[House Report 118-447]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress   }                                      {      Report
                          HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session      }                                      {      118-447

======================================================================


 
WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE POLLUTION PREVENTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY 
                                  ACT

                                _______
                                

 April 5, 2024.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mrs. Rodgers of Washington, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 2964]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 2964) to require the Federal Trade Commission to 
issue regulations requiring certain products to have ``Do Not 
Flush'' labeling, and for other purposes, having considered the 
same, reports favorably thereon with amendments and recommends 
that the bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     4
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     4
Committee Action.................................................     5
Committee Votes..................................................     5
Oversight Findings and Recommendations...........................     7
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures     7
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................     7
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................    12
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............    12
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................    12
Related Committee and Subcommittee Hearings......................    12
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................    12
Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits.......    12
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    12
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................    13
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................    13
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    13

    The amendments are as follows:
    Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Wastewater Infrastructure Pollution 
Prevention and Environmental Safety Act'' or the ``WIPPES Act''.

SEC. 2. ``DO NOT FLUSH'' LABELING.

  (a) In General.--A covered entity shall label a covered product 
clearly and conspicuously with the label notice and symbol, in 
accordance with subsections (b) and (c).
  (b) Requirements.--
          (1) Cylindrical packaging.--In the case of a covered product 
        sold in cylindrical or near-cylindrical packaging, and intended 
        to dispense individual wipes--
                  (A) the symbol and label notice shall be displayed on 
                the principal display panel in a clear and conspicuous 
                location reasonably visible to the user each time a 
                wipe is dispensed; or
                  (B) the symbol shall be displayed on the principal 
                display panel and the label notice, or a combination of 
                the label notice and symbol, shall be displayed on a 
                flip lid in a manner that covers at least 8 percent of 
                the surface area of the flip lid.
          (2) Flexible film packaging.--In the case of a covered 
        product sold in flexible film packaging, and intended to 
        dispense individual wipes--
                  (A) the symbol shall be displayed on the principal 
                display panel and, if the principal display panel is 
                not on the dispensing side of the packaging, on the 
                dispensing side panel; and
                  (B) the label notice shall be displayed on either the 
                principal display panel or the dispensing side panel, 
                in a clear and conspicuous location reasonably visible 
                to the user each time a wipe is dispensed.
          (3) Rigid packaging.--In the case of a covered product sold 
        in a refillable tub or other rigid packaging that may be reused 
        by a customer, and that is intended to dispense individual 
        wipes, the symbol and label notice shall be displayed on the 
        principal display panel in a clear and conspicuous location 
        reasonably visible to the user each time a wipe is dispensed.
          (4) Packaging not intended to dispense individual wipes.--In 
        the case of a covered product sold in packaging that is not 
        intended to dispense individual wipes, the symbol and label 
        notice shall be displayed on the principal display panel in a 
        clear and conspicuous location reasonably visible to the user 
        of the covered product.
          (5) Bulk packaging.--
                  (A) In general.--In the case of a covered product 
                sold in bulk at retail, the symbol and label notice 
                shall be displayed on both the outer packaging visible 
                at retail and the individual packaging contained within 
                the outer packaging.
                  (B) Exemption.--The following shall be exempt from 
                the requirements of subparagraph (A):
                          (i) Individually packaged covered products 
                        that are contained within outer packaging, are 
                        not intended to dispense individual wipes, and 
                        have no retail labeling.
                          (ii) Outer packaging that does not obscure 
                        the symbol and label notice on individually 
                        packaged covered products contained within.
          (6) Packaging of combined products.--
                  (A) Outer packaging.--The outer packaging of combined 
                products shall be exempt from the symbol and label 
                notice requirements of subsection (a).
                  (B) Packages less than 3 by 3 inches.--In the case of 
                a covered product in packaging smaller than 3 inches by 
                3 inches (such as an individually packaged wipe in 
                tear-top packaging) and sold as part of a combined 
                product, if a symbol and label notice are placed in a 
                prominent location reasonably visible to the user of 
                the covered product, such covered product shall be 
                considered to be labeled clearly and conspicuously.
  (c) Reasonable Visibility of Symbol and Label Notice.--
          (1) In general.--A covered entity shall ensure that--
                  (A) packaging seams or folds or other packaging 
                design elements do not obscure the symbol or label 
                notice;
                  (B) the symbol and label notice are each equal in 
                size to at least 2 percent of the surface area of the 
                principal display panel; and
                  (C) the symbol and label notice have high contrast 
                with the immediate background of the packaging so that 
                such symbol and label notice may be seen and read by an 
                ordinary individual under customary conditions of 
                purchase and use.
          (2) Proximity of symbol and label notice.--A covered entity 
        may display a symbol and label notice either adjacent to or on 
        separate areas of the principal display panel.
          (3) Exception.--Paragraph (1)(C) does not apply to an 
        embossed symbol or label notice on the flip lid of a covered 
        product sold in cylindrical or near-cylindrical packaging.
  (d) Representations of Flushability.--With respect to a covered 
product, a covered entity may not make any express or implied 
representation that such covered product can or should be flushed.
  (e) Enforcement by Federal Trade Commission.--
          (1) Unfair or deceptive acts or practices.--A violation of 
        this section or any regulation promulgated under this section 
        shall be treated as a violation of a regulation under section 
        18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 
        57a(a)(1)(B)) regarding unfair or deceptive acts or practices.
          (2) Powers of commission.--The Commission shall enforce this 
        section and any regulations promulgated under this section by 
        the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and 
        duties, as though all applicable terms and provisions of the 
        Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were 
        incorporated into and made a part of this section, and any 
        person who violates this section or any regulation promulgated 
        under this section shall be subject to the penalties and 
        entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the 
        Federal Trade Commission Act.
          (3) Regulations.--The Commission may promulgate regulations 
        under section 553 of title 5, United States Code, to implement 
        this section. In developing the regulations, the Commission may 
        consult with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
        Agency, the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, the Consumer 
        Product Safety Commission, or any other agency as appropriate.
          (4) Authority preserved.--Nothing in this section may be 
        construed to limit the authority of the Commission under any 
        other provision of law.
  (f) Preemption of State Laws.--No State or political subdivision of a 
State may directly or indirectly establish or continue in effect, under 
any authority, requirements with respect to the ``Do Not Flush'' 
labeling of covered products that are not identical to the requirements 
of this section and the regulations promulgated under this section.
  (g) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) Combined product.--The term ``combined product'' means 
        two or more products sold in shared retail packaging, of 
        which--
                  (A) at least one of the products is a covered 
                product; and
                  (B) at least one of the products is another consumer 
                product intended to be used in combination with such 
                covered product.
          (2) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal 
        Trade Commission.
          (3) Covered entity.--The term ``covered entity'' means a 
        manufacturer, wholesaler, supplier, individual or group of 
        individuals, or retailer that is responsible for the labeling 
        or retail packaging of a covered product that is sold or 
        offered for retail sale in the United States.
          (4) Covered product.--
                  (A) In general.--The term ``covered product'' means a 
                premoistened, nonwoven disposable wipe sold or offered 
                for retail sale--
                          (i) that is marketed as a baby wipe or 
                        diapering wipe; or
                          (ii) that is a household or personal care 
                        wipe (including a wipe described in 
                        subparagraph (B)) that--
                                  (I) is composed entirely, or in part, 
                                of petrochemical-derived fibers; and
                                  (II) has significant potential to be 
                                flushed.
                  (B) Inclusions.--The wipes described in this 
                subparagraph are--
                          (i) antibacterial wipes and disinfecting 
                        wipes;
                          (ii) wipes intended for general purpose 
                        cleaning or bathroom cleaning, including toilet 
                        cleaning and hard surface cleaning; and
                          (iii) wipes intended for personal care use on 
                        the body, including hand sanitizing, makeup 
                        removal, feminine hygiene, adult hygiene 
                        (including incontinence hygiene), and body 
                        cleansing.
          (5) High contrast.--The term ``high contrast'' means, with 
        respect to the symbol or label notice, that such symbol or 
        label notice--
                  (A) is either light on a solid dark background or 
                dark on a solid light background; and
                  (B) has a contrast percentage of at least 70 percent 
                between such symbol or label notice and the background, 
                using the formula (B1 - B2) / B1 * 100 = contrast 
                percentage, where B1 is the light reflectance value of 
                the lighter area and B2 is the light reflectance value 
                of the darker area.
          (6) Label notice.--The term ``label notice'' means the 
        written phrase ``Do Not Flush''.
          (7) Principal display panel.--The term ``principal display 
        panel'' means the side of a product package that is most likely 
        to be displayed, presented, or shown under customary conditions 
        of display for retail sale, and--
                  (A) in the case of a cylindrical or near-cylindrical 
                package, the surface area of which constitutes at least 
                40 percent of the product package, as measured by 
                multiplying the height by the circumference of the 
                package; or
                  (B) in the case of a flexible film package in which a 
                rectangular prism or near-rectangular prism stack of 
                wipes is housed within the film, the surface area of 
                which is measured by multiplying the length by the 
                width of the side of the package when the flexible 
                packaging film is pressed flat against the stack of 
                wipes on all sides of the stack.
          (8) State.--The term ``State'' means each State of the United 
        States, the District of Columbia, and each commonwealth, 
        territory, or possession of the United States.
          (9) Symbol.--The term ``symbol'' means the ``Do Not Flush'' 
        symbol, as depicted in the most recent edition of the 
        Guidelines for Assessing the Flushability of Disposable 
        Nonwoven Products published by the Association of the Nonwoven 
        Fabrics Industry (INDA) and the European Disposables And 
        Nonwovens Association (EDANA), or an otherwise equivalent 
        symbol adopted by the Commission through rulemaking under this 
        section.
  (h) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to a covered entity 
beginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.

    Amend the title so as to read:
    A bill to require certain products to be labeled with ``Do 
Not Flush'' labeling, and for other purposes.

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    H.R. 2964, the ``Wastewater Infrastructure Pollution 
Prevention and Environmental Safety Act'' was introduced by 
Representative McClain on April 27, 2023. H.R. 2964 was 
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 2964 
requires covered entities to label covered products clearly and 
conspicuously with ``Do Not Flush'' labels and symbols.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Wastewater treatment systems have been increasingly 
impacted by clogs and fatbergs resulting from the flushing of 
non-flushable wipes. In a 2019 study, the National Association 
of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) estimated that wipes result in 
approximately $441 million in additional yearly operating costs 
at U.S. clean water utilities.\1\ According to NACWA, just in 
the state of California, flushed wipes have cost utilities $47 
million in additional annual operating costs.\2\ Similar trends 
can be seen across the United States, prompting some state 
legislators to offer legislation to address the clogged drains 
and expensive repairs associated with the improper disposal of 
non-flushable wipe.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Nat'l Assoc of Clean Water Agencies, The Cost of Wipes on 
America's Clean Water Utilities, (Sept. 2020) https://www.nacwa.org/
docs/default-source/resources---public/govaff-3-cost_of_wipes-1.pdf.
    \2\Id.
    \3\Sophie Nieto-Munoz, Senator waters down plan to ban non-
flushable wipes, New Jersey Monitor (May 12, 2023), https://
newjerseymonitor.com/briefs/senators-plan-to-ban-non-flushable-wipes-
to-be-watered-down/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Organizations have used a combination of outreach and 
surveys to probe and increase consumer's understanding of 
appropriate wipe-flushing practices. For example, in April 
2023, the Responsible Flushing Alliance (RFA) released survey 
data of California consumers measuring their general awareness 
of the ``Do Not Flush'' symbol. Surprisingly, though most 
respondents believed that they were somewhat knowledgeable 
about what can be flushed, a notable portion of respondents 
falsely believed that some non-flushable products are 
flushable.\4\ In an attempt to address this consumer 
uncertainty, some wastewater treatment companies have issued 
notices to residents to educate them on what products can and 
cannot be flushed down the toilet.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\New Survey Finds Consumers Still Disposing Non-Flushable Items 
Down the Toilet, Sparking Increase in Consumer Education Efforts, PR 
Newswire (April 5, 2023), https://finance.yahoo.com/news/survey-finds-
consumers-still-disposing-100000634.html.
    \5\Non-flushable items cause problems at wastewater treatment 
plants, JC Post (December 29, 2023), https://jcpost.com/posts/4dee80fd-
f852-4891-9419-8d2a7f24bb5b.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Based on the available data, there is an apparent 
disconnect between consumers' understanding of whether certain 
wipes products are flushable, and the information directed 
towards wipes consumers. To address the ongoing infrastructure 
and environmental issues caused by the misinformed flushing of 
non-flushable wipes, consumers must be clearly notified when a 
wipe is non-flushable. The requirements posed by H.R. 2964 
would ensure that wipe manufacturers, and other covered 
entities, clearly and conspicuously label and notice non-
flushable wipes accordingly. By enacting a uniform, national 
policy to ensure wipe manufacturers, or other covered entities, 
appropriately label the packaging of their wipe products with 
``Do Not Flush'' notices and symbols, consumers will be better 
equipped to help prevent the damaging consequences that lead to 
costly breakdowns and backups in American wastewater systems 
associated with flushing non-flushable wipes.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    On September 27, 2023, the Subcommittee on Innovation, 
Data, and Commerce held a hearing on H.R. 2964. The title of 
the hearing was ``Proposals to Enhance Product Safety and 
Transparency for Americans.'' The Subcommittee received 
testimony from:
           Kathleen Callahan, Owner, Xpertech Auto 
        Repair;
           Scott Benavidez, Chairman, Automotive 
        Service Association;
           Steven Michael Gentine, Counsel, Arnold & 
        Porter, LLP;
           John Breyault, Vice President of Public 
        Policy, Telecommunications and Fraud, National 
        Consumers League; and,
           David Touhey, Principal, Connett Consulting, 
        appearing on behalf of International Association of 
        Venue Managers.
    On November 2, 2023, the Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, 
and Commerce met in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 
2964, without amendment, to the full Committee by a voice vote.
    On December 5 and 6, 2023, the full Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 2964, as 
amended, favorably reported to the House by a record vote of 42 
yeas and 0 nays.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII requires the Committee to list the 
recorded votes on the motion to report legislation and 
amendments thereto.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII, the Committee held a hearing and made findings that 
are reflected in this report.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII, the Committee 
finds that H.R. 2964 would result in no new or increased budget 
authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or 
revenues.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII, the following is 
the cost estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office 
pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974:

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Changes in Spending Subject to
                                               Net Increase or Decrease (-) in the    Appropriation Over the 2024-2029
                     Bill                       Deficit Over the  2024-2034 Period     Period  (Outlays, Millions of             Mandate Effects?
                                                       (Millions of Dollars)                      Dollars)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 2964....................................                                   *                                    4   Yes
H.R. 3950....................................                                   *                                    4   Yes
H.R. 5146....................................                                   0                                    2   No
H.R. 5390....................................                                   0                                    1   No
H.R. 5398....................................                                   0                                    2   No
H.R. 6125....................................                                   *                                    4   Yes
H.R. 6543....................................                                   *                                    4   Yes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* = between -$500,000 and zero.

    Summary of legislation: On December 6, 2023, the House 
Committee on Energy and Commerce ordered reported 41 bills. 
This document provides estimates for 7 of those bills.
    The bills would require the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 
to enforce new prohibitions and requirements or would direct 
the Department of Commerce to study various issues and report 
to the Congress.
    Estimated Federal cost: The bills' costs fall within budget 
function 370 (commerce and housing credit).
    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
bills will be enacted near the middle of fiscal year 2024. The 
estimated costs do not include any interaction effects among 
the bills. If all seven bills were combined and enacted as a 
single piece of legislation, the estimated costs would be 
different from the sum of the separate estimates, although CBO 
expects that any difference would be small.
    CBO estimates that implementing each of the seven bills 
would cost between $1 million and $4 million over the 2024-2029 
period; that spending would be subject to the availability of 
appropriated funds.
    Four bills--H.R. 2964, H.R. 3950, H.R. 6125, and H.R. 
6543--would each increase revenues by an insignificant amount. 
Entities that fail to meet each of those bills' new 
requirements could face civil penalties, which are recorded in 
the federal budget as revenues. To some extent, collection of 
any civil fines would depend on the amount of appropriations 
provided by future appropriation acts to pay for enforcement. 
In addition, whether the FTC would pursue civil penalties or 
some other remedy for violations is unclear. In any event, CBO 
expects that companies would generally comply with the new 
requirements and that any additional revenues collected over 
the 2024-2034 period would be insignificant for each bill.
    H.R. 2964, WIPPES Act: The bill would require manufacturers 
and suppliers of disposable wipes to clearly mark their 
products with a ``do not flush'' label and symbol. The FTC 
would enforce those requirements.
    Based on the cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 2964 would cost the FTC $4 million to issue 
guidance and to monitor and enforce violations. In addition, 
CBO estimates that enacting the bill could increase civil 
penalty collections, which are recorded in the federal budget 
as revenues, by an insignificant amount.
    H.R. 3950, TICKET Act: The bill would require companies 
that issue tickets or that sell tickets on the secondary market 
to clearly display the total price of any ticket, including 
itemizing any fees not included in the base ticket price. That 
requirement would apply to live events at venues with an 
attendance capacity of 200 people or more. The FTC would 
enforce those requirements.
    Based on the cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 3950 would cost the FTC $4 million to issue 
guidance and to monitor and enforce violations. In addition, 
CBO estimates that enacting the bill could increase civil 
penalty collections, which are recorded in the federal budget 
as revenues, by an insignificant amount.
    H.R. 5146, Advancing Gig Economy Act: The bill would 
require the Department of Commerce to study and report to the 
Congress within two years of enactment on how the gig economy 
affects U.S. businesses.
    Based on the cost of similar studies, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 5146 would cost $2 million over two years for 
the work of four employees, at an annual cost of about $220,000 
each, along with purchases of data and survey contracts.
    H.R. 5390, Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing 
Feasibility Act: The bill would require the Department of 
Commerce to study and report to the Congress within one year of 
enactment on the feasibility of manufacturing in the United 
States products in critical infrastructure sectors that now are 
imported because of supply chain constraints.
    Based on the cost of similar studies, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 5390 would cost $1 million for one year for 
the work of four employees, at a cost of about $220,000 each, 
along with purchases of data and survey contracts.
    H.R. 5398, Advancing Tech Startups Act: The bill would 
require the Department of Commerce to study and report to the 
Congress within two years of enactment on how technology 
startup companies affect the U.S. economy.
    Based on the cost of similar studies, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 5398 would cost $2 million over two years for 
the work of four employees, at an annual cost of about $220,000 
each, along with purchases of data and survey contracts.
    H.R. 6125, Online Dating Safety Act of 2023: The bill would 
require providers of online dating services to notify a user if 
they are contacted by a member whose account was suspended or 
terminated because of fraudulent activity. The FTC would 
enforce those requirements.
    Based on the cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 6125 would cost the FTC $4 million to issue 
guidance and to monitor and enforce violations. In addition, 
CBO estimates that enacting the bill could increase civil 
penalty collections, which are recorded in the federal budget 
as revenues, by an insignificant amount.
    H.R. 6543, No Hidden FEES Act of 2023: The bill would 
require providers of short-term lodging and websites that 
advertise or offer such lodging to display each mandatory fee 
required to complete a booking. The FTC would enforce those 
requirements.
    Based on the cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 6543 would cost the FTC $4 million to issue 
guidance and to monitor and enforce violations. In addition, 
CBO estimates that enacting the bill could increase civil 
penalty collections, which are recorded in the federal budget 
as revenues, by an insignificant amount.
    Pay-As-You-Go considerations: CBO estimates that enacting 
H.R. 2964, H.R. 3950, H.R. 6125, and H.R. 6543 would each 
increase revenues by less than $500,000 over the 2024-2034 
period; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply to those 
bills.
    Increase in long-term net direct spending and deficits: 
None of the bills would increase net direct spending or on-
budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods 
beginning in 2035.
    Mandates: The following bills--H.R. 2964, H.R. 3950, H.R. 
6125, and H.R. 6543--would impose mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
    H.R. 2964, WIPPES Act: The bill would impose 
intergovernmental and private-sector mandates, but CBO 
estimates that the costs to comply with those mandates would 
not exceed the thresholds established in UMRA ($100 million and 
$200 million in 2024, respectively, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    H.R. 2964 would preempt some state and local laws governing 
the labeling of certain disposable wipes. Although the 
preemptions would limit the application of state and local 
laws, they would impose no duty on state or local governments 
that would result in significant spending or loss of revenues.
    The bill would require manufacturers of certain disposable 
wipes to clearly mark their products with a ``do not flush'' 
label and symbol. Because manufacturers already are complying 
with similar laws enacted in California, Illinois, and several 
other states, CBO estimates that the cost for manufacturers to 
comply with the mandate would be small.
    H.R. 3950, TICKET Act: The bill would impose private-sector 
mandates as defined in UMRA on ticket sellers and resellers by 
requiring certain changes, including new refund policies, to 
the ticketing process. CBO estimates that the aggregate cost to 
comply with the mandates would be above the threshold 
established in UMRA for private-sector mandates ($200 million 
in 2024, adjusted annually for inflation).
    Under the bill, if an event is canceled, ticket sellers and 
resellers would be required to refund the full ticket price, 
including taxes and fees, to purchasers. If an event is 
postponed, sellers and resellers would be required to offer 
customers either a full refund or a replacement ticket, if 
available, subject to the customer's preference. Sellers also 
would be required to disclose this refund policy. The bill 
allows for exceptions to this policy in cases where the 
cancellation or postponement is beyond the control of the 
ticket issuer, such as natural disasters. Based on discussions 
with industry sources, a substantial share of sellers and 
resellers already provide full refunds for canceled events but 
few offer refunds for postponed events. Considerable 
uncertainty surrounds the ways that federal regulations might 
define what is within the control of a ticket issuer in the 
event of a cancellation or postponement or what might 
constitute comparable replacement events. Given the large size 
of the industry and the amount of revenue generated by ticketed 
events, CBO estimates that the cost of the mandate would exceed 
the threshold for private-sector mandates.
    H.R. 3950 also would require ticket sellers and resellers 
to make certain up-front disclosures to consumers. They would 
need to disclose the total ticket prices, including taxes and 
fees. Those disclosures would occur when the ticket is first 
displayed to the consumer and in any advertisements or 
marketing. The bill also would require sellers and resellers to 
provide purchasers with an itemized list of the base price and 
all fees. Information from the industry indicates that most 
ticket sellers have already begun to provide the total cost to 
consumers in advance; thus, CBO expects that the additional 
requirements in the bill would have small costs for ticket 
sellers and resellers.
    The bill also would require ticket resellers to disclose to 
consumers that they are resellers before any purchase is 
complete. Sellers and resellers would be prohibited from 
advertising or selling any ticket that the seller does not 
actually or constructively possess. In certain instances, 
sellers also would be prohibited from revealing to consumers 
and using the names of venues, teams, artists, and events in 
their online domain names. CBO expects that those disclosures 
and prohibitions would impose minimal costs on the sellers.
    The bill contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined 
in UMRA.
    H.R. 6125, Online Dating Safety Act of 2023: The bill would 
impose intergovernmental and private-sector mandates, but CBO 
estimates that the costs to comply with those mandates would 
not exceed the thresholds established in UMRA ($100 million and 
$200 million in 2024, respectively, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    The bill would preempt state laws governing fraud 
notifications issued by online dating services. Although the 
preemptions would limit the application of state and local 
laws, they would impose no duty on state or local governments 
that would result in significant spending or loss of revenues.
    H.R. 6125 would require providers of online dating services 
to send a fraud notification to consumers who receive a message 
from any member who has been banned by the service. Because 
some states already require those fraud notifications, most 
dating services have implemented the policy regardless of the 
consumer's location. Therefore, CBO expects that the cost to 
comply with the mandate would be small.
    H.R. 6543, No Hidden FEES Act of 2023: The bill would 
impose intergovernmental and private-sector mandates, but CBO 
estimates that the costs to comply with those mandates would 
not exceed the thresholds established in UMRA ($100 million and 
$200 million in 2024, respectively, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    The bill would preempt state and local laws governing the 
display of prices for short-term lodging. Although the 
preemptions would limit the application of state and local 
laws, they would impose no duty on state or local governments 
that would result in significant spending or loss of revenues.
    H.R. 6543 would prohibit providers, online booking 
websites, and advertisers of short-term lodging from displaying 
prices that do not include all mandatory fees. Information from 
industry sources and the FTC indicates that several lodging 
providers already comply with provisions in the bill, and CBO 
expects the cost for other entities to comply would be small 
because they already possess the fee information required to be 
displayed.
    Previous CBO estimate: On October 25, 2023, CBO transmitted 
a cost estimate for S. 1303, the TICKET Act, as reported by the 
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on 
September 12, 2023. Under H.R. 3950, regulated companies would 
be required to fulfill requirements that are additional to 
those specified in S. 1303; for example, if an event is 
canceled or postponed, a ticket seller would need to provide a 
full refund or replacement ticket. In addition, H.R. 3950 would 
require the FTC to report to the Congress on its enforcement of 
the Better Online Ticket Sales Act of 2016. CBO's estimated 
federal costs for both bills are the same. Because of the 
additional refund requirements on ticket sellers and resellers 
in H.R. 3950, CBO has determined that the cost of the private-
sector mandates is above the threshold.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: David Hughes; 
Mandates: Rachel Austin and Grace Watson.
    Estimate reviewed by: Justin Humphrey, Chief, Finance, 
Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit; Kathleen 
FitzGerald, Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit; H. Samuel 
Papenfuss, Deputy Director of Budget Analysis.
    Estimate approved by: Phillip L. Swagel, Director, 
Congressional Budget Office.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general 
performance goal or objective of this legislation is to require 
labeling on certain products to designate they are not safe to 
be flushed down the toilet.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII, no provision of 
H.R. 2964 is known to be duplicative of another Federal 
program, including any program that was included in a report to 
Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 or the 
most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

              RELATED COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII, the following 
related hearing was used to develop or consider H.R. 2964:
           On September 27, 2023, the Subcommittee on 
        Innovation, Data, and Commerce held a hearing on H.R. 
        2964. The title of the hearing was ``Proposals to 
        Enhance Product Safety and Transparency for 
        Americans.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
                   Kathleen Callahan, Owner, 
                Xpertech Auto Repair;
                   Scott Benavidez, Chairman, 
                Automotive Service Association;
                   Steven Michael Gentine, Counsel, 
                Arnold & Porter, LLP;
                   John Breyault, Vice President of 
                Public Policy, Telecommunications and Fraud, 
                National Consumers League; and,
                   David Touhey, Principal, Connett 
                Consulting, appearing on behalf of 
                International Association of Venue Managers.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII, the Committee 
adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

       EARMARK, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF BENEFITS

    Pursuant to clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI, the 
Committee finds that H.R. 2964 contains no earmarks, limited 
tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 provides that the Act may be cited as the 
``Wastewater Infrastructure Pollution Prevention and 
Environmental Safety Act'' or the ``WIPPES Act.''

Section 2. ``Do Not Flush'' labeling

    Section 2 requires covered entities to label covered 
products with a ``Do Not Flush'' label and symbol. These labels 
and symbols must meet the standards required in this Act and be 
clearly and conspicuously displayed. This section grants the 
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rulemaking authority to 
promulgate regulations regarding requirements for ``Do Not 
Flush'' labels and symbols and allows for consultation with any 
agency it deems appropriate when developing such rules. 
Furthermore, this section provides definitions relevant to the 
Act.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    This legislation does not amend any existing Federal 
statute.

                                  [all]