Maryland Senate Bill SB273

Maryland 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/17/22
• Refer: 1/17/22
• Report Pass: 2/25/22
• Engrossed: 3/1/22
• Refer: 3/2/22
• Report Pass: 4/8/22
• Enrolled: 4/11/22
• Chaptered: 4/21/22
• Passed: 4/21/22

Caption

Environment – PFAS Chemicals – Prohibitions and Requirements (George “Walter” Taylor Act)

Impact

The impact of SB 273 on state laws is significant, as it directly influences regulations surrounding hazardous substances, particularly PFAS chemicals. By placing stringent requirements on the sale and distribution of certain products, this bill not only enhances public health protections but also shifts the legislative landscape toward cleaner environmental practices. Local governments and businesses may need to review and adjust their operational practices to comply with the new regulations on PFAS usage and management.

Summary

Senate Bill 273, also known as the George 'Walter' Taylor Act, aims to address the environmental and health concerns associated with PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) chemicals in Maryland. The bill establishes prohibitions on the use, manufacture, and sale of fire-fighting foam that contains intentionally added PFAS chemicals, alongside strict regulations to manage their disposal and usage in various contexts. Specifically, the act limits the application of such foams in emergency and training scenarios, aiming to minimize environmental contamination while moving towards safer alternatives.

Sentiment

The sentiment regarding SB 273 is largely supportive among environmental advocacy groups and public health organizations, who view the bill as a necessary step towards mitigating the risks associated with chemical contamination. Conversely, some manufacturers and related industries have raised concerns about the potential economic impacts of transitioning away from established products that contain PFAS, reflecting a divided viewpoint on the bill's practical implications.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding SB 273 include the timeline for compliance, particularly regarding the use of fire-fighting foam at specific facilities such as airports and chemical plants where PFAS may still be utilized under defined circumstances. Critics argue that the transition away from PFAS might hamper operational efficiency in these sectors, while proponents emphasize the importance of prioritizing environmental health and safety over convenience. The bill also addresses remediation and education efforts, which adds a layer of complexity regarding enforcement and public outreach as the state implements these new regulations.