By Sonya Lunder, Senior Toxics Policy Advisor, Sierra Club
On June 14, the Chemtool lubricant factory in Rockton, Illinois caught fire, causing an explosion that sent black ash into the air and resulted in the evacuation of all residents within a one mile radius. What’s more, the company’s choice to use firefighting foam containing PFAS to extinguish the blaze sent unknown quantities of the chemical into the nearby Rock River. PFAS are Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances - highly persistent and toxic chemicals put into firefighting foams used in petroleum-based fires.
To make things even worse, in the aftermath of the fire, Sierra Club test results from a nearby river show levels of dangerous PFAS contamination much higher than state testing. How did this happen, and why are agencies still using toxic PFAS firefighting foam? Let’s look at this disaster in more detail and explain how you can help.
As the chemical fire raged on at the Rockton facility, emergency responders weighed their options. Town residents weren’t allowed to return to their homes until the smoke had dissipated. Fire officials raised concerns about fighting the fire with water and industrial firefighting foam, given the chemical facility’s proximity to the Rock River. In a press briefing on the morning of June 15, the Rockton Fire Chief, cautioned,
“If we let product go into the river, I think we'd have more of an environmental impact, and more of a nightmare than this actual fire.”
Despite these concerns, Chemtool’s parent company, Lubrizol Corporation, contracted industrial firefighting company US Fire Pump, which sprayed 3,200 gallons of PFAS-based firefighting foam concentrate onto the fire the same afternoon. Over the course of three hours, 74,000 gallons of water mixed with PFAS were used to extinguish the blaze. Once Illinois and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency raised concerns, a PFAS-free foam was used to extinguish the blaze.
Testing by the Illinois EPA demonstrates that high levels of PFAS entered Rock River via sewage drains at the Chemtool site. The concentrations of PFAS was nearly 6,000 parts per trillion or 50 times higher than upstream sampling sites. Concentrations of a single PFAS chemical, 6:2 FTSA, made up the bulk of this sample, as well as being measured at high levels in wastewater collected at the factory site. Read Sierra Club’s analysis of PFAS contamination of the Rock River and water testing results here.
Sierra Club volunteers also collected samples from Rock River closer to the factory and found PFAS levels were about 15 to 24 parts per trillion higher than samples collected upstream of the site. Using a novel chemical test called the TOP Assay, chemists measured a broader number of unidentifiable PFAS-precursors, and demonstrated that the total burden of PFAS in the river is about double the amount measured in standard laboratory analytical tests.
This isn’t the first time that PFAS fire fighting foams have poured into waterways, and it won’t be the last. In 2019 thousands of gallons of foam and waste water flushed from the ITC Tank Farm into the Houston Ship Channel and Galveston Bay.
The use of PFAS in firefighting is responsible for a huge share of drinking water contamination, which is estimated to impact more than 100 million Americans. The chemicals pose a hazard to first responders and risk permanently contaminating the local area’s groundwater and rivers, and local fish and wildlife. PFAS-free foams are available, widely used outside the US, and actually successful in suppressing the Rockton fire. So why are these toxic products still used in emergency response?
Eight states, including Illinois, have enacted laws to phase out the sale and use of PFAS in fire fighting. Congress has directed airports and the military to study and adopt alternatives within the next several years. With EPA Administrator Micheal Regan’s pledge to do everything possible to address the crisis of PFAS contamination, it is clear that EPA must push the process by further restricting PFAS in fire fighting, and holding industries responsible for cleaning up the contamination they cause when fighting a fire.
Author: Sonya Lunder, Toxics Policy Advisor
Photo courtesy of Matthew Ames via Instagram