House Democrats added several amendments aiming to regulate a class of cancer-linked chemicals called PFAS to a defense spending bill Monday. 

The additions followed the failure of the chamber to add a broader amendment that would tackle the substances. 

PFAS chemicals are also often called forever chemicals due to their persistence in nature and the human body. They are found in firefighting foam that is used by the military as well as a variety of household products. 

The House version of the bill, known as the National Defense Authorization Act, is slated for a vote on Tuesday. 

On Monday, the House added amendments from Reps. Antonio DelgadoAntonio Ramon DelgadoKyle Van De Water wins New York GOP primary to challenge Rep. Antonio DelgadoHispanic Democrats build capital with big primary winsThe Hill’s Campaign Report: Buzz builds around Warren for VPMORE (D-N.Y.), Andy LevinAndrew (Andy) LevinUS, Mexico set for new post-NAFTA trade eraHouse members race to prepare for first-ever remote votesWarren, Levin introduce legislation for federal contact tracing programMORE (D-Mich.), Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) and Ed PerlmutterEdwin (Ed) George PerlmutterFor safety and economic recovery, Congress must prioritize cannabis bankingEight surprises in House Democrats’ T coronavirus relief billDemocrats introduce bill to include cannabis businesses in coronavirus reliefMORE (D-Colo.) that aim to study or limit PFAS. 

The provision from Levin would temporarily prevent the Defense Department (DoD) from incinerating PFAS until the defense secretary finalizes disposal regulations. 

The Delgado amendment would require all PFAS manufacturers to disclose any discharges of the substance over 100 pounds. Last year, the House required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make manufacturers report discharges of some types of PFAS in the same quantity, but Delgados measure would prevent the agency from applying a certain exemption. 

The Houlahan and Perlmutter amendments would increase or require PFAS studies. 

However, late last week, a broader amendment presented by Reps. Debbie DingellDeborah (Debbie) Ann DingellTexas Democrat proposes legislation requiring masks in federal facilitiesDingell pushes provision to curtail drunk driving in House infrastructure package18 states fight conservative think tank effort to freeze fuel efficiency standardsMORE (D-Mich.) and Bill PoseyWilliam (Bill) Joseph PoseyHouse Republicans urge White House to support TSA giving travelers temperature checks House Republican introduces bill to hold up members’ pay if they vote by proxyTrump takes track to open Daytona 500MORE (R-Fla.) that would designate PFAS a hazardous air pollutant in an attempt to clean up the substance was determined to be outside the bill’s rules.

Its disappointing that my bipartisan amendment, which cleared the House earlier this year on a strong bipartisan vote, is being ruled out of order to the NDAA because of budgetary points of order, Dingell said in a statement after the fact. 

We can find ways to afford billion dollar weapons systems or tax breaks for the wealthy and yet we cannot set a safe drinking water standards for PFAS or clean up contaminated sites for a forever chemical, she added.

When the budget rules are such that we, the American people, are put at a disadvantage for merely making polluters clean-up their own mess or making EPA ensure safe drinking water under authorities we already gave them, then there is something fundamentally wrong with the way weve set up these rules.

Politico reported on Tuesday that supporters of stronger PFAS regulations may try to target the chemicals through a bill funding the Interior Department and the EPA. 

The House in January passed a bill that would require a mandatory drinking water standard for PFAS and requiring it be covered under the hazardous waste cleanup law, among other measures. 

Last year, Democrats also attempted to include PFAS measures in the NDAA but many were eventually stripped from the final version of the legislation. 

Rebecca Kheel contributed.