PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 15, 2021
Fairly Assessing Service-related Toxic Exposure Residuals Presumptions Act or the FASTER Presumptions Act
This bill revises policies and procedures of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) related to establishing or modifying presumptions of service-connection based on toxic exposure. The bill sets up a procedure by which the VA must determine whether to establish, remove, or modify via regulations presumptions of service-connection based on toxic exposure.
Specifically, the bill establishes within the VA the Formal Advisory Committee on Toxic Exposure, the Science Review Board, and the Working Group to assist with the various procedures in establishing or removing presumptions of service-connection. Such procedures include assessing the exposure of veterans to toxic substances during active service, evaluating research on the health effects of exposure, and making recommendations based on the evidence and research.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill also establishes the Expert Advisory Panel on Constrictive Bronchiolitis within the VA to develop guidelines for VA research on symptomatic veterans who served on active duty in the Southwest Asia theater of operations and have bronchiolitis.
The Department of Defense must develop and implement a plan to strengthen data collection with respect to members of the Armed Forces (including the reserve components) who are exposed to toxic substances while serving.
The VA must initiate or sponsor various studies related to veterans who served on active duty in certain locations.
Finally, the VA must provide annual training to relevant employees to improve the handling of claims for compensation and benefits that relate to toxic exposure.
People & committees
Rep. Trone, David J. [D-MD-6] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs.
Referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 6, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2607 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2607 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2607 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2607 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.