← All Bills

S9268A

An act to amend the Environmental Conservation Law — 2026-04-21 · Calendar #650

The New York State Senate passed legislation amending the Environmental Conservation Law to ban PFAS in consumer products such as anti-fogging sprays and wipes, with a vote of 62-0. The bill, sponsored by Sen. Fahy and designated as Calendar Number 650, Senate Print 9268A, faced a procedural challenge when Sen. Helming attempted to offer an amendment addressing PFAS in solar panels. The amendment was ruled nongermane by Acting President Mayer, and an appeal of that ruling was heard but ultimately unsuccessful. During floor debate, Sen. Helming argued that while the bill addresses PFAS in consumer products, companion legislation should be considered to ban the same chemicals in solar panels covering thousands of acres, citing risks that forever chemicals can leach into soil and contaminate drinking water and food supplies. She referenced a 2021 local law in Avon prohibiting PFAS-containing solar panels and expressed concern that the state's ORES program could override such local protections. The bill was restored to the noncontroversial calendar and passed unanimously on a voice vote.
Passed Senate Ayes: 62 · Nays: unknown

Debate Summary

Sen. Helming spoke in favor of companion legislation (S8933) to ban PFAS in solar panels, arguing that while the bill before the chamber bans PFAS in consumer products like anti-fogging sprays and wipes, a greater public health risk exists from PFAS in solar panels covering thousands of acres that can leach into soil and drinking water. She noted that the Avon community in her district adopted a local law in 2021 prohibiting PFAS-containing solar panels and expressed concern that the state's ORES program could override such local protections. She also raised concerns about rising energy costs in New York despite proposed cost-reduction measures.

Amendments

Sponsor Description Outcome
Sen. Helming An amendment addressing banning PFAS in solar panels (related to S8933), which would have prohibited intentionally added PFAS in solar panels ruled nongermane and out of order; appeal of ruling was heard but amendment was not adopted