{"id":"30212f58-90e7-449a-aa0d-67c07a1b401d","feedVisibility":"normal","congress":119,"billType":"hr","billNumber":6387,"title":"FIRE Act","displayTitle":"FIRE Act","abstract":"Fire Improvement and Reforming Exceptional Events Act or the FIRE Act This bill modifies the definition of exceptional events under the Clean Air Act and requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to revise its regulations regarding exceptional events or actions to mitigate wildfire risk. Generally, the EPA must exclude data from use in determinations of exceedances and violations of national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) if a state demonstrates that an exceptional event caused a specific air pollution concentration. The bill provides that events caused by human activity that are intended to mirror the occurrence or reoccurrence of a natural event are exceptional events. Additionally, the bill no longer excludes from consideration as an exceptional event (1) meteorological events involving high temperatures or a lack of precipitation, or (2) stagnation of air masses that does not ordinarily occur. The bill requires the EPA to revise regulations regarding the reviewing and handling of air quality monitoring data influenced by actions to mitigate wildfire risk. The bill also requires the EPA to conduct regional modeling and analysis when multiple states submit petitions regarding the same exceptional event or action to mitigate wildfire risk.","displaySummary":"<p><strong>YVN Summary</strong></p>\n\n<p>Most people would not see a change in daily life right away. What changes is how the government scores the air you breathe.\n\nWhen smoke pushes a monitor past federal limits, a state can already ask the EPA to ignore that reading. This bill would add smoke from planned burns, which are fires set on purpose to cut wildfire risk. It would also let heat waves and dry spells count as rare events, which current law bars. And it widens where those set-aside readings apply, including permits for large new plants. The EPA would have to post a public list of every state request within a year and update it monthly. New rules would be proposed within 18 months of the bill becoming law.</p>","status":"FLOOR_CONSIDERATION","topics":[],"introducedAt":"2025-12-03T00:00:00+00:00","latestActionAt":"2026-01-21T00:00:00+00:00","congressGovUrl":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6387","accountabilityFlags":{"environment":["↓ Smoke from planned burns counted against local air quality","↓ Heat-wave and drought pollution counted against local air quality","↓ Areas labeled as failing federal air quality standards","↓ Proof required to exclude a high pollution reading","↑ EPA analysis required when smoke crosses state lines"],"corporate_benefits":["↑ New plants' ability to get air pollution permits"],"transparency_accountability":["↑ Public website tracking state petitions — updated monthly"]},"tldr":"Smoke from planned burns — and heat-wave pollution — could be left out of your area's federal air quality score.","summaryStandard":"v2","flagExplainers":{"environment":["Today a state can ask the EPA to ignore high readings caused by wildfires. This bill adds planned burns, which are fires lit on purpose, under state rules, to lower wildfire risk.","Current law says heat waves and dry spells can never count as rare events. The bill drops that rule, so a state could ask to leave out those readings too.","Right now a state can only ask to drop readings when the EPA counts violations. The bill widens that to labeling an area as failing, cleanup deadlines, and state cleanup plans.","Today a state must show a clear link between the event and the high reading. The bill would also accept a link that is reasonably expected to exist.","When smoke from one fire hits several states, the EPA would have to run the regional analysis itself. Each state does that work on its own today."],"corporate_benefits":["A company building a big new plant must show it will not push local air past federal limits. Readings set aside as rare events could be left out of that showing."],"transparency_accountability":["The EPA would have to post the status of every state request within a year, then update it each month. There is no such public list today."]},"flagValence":{"environment":["contested","contested","contested","contested","contested"],"corporate_benefits":["contested"],"transparency_accountability":["good"]},"needsResummary":false,"displaySummaryHtml":null,"rawStatusText":"Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 27 - 23.","chamber":"HOUSE","policyArea":"Environmental Protection","legislativeSubjects":["Air quality","Environmental assessment, monitoring, research","Fires","Wilderness and natural areas, wildlife refuges, wild rivers, habitats"],"lawStatus":null,"lawNumber":null,"latestActionText":"Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.","latestTextVersion":"Referred in Senate","textVersionUsed":"Engrossed in House","dateAdded":"2026-04-14T00:00:00+00:00","summarizedAt":"2026-08-17T00:00:00+00:00","recordId":"30212f58-90e7-449a-aa0d-67c07a1b401d","feedIdentityKey":"119/hr/6387","websiteBillId":"HR-6387","yourvoiceSummary":"Most people would not see a change in daily life right away. What changes is how the government scores the air you breathe.\n\nWhen smoke pushes a monitor past federal limits, a state can already ask the EPA to ignore that reading. This bill would add smoke from planned burns, which are fires set on purpose to cut wildfire risk. It would also let heat waves and dry spells count as rare events, which current law bars. And it widens where those set-aside readings apply, including permits for large new plants. The EPA would have to post a public list of every state request within a year and update it monthly. New rules would be proposed within 18 months of the bill becoming law.","updatedAt":"2026-10-25T02:02:22.831063+00:00"}