This bill adds a new section to the Toxic Substances Control Act about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It creates a federal cause of action so individuals who are "significantly exposed" to PFAS, or who reasonably suspect such exposure, can sue in U.S. district court. Covered defendants are persons who took part in making PFAS and who foresaw or should have foreseen that their creation or use would lead to human exposure. The bill allows courts to order medical monitoring for individuals or classes when exposure raises the risk of a PFAS-linked disease and special or additional medical exams would help detect that disease. The bill defines a presumption of significant exposure when a defendant’s PFAS were released where a person was exposed for a cumulative year, or when testing shows PFAS or metabolites in a person’s body or blood serum. Defendants may rebut the presumption with independent testing (at the defendant’s cost). Courts may lower scientific proof requirements when toxicological data are lacking and may order new studies as part of a medical monitoring remedy. The text says this new federal remedy does not replace or block state claims or remedies.
If you believe you were significantly exposed to PFAS, you could file a federal lawsuit alone or as part of a class. You could be eligible for court-ordered medical monitoring if the court finds exposure raised your risk of a PFAS-linked disease and monitoring would help detect it. A blood or body test showing PFAS can help establish your exposure. If a defendant can show independent testing that PFAS were not present in sufficient quantity, that can rebut your claim; the defendant pays for that testing. Courts can require more research into health effects of specific PFAS if data are insufficient.
The bill states that medical monitoring costs should shift from exposed individuals to the parties responsible for the exposure. It also requires defendants to pay for testing used to rebut exposure presumptions. The bill allows courts to order new studies as part of a remedy, but the bill text does not specify who pays for such studies. No publicly available information on overall costs to the government, industry, or affected people beyond the bill text.
The bill’s stated purposes are to encourage PFAS research, provide accountability for irresponsible PFAS manufacturing and use, codify a federal cause of action and a medical monitoring remedy, shift medical monitoring costs away from individuals to responsible parties, and provide incentives for industry to fund PFAS safety research.
No publicly available information.