S187A
An act to amend the Environmental Conservation Law — 2025-05-21 · Calendar #765
Debate Summary
The bill would ban intentionally added PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals) from consumer products and restrict unintentionally present PFAS above detectable levels, with exceptions for industrial applications. Debate centered on whether the ban on architectural paint was scientifically justified, with opponents arguing that PFAS in paint products are non-bioavailable and non-water soluble and therefore pose no human health risk, while supporters cited health risks including cancer, reproductive problems, and kidney damage, and noted that major paint manufacturers already offer PFAS-free alternatives. The bill includes a January 1, 2027 implementation date and carveouts for specialty industrial coatings including solar panel coatings.
Recorded Votes
Recorded votes are predominantly dissenting (nay) votes captured from roll call records.
| Senator | Vote | Party |
|---|---|---|
| Chan | nay | Republican |
| Griffo | nay | Republican |
| Helming | nay | Republican |
| Lanza | nay | Republican |
| O'Mara | nay | Republican |
| Oberacker | nay | Republican |
| Ortt | nay | Republican |
| Rhoads | nay | Republican |
| Stec | nay | Republican |
| Tedisco | nay | Republican |
| Walczyk | nay | Republican |
| Weik | nay | Republican |