SB 67-PFAS USE FIREFIGHTING  4:03:28 PM CO-CHAIR BISHOP reconvened the meeting and announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 67 "An Act relating to firefighting substances; and providing for an effective date." 4:03:45 PM CO-CHAIR BISHOP opened public testimony on SB 67. 4:04:03 PM JOE LALLY, Staff, Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory Council, Valdez, Alaska, testified in support of SB 67. He paraphrased the following prepared statement: The Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council (PWSRCAC or Council) would like to express our support for Senate Bill 67 PFAS Use & Remediation; Fire/Water Safety. Because of the relatively narrow focus of PWSRCAC's mission, our interest in SB 67 is limited to the Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) that is stored at the Valdez Marine Terminal, and on some of the related vessels, for the purpose of suppressing fires. The Council is an independent nonprofit corporation whose mission is to promote the environmentally safe operation of the Valdez Marine Terminal and associated tankers. Our work is guided by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, and our contract with Alyeska Pipeline Service Company. PWSRCAC's 19 member organizations are communities in the region affected by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, as well as commercial fishing, aquaculture, Alaska Native, recreation, tourism, and environmental groups. AFFF contains perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that are known for their persistence in the environment and harmful effects to people and animals. Any release of AFFF could result in the contamination of drinking water and state waters, including Prince William Sound. PWSRCAC is aware of PFAS-containing firefighting substances that are available and used to fight fires at oil and gas- related facilities in Alaska, including the Valdez Marine Terminal. While we are mindful of pollution impacts that could result from a catastrophic fire, we are also concerned about environmental harm that could result from fire suppression, or the testing of suppression systems, using PFAS-containing substances. In 2021, there were two spills of AFFF at the Valdez Marine Terminal, associated with maintenance and fire-system testing activities, but thankfully neither spill reached the marine waters of Port Valdez and Alyeska was able to detect, respond, and mitigate both spills expediently. Therefore, the Council supports proposed language that would empower the Alaska State Fire Marshal to restrict the use of firefighting substances that contain PFAS in the state if he or she determines an alternative non-PFAS substance is available. Such a determination would be based on an alternative firefighting substance being approved by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration. A secondary matter of concern that could be mitigated by the passage of SB 67 stems from the past appropriation of $9,425,000 from the Oil and Hazardous Substance Release Prevention and Response Fund (Response Fund or Fund) for the purpose of responding to releases of PFAS statewide. It is proper for the State to respond and deal with such hazardous substance releases. However, while the statutes do allow the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to use the Response Fund to assess the releases of PFAS that pose an imminent and substantial threat to the public health or welfare, or to the environment, it was never intended to pay all the long-term costs of remediation after the initial emergency has passed. A danger of using the Response Fund for long-term PFAS remediation is that every dollar spent on such activity reduces the amount available for swift response to an oil spill or other hazardous substance release disaster. The overarching purpose of the Fund is to allow for a speedy and full response to an acute disaster such as an oil spill. However, using the Fund for long-term PFAS remediation could easily drain the Fund to zero and could result in the State being less able to respond immediately to an oil spill or chemical release. The language contained in SB 67 that proposes a new section of Alaska law (46.03.350) could lead to a complete ban on the use of PFAS-containing substances in Alaska. This would reduce future budgetary pressure on the Response Fund and make the State better prepared to deploy the Fund to respond to non-PFAS spill disasters. 4:07:56 PM MICHELLE MEYER, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Juneau, Alaska, testified in support of SB 67. She stated that she grew up in Yakutat and was a cancer survivor. Yakutat was a large military base during World War II and it has residual PCB and dioxin that continues to cause concern. The water is contaminated by PFAS resulting from the use of the firefighting foam used at the airport. PFAS is known to cause cancers such as testicular, kidney, bladder, and acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children. The latter was her cancer diagnosis as an adult, which is rare. She believes the cancer was caused by PFAS exposure from drinking well water at the school that was near the Yakutat airport. She said her father, brother, husband, and son have been volunteer firefighters in Yakutat and she worries about their exposure to PFAS. It is in their turnout gear and the foam that is used to suppress fires, even though nontoxic biodegradable alternatives are available. She thanked the committee for supporting SB 67. 4:11:20 PM ADAM ORTEGA, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Juneau, Alaska, testified in support of SB 67, which would phase out the use of PFAS firefighting foams. He identified military bases and airports throughout the state as the largest source of PFAS, which has contaminated the drinking water for thousands of Alaskans. Passing SB 67 will help to phase out these forever chemicals. 4:12:20 PM PATRICE LEE, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified in support of SB 67. She reported that the Golden Heart City has four kinds of PFAS in the municipal water source. Combined, it exceeds the far too lenient standard of 70 parts per trillion. She said there are scores of lakes that are too contaminated with PFAS to be fished. She cited contamination in Pile Driver Slough and the Rolling Stone gravel pit, both of which are well documented by DEC. She said the plume is moving toward the Salcha River and Harding Lake. MS. LEE asked how the state expects to prevail in the lawsuit it filed against DuPont if it doesn't even pass a law to ban the further use of PFAS. She also suggested the committee expand the bill to include a safe drinking water standard. 4:14:44 PM PAM MILLER, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of SB 67. She described the legislation as an important first step to turn off the tap of pollution that is contaminating the drinking water for people from the North Slope through Southeast. These forever chemicals continue to be used dispersively, even when there are safe, effective, and certified alternatives. MR. MILLER stated that in 2019 Alaska Community Action on Toxics identified about 100 sites throughout Alaska that were contaminated with PFAS. Today, DEC has identified 469 sites that have PFAS contamination in soil and/or water. This is a serious public health issue because exposure to these toxic forever chemicals can cause health problems at levels of less than 1 part per trillion. She emphasized the need to protect all Alaskans by ensuring they have safe water to drink. She urged the committee to pass SB 67. 4:18:27 PM TIM SHESTEK, Senior Director of State Affairs, American Chemistry Council, Sacramento, California, testified in support of SB 67. He stated that his organization has supported similar legislation in other states to restrict the use of PFAS firefighting foam for training and testing purposes. He said SB 67 recognizes that the oil and gas industry may need to use PFAS foams to combat large quantity flammable liquid fires, and ACC would encourage the committee to consider whether there may be other facilities that need the same accommodation in a real- world emergency. He offered to work with the committee on this issue. 4:19:46 PM CO-CHAIR BISHOP closed public testimony on SB 67 and held the bill in committee awaiting an updated fiscal note.