PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 5, 2017
Black Lung Benefits Improvement Act of 2017
This bill amends the Black Lung Benefits Act to revise requirements for miners' claims for pneumoconiosis (black lung) benefits.
The Department of Labor must pay the attorneys' fees of prevailing parties on a qualifying benefit claim.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
This bill revises: (1) the standards of medical evidence that establish a presumption that a miner is totally disabled by black lung, and (2) payments to such miners, including their dependents.
Black lung clinics may use federal funds to help individuals file claims.
A person may not: (1) knowingly and willfully make a false statement or misrepresentation in increasing or reducing black lung benefits, or (2) threaten or mislead a participant in a proceeding regarding the benefits.
Labor, upon request, must give a claimant the opportunity to substantiate a claim for benefits through a pulmonary evaluation of the miner. Labor must also authorize a CT (computerized tomography) scan in diagnosing complicated pneumoconiosis.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health must establish a pilot program to ensure accurate classifications of chest radiographs in black lung cases where the diagnosis is at issue.
Labor must educate certain individuals who work on black lung benefits about medical evidence relevant to claims.
A previously denied claimant may file a new claim for black lung benefits within one year.
This bill amends the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 to direct Labor to use data from continuous personal dust monitors to determine whether to make changes to respirable dust concentration standards, controls, and measurements.
This bill provides statutory authority for the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs.
People & committees
Sen. Casey, Robert P., Jr. [D-PA] · D–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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 S.855 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 S.855 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 S.855 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 S.855 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.