Phasing out PFAS
But Congress won’t compel Defense Dept. to clean up chemicals
National Defense Bill would curb the use of toxic pollutants like PFAS, but the legislation doesn’t mandate a robust cleanup effort.
Congress’ annual national defense bill will curb the use of products containing long-lasting, toxic pollutants that have contaminated hundreds of military bases around the country, but the legislation falls short of mandating the Defense Department launch a robust cleanup effort of the chemicals, something that’s been a two-year goal of Democrats, sources said.
For advocates of cleaning up per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) — which have also polluted public water supplies across the country, including in the village of Hoosick Falls and many other upstate communities — the final bill was yet another disappointment. But they are confident that President-elect Joe Biden’s administration will soon take further steps that will force widespread remediation of PFAS.
In his environmental plan, Biden promised to designate the chemicals as a hazardous substance, set a national safety limit for PFAS in drinking water, direct federal agencies to buy products without PFAS and conduct more research on the chemicals.
The Intercept reported that after several administrations ignored the problem for years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency completed policy work over a year ago to designate PFAS and similar compounds as hazardous substances, a move that would make polluting companies share the cost for the cleanup. But the policy regulation stalled at the White House, the Intercept reported.
“Most expect that one of the first things the Biden administration will do is finalize the designation of PFOA and PFAS as hazardous substances,” said Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs for the nonprofit Environmental Working Group.
The House plans to pass the National Defense Authorization Act, including some new PFAS regulations, as early as Tuesday. President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to veto the bipartisan legislation because he wants lawmakers to add a provision that would limit liability protections for social media companies, drawing opposition from both parties. It’s unclear if both the House and Senate will muster enough votes for the bill to overcome a veto, if Trump follows through.
In the absence of strong EPA regulation and enforcement of the chemicals, Republicans and Democrats have battled for two years over legislation that would direct the government to do more.
During last year’s NDAA negotiations, a conflict emerged over legislation that would mandate the cleanup of Superfund sites where PFAS are found. That mandate was stripped from the final version of the bill, prompting finger-pointing among New York Democrats, who pressed for the mandate’s inclusion. Rep. Paul Tonko, D -Amsterdam, voted against last year’s massive defense bill in protest of the mandate’s removal.
This time around, Republicans refused to budge on their opposition to mandating the cleanup at military bases, sources said.
“I think the opposition was based on cost from the Pentagon. I think Republicans were sympathetic to that point,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D -Conn., who helped negotiate the final version of the bill. “Our argument was [remediation] could be done over a period of time, but at least it should begin.”
Republicans leading the NDAA negotiations, Sen. James Inhofe, R- Okla., and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-texas, did not respond to requests for comment.
In March, a Defense Department official estimated that it would take $3 billion to remediate PFAS at military bases, and that cost is expected to balloon as the Pentagon continues investigating the problem. Firefighting foam containing PFAS is the suspected cause of much contamination at military bases and airports.
PFAS is confirmed or suspected at 704 military installations, including 22 in New York, according to data obtained by EWG. New York sites include Schenectady County Airport and the Watervliet Aresnal.
State technicians also tested for PFAS contamination at the Norlite plant in Cohoes this fall, after firefighting foams were incinerated there.
PFAS are a family of humancreated chemicals that have been used in manufacturing and are also found in numerous products such as nonstick pans, food packaging, Gore-tex clothing, fire retardants, water repellents and firefighting foams. They have been linked to cancer, liver damage and harm to the reproductive and immune systems. The chemicals persist in nature for decades and are difficult and expensive to clean up.
This year’s NDAA includes $1.4 billion for environmental remediation at DOD facilities, including those contaminated by PFAS.
The legislation also forbids the military from buying certain products containing PFAS, like cookware, and carpets and upholstery with stain-resistant coatings; spurs research on the chemicals and alternatives to its use; and requires the Defense Department to notify local agriculture operators and congressional defense committees when the chemicals are discharged by the military.
“The authors of the NDAA clearly recognize that service members are already disproportionately exposed to PFAS because of the use of firefighting foams containing PFAS, so that’s an important development,” Faber said. “But this NDAA falls far short of what is needed to ultimately understand the scope of the PFAS contamination crisis and clean it up.”
U.S. Rep. Antonio Delgado, D -Rhinebeck, noted that an early version of the NDAA approved by the House included more stringent PFAS provisions, including an amendment he wrote.
“I am very disappointed that the final NDAA conference report — after negotiations with the Senate — struck many of these provisions and, broadly speaking, fails to address the scale of the crisis at hand,” Delgado said.
In January, the House also passed separate legislation to spur more PFAS cleanup and limit releases of the chemicals, but it never received a vote in the Senate.