WASHINGTON — After facing years of criticism from U.S. legislators and environmental advocates, the Department of Defense plans to stop purchasing PFAS-containing firefighting foam later this year, phasing it out entirely by 2024. A substitute for Aqueous Film Forming Foam has not yet been identified, causing frustration among advocates regarding the prolonged usage of a product containing a “forever chemical” that may increase cancer risks and other health issues when exposed to high levels. Congress has also scrutinized the progress of cleanup at possibly contaminated military installations and nearby communities.
The search for a more effective fire suppressant than water began after the tragic USS Forrestal fire in 1967, which resulted in 134 sailor deaths and 161 injuries. The solution was a highly effective PFAS-containing firefighting foam, which the Pentagon and other federal agencies, like the Forest Service, now struggle to replace due to its potential health and environmental problems.
What is PFAS?
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a class of man-made chemicals that have been used in various industries since the 1940s. PFAS are known for their strong carbon-fluorine bonds, which make them highly resistant to heat, water, and oil, as well as chemically stable and persistent in the environment. These properties have led to their widespread use in a variety of products, including firefighting foams, nonstick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics, food packaging, and other industrial applications. However, PFAS has raised concerns due to their potential adverse health effects and their persistence in the environment, which is why they are often referred to as “forever chemicals.” Exposure to high levels of PFAS has been connected with increased risks of cancer, thyroid disease, birth defects, and other health issues.
The widespread use of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by the federal government has raised concerns for decades. PFAS, which are highly durable and do not degrade naturally, are used in numerous products where heat resistance or water repellency is crucial. This has led to their prevalence in household items like nonstick pans as well as larger, more industrial applications like firefighting foam.
Although PFAS is a highly effective fire suppressant, it is also indestructible, according to House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chair Ken Calvert, R-Calif. Finding a suitable replacement has been more challenging than anticipated, but efforts are ongoing.
Senator Joni Ernst, a Republican from Iowa and former U.S. Army officer who serves on the Armed Services Committee expressed concerns about the Defense Department’s phase-out process for PFAS and the effectiveness of potential replacements for the current firefighting foam. However, she emphasized that the Pentagon must ensure that PFAS usage does not negatively impact the health of individuals on or near military installations. The Pentagon has identified over 700 installations where PFAS could have contaminated soil or groundwater and has started testing to determine the extent of potential contamination. Testing and cleanup costs are expected to reach billions of dollars.
As the U.S. military’s choice of replacement for firefighting foam containing PFAS will likely influence the decisions of other agencies, it is crucial to identify an alternative quickly. The Pentagon had received warnings about the problems associated with its firefighting foam since the 1990s. Although the foam has been phased out for training purposes to reduce exposure, it remains in airplane hangar sprinklers, Navy ships, and submarines and is only used in the case of an aircraft fire or plane crash.
According to a Defense Department report, the Defense Department has completed preliminary assessments at 476 of the 700 sites that may have been affected by PFAS contamination, with cleanup preparations in progress at 144 sites. The Government Accountability Office, a watchdog agency, reports that at least $2.1 billion more than the $1.1 billion already spent by the Pentagon will be required for testing and cleanup. These costs are likely to increase significantly as the investigation into PFAS continues.
The Pentagon has released new requirements for PFAS-free firefighting foam, with a deadline of October to ensure an alternative foam that meets these new performance standards is available on the market and an additional year to cease the use of PFAS-containing foams entirely. The Pentagon has yet to release a list of PFAS-free fire-suppressing foams, and the Naval Sea Systems Command is currently reviewing applications from PFAS-free foam manufacturers. The review process is expected to take up to 120 days.
.svg){kind=small}
.avif)
.avif)
