Oregon Senate votes to ban toxic ‘forever chemicals' in firefighting foam
Firefighting foam, used at airports and military bases, has been identified as a source of toxic PFAS chemicals. (Photo courtesy of the U.S. Fire Administration)
Efforts to get harmful 'forever chemicals' out of firefighting foam used in Oregon are closer to being realized.
The state Senate voted nearly unanimously Tuesday to pass Senate Bill 91 and ban perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, from firefighting foam used on the ground by firefighters. A vote in the House of Representatives has not yet been scheduled, but if passed, it would make Oregon the 16th state to essentially outlaw PFAS-laden firefighting foam.
PFAS are human-made chemical chains that do not break down or go away naturally but instead have for decades leached into rivers and streams and contaminated water supplies. Theyare thought to now be in the blood of everyone in the U.S., according to research and testing from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The chemicals have long been used in flame retardants, non-stick cookware and other products, and are known or suspected by the EPA to be harmful when consumption or exposure persists over long periods. They can lead to increased risks for cancers and birth defects, among other effects.
Under Senate Bill 91, fire departments would have until July 1, 2026 to phase out foams that contain PFAS, and find alternative ones that do not contain PFAS.
The bill is sponsored by state Sen. Janeen Sollman, D-Hillsboro, who said in a news release that fire stations in her district have already phased out their use of flame retardants that contain PFAS. Oregon was the first state to direct all airports to phase out a common PFAS-laden foam, AFFF foam, which has largely been replaced by a non-PFAS containing foam called P3, according to Karl Koenig, president of the Oregon Fire Chiefs Association.
Officials from the Oregon State Fire Marshal's Office told lawmakers they are not aware of any use of firefighting foam with PFAS among the fire departments they coordinate with and officials of the Oregon Department of Forestry told lawmakers they do not use firefighting foam containing PFAS.
Koenig, a retired fighter and paramedic, told lawmakers at a February hearing on the bill that he regrettably 'played with and used thousands of gallons of AFFF foam.' He said if the bill passes the Oregon Fire Chiefs would work with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality to inventory how much of the AFFF foam and other foams containing PFAS still exist in the state and find the best way to exchange or dispose of them.
'We don't know if there's five gallons out there or 500,000 gallons out there. My gut feel is it's in the middle,' he told lawmakers.
The bill makes an exception for firefighting foams that are or could be required by a regulation of the Federal Aviation Administration or other federal law, but some federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Defense, are phasing them out. The U.S. Forest Service has not ended the use of firefighting foam containing PFAS.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senator Markey announces plans to file amendment on AI regulation
BOSTON (WWLP) – State Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has announced that he intends to file an amendment on AI regulation. Senator Markey said he plans to file an amendment to the Senate reconciliation bill to block Republicans' attempt to prevent states from regulating AI in the next ten years. Senators in both parties have expressed an interest in regulating artificial intelligence. Car dealership aids relief at Baystate Children's Hospital 'Despite the overwhelming opposition to their plan to block states from regulating artificial intelligence for the next decade, Republicans are refusing to back down on this irresponsible and short-sighted provision,' said Senator Markey. Last Tuesday, the senator delivered remarks on the Senate floor opposing the reconciliation bill passed in the House. He also took part in a virtual roundtable last week with advocates to discuss the ban's impact on communities throughout the United States. 'I plan to file an amendment to strip this dangerous provision from Republicans' 'Big Beautiful Bill,'' Markey said. 'Republicans should be prepared to vote on this outrageous policy and explain to their constituents why they are preventing their state leaders from responding to the harms caused by this new and evolving technology.' WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Schumer says 16 Republicans have ‘discomfort' with green tax credit rollbacks
Democrats are working to convince some 16 of their Republican colleagues to oppose the GOP's policy bill because of its rollbacks to climate-friendly tax credits, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday. 'We have a group … of seven or eight Democrats who are talking to their Republican colleagues … and we're getting some vibes that people realize this bill went too far, and we're hoping they can all go together to John Thune and to Crapo and say, 'Change it. We can't be for it the way it is,'' Schumer told reporters Wednesday, referring to Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho). 'We have a list of 16 Republican senators who have shown some discomfort with this, and that's the main group we're focused on,' he added. The version of the 'big, beautiful bill' passed by House Republicans makes major cuts to tax credits for climate-friendly energy sources, making it so that any project that is not already under construction within 60 days of the law's enactment is ineligible for the tax credits. This provision, among others, is expected to bar many projects from eligibility and could ultimately lead to less low-carbon energy development. At least some Republicans have publicly expressed skepticism of a rapid end to the credits, with Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Thom Tillis (N.C.), John Curtis (Utah) and Jerry Moran (Kan.) warning against a full repeal. However, House Republicans who have championed the cuts are pushing for them to stay in their current form, with members of the Freedom Caucus board recently saying it will 'not accept' changes that water down the cuts. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ohio Senate, House each passed their ideal budget; What's next?
Jun. 11—An Ohio Senate vote this week finalized its two-year state spending plan that would, among many other things, create a flat 2.75% income tax; push funds to higher performing school districts; and use Ohioans' unclaimed funds to partially fund a new Cleveland Browns stadium. The 23-to-10 Senate vote Wednesday and the subsequent 84-to-1 House vote not to concur with the Senate's changes set up a so-called conference committee — a negotiation between hand-picked members of each chamber that caps off nearly every operating budget process. "This is tradition with budgets with limited exceptions," Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, told this outlet. "It's usually just the standard process of getting together, working out the differences and figuring out where we're going to end up for the final version." Whatever compromise the GOP-dominated House and Senate chambers agree on then has to be sent to Ohio's Republican governor, who wields line-item veto power and can cross out provisions he doesn't like. Most of the negotiation happens behind closed doors and out of public view, but the major points of contention heading into this conference committee are fairly obvious. Highlights from the Senate's now-confirmed plan compared to the House's plan include: — Creating a flat, 2.75% income tax rate for all Ohioans who earn more than $26,050 annually. The proposal eliminates Ohio's highest tax bracket for earners pulling over $100,000 per year, eliminating over a billion dollars in state tax revenue over a two-year period. — Expanding access to Ohio's "homestead exemption" property tax relief program by increasing the income threshold from $40,000 to $42,000 and allowing slightly more of a qualifying participants' home value to be tax exempt. — Granting county budget commissions the authority to reduce property tax millage "if the commission finds it reasonably necessary or prudent to avoid unnecessary, excessive, or unneeded property tax collections." — Eliminating replacement and substitute property tax levies. — Capping a school district's financial reserves at 50% of the prior year's operating expenses, as opposed to the House-proposed 30% carryover cap. General funds in excess of that 50% cap would then be portioned back out to the property taxpayers of that district. — Directing $600 million of the state's $3.7 billion in unclaimed funds to the Cleveland Browns' new stadium project instead of issuing public bonds as the House proposed. — Requiring school boards to obtain a 2/3 vote from members before putting a property tax levy on the ballot. — Adding $633.9 million more to the state's K-12 public schools than the current biennium, phased in largely through new "performance-based" incentives that will reward high-performing and improving districts with more cash. — Establishing a $100 million set-aside to potentially withhold from state universities that do not come under compliance of the newly-passed Senate Bill 1, which eliminates university-sanctioned diversity, equity and inclusion programs on public campuses. Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman, R-Lima, told reporters Wednesday that the Senate's school funding plan and flat tax rate will likely be central points of internal discussion as his caucus prepares for negotiations. "We'll have the next two-plus weeks to deal with it," Huffman said. "Our staff and some of the leadership and other folks are set to spend the weekend reviewing these items, so I think there's already discussions going on among a variety of people in different areas about what we may do." But, Huffman said he overall believes that the House and the Senate aren't too far apart on the big stuff — he likes the idea of a flat tax, he's framed the Senate's idea on using unclaimed funds to help the Browns as clever — but pointed to "a lot of very basic policy differences" within the disparate proposals. When asked about his non-negotiables, McColley said he didn't want to reveal too much. "But we're firm believers in some of the big items. The flat tax is something that we feel pretty strongly about," McColley said. "That would be something we're pretty committed to, hopefully we don't get a lot of push back. But other than that, we'll let the process play out." Asked about his non-negotiables, Huffman told reporters, "I'd like to tell you that there is nothing that's non-negotiable, even if somebody says it's non-negotiable."
