally address some long-standing medical issues without adding financial burden.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 5
Year 2 8 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 9 4
Year 10 9 3
Year 20 8 2

Veterans affairs advocate (San Diego, CA)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a step in the right direction, but may not be enough to cover everyone who was affected.

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 6 5
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 4 3

Nurse (Fayetteville, NC)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My family is slightly affected, but I'm glad to see veterans finally getting support they need.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 5 3

Engineer (Norfolk, VA)

Age: 58 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I don't need immediate support, it's reassuring to know future health issues related to PFAS could be covered.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Graduate student (Colorado Springs, CO)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Right now, I don't feel directly affected, but it could be crucial for my future health.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 5 6
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Veteran entrepreneur (Austin, TX)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy has little direct impact on me, but it could help people I know who are struggling with related issues.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 9
Year 2 9 9
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 6 6

Military spouse (Honolulu, HI)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm grateful there's a policy addressing these issues, as it's caused us some anxiety over the years.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

Retired Air Force (Seattle, WA)

Age: 63 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm cautiously optimistic this will bring much-needed help with my medical costs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 7 3
Year 10 7 3
Year 20 6 2

Veteran and artist (Jacksonville, FL)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might not affect me directly, but I'm supportive of initiatives that help fellow veterans.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 6

Active duty military (Fort Bragg, NC)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It feels good to know there are some safety nets for the future, even if it's not immediate.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 2: $520000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $620000000)

Year 3: $540000000 (Low: $440000000, High: $640000000)

Year 5: $580000000 (Low: $480000000, High: $680000000)

Year 10: $640000000 (Low: $540000000, High: $740000000)

Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $840000000, High: $1160000000)

Key Considerations