Florida’s House Bill (“HB”) 167, entitled “Former Phosphate Mining Lands,” remains “pending,” until approved by the Florida Senate.[i] If approved, it will significantly change Florida’s environmental and legal landscape. In short, the proposed law will remove strict liability for some landowners.[ii]

With a prospective effective date of July 1, 2026, HB 167[iii], in its current form, would require the Florida Department of Health (DOH) to conduct gamma radiation surveys and require radiation levels to be submitted in certain civil actions related to phosphate mining. The bill aims to protect owners of former phosphate mine lands from “strict liability” lawsuits related to pollution, specifically natural geological substances (e.g., radiation). Public health concerns include renters not being fully informed of potential radiation or contamination risks on or near former phosphate mine sites.

Florida currently has “28 phosphate mines…, of which 11 mines are currently active, and 10 mines are 100 percent reclaimed and released from reclamation obligations.”[iv] Florida mines the most phosphates in the United States.[v][vi] Accordingly, “[p]hosphate mining disturbs between 3,000 to 6,000 acres annually in Florida.”[vii] “Approximately 25 to 30 percent of these lands are wetlands or other surface waters.”[viii]

Why Is It Controversial?

To gain this protection from strict liability, landowners must file a public notice with the county declaring the site a former phosphate mine and request the DOH survey the property. The bill’s proposed language is brief and does not adequately define all of its terms or explain all of its implications.

Specifically, landowners of former phosphate mines may record a notice and conduct the requisite radiation survey. Then, by relying on public record “notice,” they would not be strictly liable for pollution as a landowner. Plaintiffs’ counsel would have to prove the landowner caused or contributed to the alleged pollution. This would change the current strict liability standard.

The Arguments

HB 167 critics, such as Rep. Lindsay Cross of District 60 (Pinellas County), argue it will weaken environmental accountability and put future residents, particularly in rental communities, at risk of exposure to phosphates.[ix] Arguably, the proposed bill relies too heavily on public knowledge of public records (which many non-attorney, non-realtor residents may not search and read), rather than requiring direct notification to potential buyers and/or tenants. This reduces the burden on the phosphate industry at the expense of Florida residents.

Environmental groups contend phosphate mining has historically left harmful pollutants[x] (including elevated radiation, sinkholes, water contamination, etc.) which negatively impact communities. This change to the burden of proof will make it more difficult for Florida residents and visitors to establish claims.

HB 167 supporters, such as Rep. Lawrence McClure of District 68 (Hillsborough County), argue the current law is unfair to landowners, and this bill will increase transparency by requiring radiation surveys.[xi] Supporters suggest this as a way to encourage the redevelopment of “reclaimed” land.[xii] Senate President, Ben Albritton, referred to the proposed bill as an “important” one, indicating potential support for its passage.[xiii]

Takeaway

The Central Florida counties of Hillsborough, Polk, Manatee and Hardee are the epicenter of Florida’s phosphate extraction.[xiv] These areas conceal some environmental scarring with lakes and sinkholes. Residents near former phosphate mines are particularly sensitive to any law that could make it more difficult to hold polluters accountable.

The tension with HB 167 stems from protecting property owners and the phosphate industry from expensive liability (e.g. lawsuits/insurance) and ensuring enforceable environmental and public health protection for locals, and new residents alike. Time will tell whether a balance will be reached through a legislative process.

Keep Reading

Early Case-Handling Strategies for Adjusters to Prevent Nuclear Verdicts® Beyond Competence: The 4 C’s of Exceptional Client Service Private Thoughts, Public Evidence: AI Chat Conversations and the Next Wave of Discovery From Classroom to Courtroom: My Personal Journey to Becoming an Attorney Setting Goals & Holding Ourselves Accountable New York State’s AVOID Act Will Drastically Change Third-Party Litigation This Spring From Zero to AI‑Augmented Litigator: My Journey from Avoidance and Fear to Delighted Learner Extraordinary Review: The Life of a Writ in California How I Use the Core Four as the Parent of Teenagers

Sources

[i] The Florida House passed the bill with an 87-24 vote in mid-January 2026. Fla. HB 137 (2026).

[ii] The Florida Senate Bill Analysis and Fiscal Impact Statement opens with, “HB 167 establishes a defense from strict liability in lawsuits brought by the Department of Environmental Protection or others for a cause of action based on a natural geological substance on the site of a former phosphate mine.

For a defendant to be exempt from strict liability under the defense created by the bill, the defendant must prove that: [1] A notice identifying the property as a former phosphate mine has been recorded within the county where the property is located. [2] The Department of Health has conducted a gamma radiation survey of the land parcel at the request of a landowner. [3] For any lawsuit based on strict liability, negligence, or similar conduct related to an alleged discharge of hazardous substances or condition of pollution related to phosphate mining, the bill requires the plaintiff to include a radiation survey meeting certain requirements with the complaint.”  Fla. S. Comm. on Rules, HB 167, “Bill Analysis and Fiscal Impact Statement”, Page 1, (January 26, 2026) (available at URL: www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2026/167/Analyses/2026h00167.pre.rc.PDF)

[iii] “Former Phosphate Mining Lands; Provides conditions for cause of action against certain former phosphate mine sites; authorizes landowners to record certain notice of former phosphate mines; specifies requirements for such notice; requires DOH to conduct gamma radiation surveys of former phosphate land parcels upon petition; requires that specified documentation of radiation levels be submitted in certain civil actions related to phosphate mining.” Fla. HB 137 (2026).

[iv] Fla. S. Comm. on Rules,  HB 167, “Bill Analysis and Fiscal Impact Statement”, Page 3, citing DEP, Phosphate, (available at URL: https://floridadep.gov/water/mining-mitigation/content/phosphate)

[v] Fla. S. Comm. on Rules,  HB 167, “Bill Analysis and Fiscal Impact Statement”, Page 3, citing EPA, Radioactive Material From Fertilizer Production.

[vi] Id. citing DEP, Phosphate, (available at URL: https://floridadep.gov/water/mining-mitigation/content/phosphate)

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] Ibid.

[ix] Bruce Ritchie, Florida House passes phosphate lands bill that died last year, (January 15, 2026) (available at URL: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2026/01/florida-house-passes-phosphate-lands-bill-that-died-last-year-00732347)

[x] Tania Galloni, A Sinking Feeling about Florida’s Phosphate Mines, (October 17, 2016) (available at URL: http://earthjustice.org/article/a-sinking-feeling-about-florida-s-phosphate-mines)

[xi] Ragan Whitlock, Florida Lawmakers Consider Reducing Liability for Mining Industry’s Radiation Health Harms, (December 8, 2025) (available at URL: https://www.wusf.org/politics-issues/2025-12-01/florida-bill-legal-protections-owners-former-phosphate-mining-land)

Douglas Soule, Florida bill would provide legal protections to owners of former phosphate mining land, (December 1, 2025) (available at URL: https://www.wusf.org/politics-issues/2025-12-01/florida-bill-legal-protections-owners-former-phosphate-mining-land)

Jesse Mendoza, House approves Lawrence McClure proposal shielding owners of former phosphate lands, (January 15, 2026) (available at URL: https://floridapolitics.com/archives/774162-house-approves-lawrence-mcclure-proposal-shielding-owners-of-former-phosphate-lands/#)

[xii] Craig Pittman, Phosphate giant turns to Florida Legislature for help thwarting lawsuits, (March 4, 2026) (available at URL: https://theapopkavoice.com/stories/phosphate-giant-turns-to-florida-legislature-for-help-thwarting-lawsuits,157891#)

[xiii] See, e.g. Christine Sexton, Fetal personhood, ‘free kill,’ sovereign immunity, and phosphates: It’s tort day at the House, (January 15, 2026) (available at URL: https://floridaphoenix.com/2026/01/15/fetal-personhood-free-kill-sovereign-immunity-and-phosphates-its-tort-day-in-the-house/)

[xiv] DEP, Phosphate, (available at URL: https://floridadep.gov/water/mining-mitigation/content/phosphate)