As concerns grow over perfluoroalkyl and poly-fluoroalkyl (PFAS) exposure among firefighters, Connecticut emerged as a national leader in banning PFAS in turnout gear and other products by 2028. However, alternatives to this highly effective gear are challenging to be found.PFAS are synthetic chemicals developed almost a century ago. Since their creation, PFAS have been extensively used in various industries for consumer goods with several military applications, including firefighting and protective gear solutions. Notably, it was only in the past 20 years that the full effects of PFAS on human health and the environment became known. With this realization, legislation was created to limit the use of PFAS and their safe disposal. However, while consumer goods may do without these substances, many other industries still struggle to find alternatives that are just as effective.
Finding Alternatives to PFAS
The firefighting industry relies heavily on PFAS-based firefighting foams, known as AFFF, and turnout gear. Replacing these with safer solutions is complicated as the new materials would have to ensure the safety of firefighters during interventions and be just as effective at putting out fires with a tremendous hazard potential. Concomitantly, the continued use of PFAS in firefighting gear poses a significant risk to the health of firefighters. Hence, while new equipment may eliminate the dangers of PFAS to firefighters, this new turnout gear may not be as effective at protecting these public servants in the line of fire.
To prompt research efforts for the development of new solutions, the PFAS Alternatives Act 2023 aims to create a fund for research and development (R&D) of these alternatives, as well as to secure annual financial support for firefighting training in the use of equipment based on new materials. A total of $25 million is proposed to develop PFAS-free alternatives to firefighting gear. These funds will be allocated within a four-year timespan, with an additional $2 million proposed for training firefighters in safely using the new equipment.
Although the proposal has not yet been approved and enacted, Connecticut has taken initiatives to eliminate PFAS across industries, including firefighting gears and foams. On a converging line, private manufacturers, pressured by increasing demand for PFAS-free firefighting gear, began independently investing in R&D for alternatives. To date, only one producer in the U.S. offers turnout gear without PFAS, while others are still developing alternatives.
High Levels of PFAS in Firefighters’ Blood
For decades now, research demonstrated that PFAS are linked with several serious diseases, including cancers, metabolic diseases such as hypercholesterolemia, high blood pressure, and other conditions, including ulcerative colitis. Among firefighters, data shows that the incidence of several of these illnesses is exceptionally high. Nonetheless, these findings are not surprising.
Research also shows firefighters have an increased level of PFAS in their blood compared to samples from the general population. Subsequent investigations demonstrate that PFAS are directly absorbed into the bloodstream from turnout gear, especially under conditions that mimic firefighting activities, where overheating and sweating facilitate the absorption and transition of these substances through the skin. Moreover, PFAS are released in more significant quantities when this gear is torn. As investigated by several studies, these test conditions mimic real-life settings in firefighting conditions. As a result, it can be argued that firefighters are daily exposed to hazardous PFAS levels, which explains the higher incidence of PFAS-related diseases in this population.
Additional research also demonstrates that firefighting protective equipment from 20 manufacturers in the U.S. has over 2,000 micrograms of PFAS per kilogram. Given that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently set the PFAS limit in drinking water at just 4 parts per trillion, these levels of PFAS in turnout gear are staggering.
The Connecticut Ban on PFAS
Connecticut passed legislation in 2024 that sets a timeline to phase out PFAS over the next four years. As part of this effort, starting January 1, 2026, manufacturers and retailers must clearly disclose whether PFAS are present in firefighter turnout gear. This initiative positions Connecticut as the first state to enforce such transparency in protective equipment. With alternatives entering the market, it is unlikely that fire departments will purchase PFAS-based equipment. In practice, this new law will force manufacturers to focus on developing alternative solutions.
The broader PFAS ban, finalized in June 2024, will extend to biosolids, textiles, consumer products, and firefighter gear by 2028. By this date, manufacturers selling turnout gear in Connecticut that did not focus on developing alternatives will be eliminated entirely from this market.
Legal Action Against Manufacturers for PFAS in Firefighting Gear
While Connecticut enacted legislation to ban PFAS, firefighters in the state initiated legal proceedings against several major PFAS manufacturers over the presence of these chemicals in their turnout gear. Although the case was filed within the state of Connecticut, a major defendant in the trial, 3M company, attempted to transfer the case to the District of South Carolina under Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) No. 2873, which consolidates lawsuits related to AFFF.
This move appeared aimed at delaying the case, streamlining it within broader litigation, and potentially reducing the company’s individual liability by reframing gear-related claims within a larger context centered on firefighting foam. This motion was nevertheless denied, and the trial will continue under its initial district, serving as a strong precedent and lesson for manufacturers attempting to diminish legal responsibility and financial resolutions.
Considering the current context of PFAS replacement pressures from the civil society and firefighting associations, the PFAS Alternatives Act would serve as an essential financial catalyst in the development of alternatives to be marketed in the U.S. With funds provided through this act to fire departments, research institutions, nonprofits, and other eligible entities, safer alternatives to PFAS-based gear may become a reality sooner than anticipated, accelerating innovation, supporting firefighter training, and helping frontline communities transition away from harmful exposure to toxic chemicals.
—
Sharp serves as the Chief Financial Officer at Environmental Litigation Group, P.C., a law firm based in Birmingham, Alabama. In his position, he oversees financial management and contributes to evaluating legal cases involving individuals impacted by toxic substance exposure.