House Bill 570, the "Responsible Firefighting Foam Management Act," would prohibit the discharge of Class B firefighting foam containing intentionally added PFAS chemicals for training or practice purposes by any person, local government, or state agency. It also restricts use of such foam for testing unless required by law or by an authority having jurisdiction, and only if the testing facility has containment, treatment, and disposal measures in place to prevent environmental releases. The bill directs that non-fluorinated training foams, such as synthetic fluorine free foam, or other non-fluorinated surrogates be used for firefighting training, and that training be conducted in a way that allows collection of spent foam regardless of foam type.
The bill defines key terms such as Class B firefighting foam, fixed systems, PFAS chemicals, testing, and testing facility, and authorizes the Office of the State Fire Marshal to adopt implementing rules. It would take effect December 1, 2025. In practical terms, the bill would add a new part to Article 21A of Chapter 143 of the North Carolina General Statutes, creating a statewide restriction on PFAS-containing firefighting foam in non-emergency training and testing settings while preserving its potential use in actual petroleum-fire suppression where necessary.
HB570 would amend Chapter 143 of the North Carolina General Statutes by adding a new Part 8 to Article 21A, creating a statutory prohibition on the use of PFAS-containing Class B firefighting foam for training, practice, and most testing activities. It would affect state agencies, local governments, fire departments, and testing facilities by requiring the use of non-fluorinated alternatives and by imposing containment and disposal requirements for any permitted testing. The bill also gives the Office of the State Fire Marshal rulemaking authority to implement the new restrictions.
The bill appears to have generally favorable environmental and public-health support based on its findings, which emphasize PFAS contamination, drinking water threats, cancer risks, and firefighter health concerns. The bill’s framing suggests a policy consensus around reducing unnecessary PFAS exposure in training and testing while acknowledging that PFAS-based foam may still be needed for certain emergency petroleum-fire scenarios. No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no direct evidence of recorded opposition or debate in the available materials.
The main policy tension in HB570 is between environmental and health protections and operational firefighting needs. Supporters are likely to favor the shift away from PFAS-containing foams because of contamination and health concerns, while potential critics may argue that PFAS-based Class B foam remains more effective for certain flammable-liquid fires and that restrictions could affect training realism or readiness. The bill tries to address that concern by limiting the prohibition to training, practice, and controlled testing, rather than banning emergency use altogether, and by allowing testing only with containment and disposal safeguards when required.