Jul. 11—A firefighter’s turnout suit weighs 35 pounds and carries an unshakable smell of smoke. Considered bulky but life-saving, the equipment designed to keep firefighters unburned is also laced with toxic chemicals.

The substances that prevent firefighting equipment from breaking down under intense heat also fail to break down inside the human body, where they are often absorbed from skin contact or in the form of dust.

“It’s a silent killer,” said Mel Holtz with the Frenchtown Rural Fire Department.

Known as PFAS or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, these chemicals have been linked to cancers, reduced efficacy of vaccines and reproductive harm among other problems, according to the nonprofit Environmental Working Group.

“There are a number of concerning side effects associated with this group of chemicals,” said Melanie Benesh, legislative attorney for the Environmental Working Group.

While traces of PFAS have be found in many everyday sources, including water supplies and seafood, firefighters encounter them with alarming intensity.

PFAS are found in the many layers of fire-resistant coats, coveralls and boots firefighters wear to protect themselves from extreme heat, as well as some foams deployed to extinguish fires.

“It’s getting worse,” said East Missoula Rural Fire Department Captain Malichi Musser. Many household items like toys and furniture are gravitating away from natural materials like wood to manufactured products filled with PFAS. That puts firefighters at a higher risk of exposure when they go into buildings where burning materials release PFAS into the smoke.

“The problem with PFAS is it’s in so much of what we use,” agreed Tim Burn, Press Secretary for the International Association of Fire Fighters.

Despite their increased exposure to PFAS, many firefighters in Missoula feel as though their hands are tied when it comes to avoiding the toxic chemicals.

“Statistically, firefighters have a lot higher incidence of cancer than other people,” said Missoula Fire Department Assistant Chief Philip Keating. “We’re trying to mitigate it as best we can and still do our job.”

For the Missoula Fire Department, mitigation efforts include the recent addition of an extra set of turnout gear, which allows firefighters to thoroughly wash a dirty set of gear and change into a fresh set in the case of another call.

The fire department also uses extractors, or heavy-duty washing machines, in an effort to clean PFAS residue off of turnout gear. Missoula Station 1 recently added a second extractor so they can use one exclusively for cleaning turnout gear.

“They get a lot of chemicals out of it and then don’t re-expose the next wash,” Keating said.

Firefighting foam presents only minimal risk to Missoula Fire Department firefighters, Keating added, because the fire department uses it in limited quantities. Most local fire department representatives agreed that they keep their use of foam to a minimum.

Still, Mel Holtz with the Frenchtown Rural Fire Department said, “we feel forced to have to use it because it does make a difference in extinguishing a fire.”

Missoula Airport Director Brian Ellestad said the airport, traditionally a more frequent foam user than municipal fire departments, tries to limit its use of hazardous firefighting foam.

“Our fire trucks are outfitted with testing equipment so we actually do not have to spray any foam to test, so our exposure is limited only to if we were to have an actual aircraft fire emergency on the airport where we would need to spray foam for life safety,” Ellestad wrote in an email to the Missoulian.

Airports like Missoula’s are hamstrung by the Federal Aviation Administration, which mandates the use of firefighting foam. According to Ellestad, the airport industry is pushing for updated standards that encourage alternative foams.

“Hopefully the FAA certifies an alternative in the near future,” Ellestad wrote.

Alternatives exist to materials containing PFAS, but numerous obstacles prevent them from being used by many local fire departments.

“There already are many safe and effective alternatives,” said Benesh with the Environmental Working Group. She urged municipal fire departments to utilize alternatives to PFAS-filled foam, citing examples of airport fire departments like London’s Heathrow Airport where alternative foams are already standard practice.

“The problem with the alternatives is cost,” explained Missoula Rural Fire District Chief Newman.

Newman said alternative foams are expensive and the PFAS-containing foam is already on hand at fire departments.

And while alternative foams are an option for fire departments, there are currently no alternatives to all three layers of protective turnout gear filled with the chemicals.

“I’m hopeful that there will be alternatives soon,” Benesh said. Research in the industry is leading to the possibility of developing turnout gear without PFAS, but Benesh said it will likely still be a few years before those options become available.

“We need to encourage and do whatever we can to spur manufacturers to find alternatives,” urged Burn with the International Association of Fire Fighters.

Legislation also has the potential to combat the negative health outcomes currently facing firefighters.

The IAFF supports a bill in Congress that would regulate foam with PFAS in it. Introduced in April, the PFAS Firefighter Protection Act would prohibit the manufacture, import and sale of all firefighting foam that includes PFAS within two years of the bill’s enactment.

In Montana, however, legislation supporting firefighters’ health hasn’t always found success.

Montana Senate Bill 160, passed in 2019, increased protections for Montana firefighters who develop cancer or other illnesses by providing them with presumptive health coverage. It took 20 years of advocacy efforts before a pared-down version of the bill passed.

The bill was stymied multiple times by the sentiment that firefighters accept certain risks by the nature of their jobs.

Firefighters “know what they’re doing,” said former Republican Sen. Mark Noland of Bigfork in 2017, according to Wildfire Today. “That is their profession, that is what they chose, and we do not want to, you know, slight them in any way, shape or form, but it is something they’re going into with their eyes wide open.”

Holtz with Frenchtown Fire said that perception remains prevalent and hampers firefighters’ abilities to avoid PFAS contamination.

On the ground in Missoula, the Missoula Fire Department looks to improve the health of its firefighters by adding saunas in its stations in the hopes that the sweaty heat would help flush out chemicals. Frenchtown Fire is also looking into arranging health screenings for its personnel.

One option local firefighters could employ is known as the “clean cab” model, in which firefighters don’t wear their turnout gear in the engine on their way to or from a fire.

“It’s quite controversial,” said East Missoula Rural Fire Captain Musser.

The clean cab model increases response time and looks less official than the traditional model, he explained.

“People have an idea of what needs to be done,” Musser said, and that includes wearing gear on the way to an incident.

Another example of an option that could be implemented locally comes from Belgrade, where the Central Valley Fire District opened a state-of-the-art new facility in 2019.

The Belgrade facility was one of the first in the country to utilize a completely separate decontamination bay, complete with an extractor, a high-power hot pressure washer, steam showers and a clean change of clothes for firefighters returning from a call.

In the regular bay, a high-tech pressure system sucks contaminants out of the facility and prevents them from entering the living quarters.

Rules at the station are strict: firefighters are not allowed to wear their boots into the living quarters. They are provided with Crocs sandals to wear instead, while their boots go through a designated boot washer.

The facility cost $8 million, but Belgrade Chief of Operations Justin Monroe said, “it was worth the cost.”

“I think people are starting to realize that might be a model fire departments go to,” Monroe said. “I think the momentum is starting to pick up.”

But Missoula-area fire personnel aren’t optimistic such a facility could be going into place here anytime soon.

Missoula Rural Fire’s new station 4, which opened this year, features a designated decontamination room as part of the new station. The new Missoula facility cost half the amount of the Belgrade station, but it’s not as large or comprehensive.

Meanwhile, in Frenchtown, Holtz pointed out the rural fire department hasn’t seen a mill levy increase since the 1990s.

“It costs a lot of money to run a fire department,” he said. “…At this point, we can only dream of having a facility (like that).”

Still, Holtz is hopeful public support for firefighters grows and the risk of PFAS exposure shrinks.

“We have volunteers doing this,” said Holtz, who works with 30 volunteers and about seven paid staff at Frenchtown Rural Fire Department. “We have do-gooders who risk their lives and safety to go help their fellow Montanans.”

Visit Missoulian, Mont. at http://www.missoulian.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.