PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 26, 2019
Protection for Veterans' Burn Pit Exposure Act of 2019
This bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to make a determination, after receipt of a study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) titled Respiratory Health Effects of Airborne Hazards Exposures in the Southwest Asia Theater of Military Operations, on whether a positive association exists between (1) the exposure of humans to toxic airborne chemicals and fumes caused by open air burn pits (areas used for burning solid waste in open air without equipment) and other airborne hazards, and (2) the occurrence of a diagnosed illness in humans.
Upon determination of a positive association, the VA must prescribe regulations providing that (1) a presumption of service-connection is warranted for certain illnesses manifesting in certain time frames, and (2) covered veterans shall be presumed to have been exposed to toxic airborne chemicals caused by open burn pits unless conclusive evidence proves otherwise. Covered veterans are veterans who were deployed on or after September 11, 2001, in support of a contingency operation and based at a location where an open burn pit was used.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
If the VA determines a presumption of service-connection is not warranted, a notice must be published and include an explanation of the basis for the determination. The bill also requires the VA to remove previous presumptions if evidence indicates such presumption is not warranted.
The Department of Defense must provide NASEM with access to information it requests for the study on Respiratory Health Effects of Airborne Hazards Exposures in the Southwest Asia Theater of Military Operations.
People & committees
Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12] · R–FL
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 Health.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
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.4086 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.4086 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.4086 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.4086 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.