PFAS

Massachusetts firefighters have a problem, and we are sounding the alarm. Our firefighter personal protective equipment — the uniforms we wear to fight fires ...

We are asking the Massachusetts Legislature to act urgently, before the end of July 2022, and pass H2475/S1576 An Act relative to the reduction of certain toxic chemicals in firefighter personal protective equipment.Sean Mitchell is deputy chief of the Nantucket Fire Department; Paul Jacques is the legislative agent for Professional Fire Fighters of Massachusetts; Jason Burns is the District 8 vice president for Professional Fire Fighters of Massachusetts. Independent studies have shown that the PFAS in firefighter gear remains in the air and dust of Fire Stations. Every day firefighters inhale, ingest, and absorb PFAS. Each time we wear or touch our gear we physically absorb PFAS. Additionally, when our uniforms are cleaned, toxic PFAS are washed down floor drains into the local community’s wastewater.According to the International Association of Firefighters, 75 percent of line of duty deaths in 2021 were due to occupational cancer. Massachusetts firefighters have a problem, and we are sounding the alarm.

Multiple fire stations in Connecticut still have trucks that contain banned firefighting foam in their tanks that can't be used because of its toxicity,

Patrick Kearney, head of the Manchester Water and Sewer department, said the town found PFAS in several water sources during its last testing cycle in 2021. Thompsonville Fire Chief David Deskis said the department is waiting for state funds to clean two of its trucks. Manchester Fire Chief Dan French said his department stripped their trucks of firefighting foam containing PFAS in 2019, before the price started to increase. Frigon said that half of the $2 million was used to remove the aqueous foam already in municipal fire department containers. The state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection stated that the ban would occur in phases. "There's just no financial support," Cooney said of the state mandate.

The looming cost to homeowners in public sewer districts is the latest impact of an expanding crisis that has contaminated agricultural fields and drinking ...

The DEP has prioritized the list of 700 test sites based on the type and amount of sludge spread at the site and its proximity to housing. But others opposed the ban, calling it a knee-jerk reaction that will bankrupt them as fertilizer prices skyrocket and drive Maine food prices up. In total, the district’s sludge disposal costs have doubled from $200,000 to $400,000, said David Hughes, superintendent of the Scarborough Sanitary District. With the secondary fertilizer and compost market now closed, municipalities must truck their sludge to one of a handful of landfills in Maine licensed to accept it. “The smarter, cheaper solution is to eliminate the source, because if it’s not in a product, it won’t get into you, and if it’s not in you, it won’t wind up here.” Another law adopted this year that bans landfills from accepting out-of-state bulky waste is contributing to the rising costs of landfilling sludge, too, Hughes said. Juniper Ridge must now buy bulky waste it was once paid to landfill in order to have a bulking agent and safely accept municipal sludge, Hughes said. “The state has set aside money to help farmers impacted by PFAS, but in the same breath, the state has forced us to find alternatives for our biosolids with no help at all,” Tucker said. Maine is now spending $20 million a year investigating the scope of the problem. This spring, Maine banned the reuse of sewage sludge as fertilizer or compost because it has trace amounts of dangerous forever chemicals. In York, the district that Tucker oversees, the average sewer customer pays about $770 in user fee and debt service combined. We didn’t make these chemicals, but we are expected to get rid of them, to manage it, and that’s going to be expensive.”