This act temporarily allows the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to cover 100% of the costs for airports to purchase and deploy equipment to test fire suppression systems that contain perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) without discharging such substances. (PFAS are manmade substances and may have adverse human health effects.)
The FAA must also (1) conduct outreach to inform airports of the availability of the increased cost-sharing; and (2) brief Congress on options to reimburse airports that acquired equipment without, or with reduced, federal funding and other matters.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 381 - 42 (Roll no. 468).
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8276)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 3662.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8168-8170)
Mr. Carson moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S4443-4444; text: CR S4443)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 462.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Cantwell with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 117-138.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Cantwell with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 117-138.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.3662 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.3662 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.3662 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.3662 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.