California Senate Bill SB1044

California 2019-2020 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/18/20
• Refer: 2/27/20
• Refer: 5/18/20
• Report Pass: 5/29/20
• Refer: 5/29/20
• Report Pass: 6/18/20
• Engrossed: 6/26/20
• Refer: 6/29/20
• Report Pass: 7/30/20
• Refer: 7/30/20
• Refer: 8/5/20
• Report Pass: 8/20/20
• Enrolled: 8/30/20
• Chaptered: 9/29/20
• Passed: 9/29/20

Caption

Firefighting equipment and foam: PFAS chemicals.

Impact

The law also prohibits certain uses of class B firefighting foam containing PFAS, particularly in training scenarios, forcing the transition to safer alternatives. The bill allows limited exemptions and requires thorough reporting of PFAS usage if such chemicals are employed in firefighting operations. This aims to mitigate potential environmental contamination resulting from foam disposal or accidental releases. The State Fire Marshal is tasked with overseeing compliance and can impose fees for waiver applications and reports, emphasizing the necessity of strict oversight on harmful substances associated with public safety technologies.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 1044, passed in 2020, addresses the environmental and health hazards posed by perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in firefighting equipment and foam. Under this legislation, beginning January 1, 2022, manufacturers and sellers of firefighter personal protective equipment that contains intentionally added PFAS are required to provide written notice to purchasers. This notice must confirm the presence of PFAS and maintain documentation for at least three years, adhering to accountability measures set forth by the Attorney General or local authorities. Violation of these requirements can lead to civil penalties enforcable through legal action by the Attorney General or local prosecutors.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 1044 has reflected a growing concern about environmental health and regulatory measures combating the use of harmful chemicals in firefighting practices. Proponents have hailed the bill as a necessary step towards safeguarding public health and reducing soil and water contamination, while some critics have raised concerns regarding the practicality of phasing out essential firefighting foams without ensuring readily available alternatives that maintain fire suppression effectiveness.

Contention

Debates around the bill indicated a tension between ensuring immediate public safety and addressing long-term environmental health risks. Notably, the process for obtaining waivers for continued use of PFAS-containing foam under specific circumstances has sparked discussions regarding industry adaptation and regulatory flexibility. Communities heavily reliant on industrial firefighting methods expressed concerns about potential disruptions or increased costs associated with compliance, highlighting the complexities of transitioning to new firefighting technologies while remaining effective in emergency responses.