I, too, rise in support of this amendment. It is my understanding this amends section 18 to ensure the FAA, State and local building code inspectors, and fire marshals are at the guidance-making table. I understand the officers believe this will result in a broader collaborative dialogue that includes the risks posed by the use of foam suppression systems in aviation hangars. That would be helpful. I understand that, in aircraft hangars, foam systems are not being used by first responders pursuant to Federal regulations. I have one question for the sponsor of the amendment about his intent with regard to one item. Is this amendment intended to open a dialogue about human health impacts or standards, or personal protective equipment requirements, responses, protocols, or anything like that?
Share & report
More from John Shimkus
I claim the time in opposition to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 minutes.
Just to clarify: one is that we are exempting airports from Superfund liability, but we are not exempting medical devices that are FDA approved in infants' bodies?
Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, on my time, I have a question for the gentleman from California (Mr. Ruiz). I have great respect for the doctor and his medical knowledge--just two questions. One, if the medical…
My colleague, Mr. Hudson, has led the committee's efforts to address GenX on behalf of his constituents in North Carolina. He has pressed EPA to complete its human health toxicity assessment on GenX using science. This amendment takes the…





