There are inherent risks that come with being a firefighter.

But the people who knowingly assume those risks in order to save others’ lives never bargained for becoming sick from the very gear they wear that is meant to protect them.

Yet firefighters say that’s exactly what’s been happening.

Now, a pair of state legislators — Assemblymembers Matt Haney, D-San Francisco, and John Harabedian, D-Pasadena — are pushing a bill to ban the use of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, in California’s firefighting gear. Specifically, it calls for California’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board to develop a standard to ban PFAS from being used in firefighter turnout gear by 2027.

Related: You can track LA wildfire-related legislation with this tool

PFAS are often used in firefighters’ uniforms as a flame retardant. But they can cause cancer and are known as “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down but remain in the body and the environment.

In California, firefighting gear, such as the clothing and equipment firefighters wear, contain significant amounts of PFAS, according to the authors and sponsors of AB 1181, also known as the Firefighter Cancer Prevention Act.

During a Monday, June 16, press conference outside a Pasadena fire station, Haney said the 50,000-plus firefighters in California who risk their own lives to save others should themselves be protected.

“They fight fires. They help people who are in emergencies. They confront some of the most urgent and dangerous challenges that we face. And they protect us,” Haney said. “And when they go out there, they should know that we are protecting them; that we are giving them the highest quality, the most advanced gear — and gear that actually keeps them safe rather than puts them at harm’s way.”

DeeDee Garcia, a spokesperson for California Professional Firefighters, which represents some 35,000 firefighters and emergency medical service personnel throughout the state, said that her organization believes PFAS aren’t actually needed in the gear.

And the firefighters and legislators who spoke during Monday’s press conference raised concerns that the presence of PFAS is doing more harm than good.

Although there is no way to break out the number of cancer cases directly caused by exposure to PFAS found in the safety gear, Garcia said those toxic chemicals, along with other harmful ones that firefighters are exposed to throughout the course of their work, have led to a number of them being diagnosed with cancer.

According to a fact sheet accompanying the bill, the International Association of Fire Fighters estimates that 66% of firefighter deaths between 2002 and 2019 were due to cancer.

Additionally, 74% of line-of-duty deaths in the U.S. fire service in 2023 were due to cancer, according to Haney’s office.

Harabedian, who represents constituents still recovering from the Eaton fire that affected communities in Altadena and Pasadena, called it “grotesque” that “heroes” are being unnecessarily sickened.

Firefighters, he said, know the work they’ve signed up for is dangerous. “But,” he said, “what they don’t sign up for is putting on clothing and protective gear that gives them cancer. It’s grotesque. And in a civilized society, we should be better than this.”

Brian Rice, president of California Professional Firefighters, which is a sponsor of AB 1181, said half the names that will be added to the California Firefighters Memorial this year were individuals who died from occupational cancer.

“Every firefighter standing behind me today knows somebody that has had to deal with cancer on the job, or they’ve known somebody that they’ve lost on the job to cancer,” he said.

Those who spoke during Monday’s press conference said PFAS have already been banned from other products, including toys and make-up. The California Legislature passed a bill in 2020 to phase out the use of certain firefighting foams containing PFAS.

The latest bill by Haney and Harabedian recently advanced out of the Assembly and is scheduled to be taken up on Wednesday, June 18, by the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee.

According to an analysis of the bill, it would likely cost the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) somewhere in the high tens of millions of dollars, spread over time, to replace its personal protective equipment supply should the legislation be enacted.