PFAS in Groundwater Near US Military Bases: DoD Remediation Program and Community Health Impacts

The Military’s PFAS Debt: Scale, Scope, and Response

The US Department of Defense (DoD) is the single largest contributor to PFAS groundwater contamination in the United States. Decades of AFFF use for aircraft crash rescue, fuel fire suppression, and training exercises at over 700 military installations has created contamination plumes affecting hundreds of communities. From Pease Air National Guard Base (New Hampshire) to Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort (South Carolina) to Naval Air Station Whidbey Island (Washington), communities adjacent to military bases have discovered PFAS in their drinking water—often learning about contamination only when DoD testing results became public, sometimes years or decades after exposure began.

Documented Community Health Impacts

The community around Pease ANGB—one of the earliest and most extensively studied cases—provides a cautionary tale. Children who attended the on-base daycare center between the 1970s and 2014 (when contaminated well water was finally shut off) showed elevated blood PFAS levels and a higher rate of immune dysfunction than unexposed peers. A 2016 study published in JAMA found elevated rates of childhood immune suppression, reduced vaccine response, and increased respiratory illness in high-exposure children from Pease. Similar health investigations at Camp Lejeune (North Carolina), Willow Grove NAES (Pennsylvania), and Lackland AFB (Texas) are documenting elevated cancer rates and immune effects in military families, veterans, and civilian neighbors.

DoD PFAS Remediation Program: Scale and Funding

DoD’s PFAS remediation program—the largest in US history for a single contaminant class—received $5.2 billion in appropriations through FY2024, with annual requests of $1–1.5 billion expected through at least 2030. The program prioritizes: interim water solutions (connection to clean water supplies, point-of-entry treatment) for affected households; groundwater pump-and-treat systems at high-priority installations; source control (AFFF disposal, soil hotspot excavation); and long-term monitoring. DoD’s Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) manages cleanup through the FUDS (Formerly Used Defense Sites) and IRP (Installation Restoration Program) frameworks, with contractor management by environmental engineering firms.

Community Interim Water Solutions

For affected communities, the gap between discovery of PFAS contamination and long-term groundwater remediation (often 20–50 years) creates an urgent need for interim solutions. DoD policy requires providing alternative drinking water to households with wells contaminated above EPA health advisory levels. Implementation varies: some installations have connected hundreds of homes to municipal water; others have installed point-of-entry (POE) GAC treatment systems; bottled water distribution has been used as an emergency short-term measure. Point-of-use (POU) filtration at the tap provides a cost-effective interim solution that communities can implement immediately—NSF/ANSI 53 certified activated carbon filters and NSF 58 certified reverse osmosis systems achieve >95% PFAS removal to below regulatory limits.

PACT Act and Veterans PFAS Health Coverage

The PACT Act (Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our PACT Act of 2022) expanded VA healthcare and disability benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances, including PFAS from AFFF at military installations. Veterans who served at installations with documented AFFF contamination may qualify for presumptive VA benefits for certain cancers (kidney cancer, testicular cancer, Hodgkin’s lymphoma) associated with PFAS exposure. DoD and VA have established a joint PFAS health registry to document exposure history and health outcomes for military personnel, providing data to support both individual claims and epidemiological research on military PFAS health impacts.

Military PFAS contamination represents both the largest PFAS remediation challenge and the most compelling argument for proactive PFAS management—the costs of cleanup are orders of magnitude greater than prevention would have been.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top