Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4076

Bill Overview

Title: PFAS Firefighter Protection Act

Description: This bill prohibits, under the Toxic Substances Control Act, the manufacture, import, processing, or distribution in commerce of any aqueous film forming foam for use in training and firefighting that contains a perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substance, commonly referred to as PFAS. These substances are man-made and may have adverse human health effects. No later than October 5, 2024, the bill also requires the prohibition of the use of fluorinated chemicals in firefighting foam at airports.

Sponsors: Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY]

Target Audience

Population: people exposed to PFAS through firefighting foams

Estimated Size: 1500000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Firefighter (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 36 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm glad there's a move towards eliminating PFAS in firefighting foam. I've read about the potential health risks.
  • Transitioning away from these foams might be challenging, but it feels necessary for our health.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 9 3

Airport firefighter (Houston, TX)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is crucial. Our team has been pushing for PFAS-free alternatives for a while now.
  • I hope the changes will be implemented smoothly without impacting our ability to respond to emergencies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 3
Year 3 7 3
Year 5 8 2
Year 10 8 1
Year 20 9 1

Firefighting foam manufacturer worker (Seattle, WA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried about what this policy will mean for my job.
  • If my company does not transition to alternative products successfully, we could be out of work.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 8 4

Environmental Health Advocate (Boulder, CO)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is an excellent step forward for both public health and environmental conservation.
  • I've been advocating for such policies for years. It feels like a win.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 10 6

Military firefighter (Fayetteville, NC)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is necessary, but I'm not sure if it'll address contamination issues already present.
  • I hope the military will take this seriously and prioritize our health and safety.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 6 3
Year 5 7 3
Year 10 8 2
Year 20 8 1

Environmental Scientist (Boston, MA)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Reducing PFAS use is critical for protecting our ecosystems.
  • I'm eager to see how policy implementation will reflect on environmental data over the next few years.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 9 3

Resident near airport (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 23 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Finally, this policy feels like someone is listening to our community concerns about water safety.
  • I hope we see an actual change in health outcomes over time.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 9 4

Airport official (Denver, CO)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy shift presents logistical challenges, especially with budgets.
  • Adapting will take effort, but it's for the greater good.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 9 5

Chemical engineer (San Diego, CA)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is beneficial for innovation in safer chemical solutions.
  • There's opportunity here but also pressure to ensure these alternatives work as effectively as PFAS foams.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Retired Air Force personnel (Detroit, MI)

Age: 61 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's too late for some of us who've already been exposed, but hopefully, this will prevent future harm.
  • I wish there was more assistance for those already affected.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 4
Year 2 4 3
Year 3 5 3
Year 5 6 2
Year 10 6 2
Year 20 7 1

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $30000000)

Year 2: $18000000 (Low: $13000000, High: $26000000)

Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)

Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $10000000)

Year 100: $100000 (Low: $50000, High: $200000)

Key Considerations