“Documents about the nationwide firefighting foam contamination investigation show the Defence Force told the public one thing, but said something different in internal reports.

  • Defence told the public the foam that it is still using, does not contain a banned chemical.
  • But it told its own consultants that it did contain this chemical, called PFOA or perfluorooctanoic acid.
  • It told the public its investigation was only about ‘historical’ contamination that occurred before 2002.
  • But it told its consultants to look at historical and ‘current’ contamination…

The main foam that Defence uses is called Tridol S.

In October 2017, Defence’s consultants Pattle Delamore Partners had this to say about it: ‘NZDF has confirmed that Tridol S does contain PFOA.’…

But a few months later, in December 2017, this is what Defence told the public when it first admitted to having contaminated multiple sites: ‘Foams used by NZDF since 2002 have not contained PFOS or PFOA, according to advice received from our suppliers.’…

‘A preliminary site investigation has been undertaken at HMNZS Devonport naval base to assess the potential for soil, groundwater and marine contamination resulting from current and historical use of PFAS,’ the October 2017 report said.

The June 2017 report about Ōhakea airbase said the same thing about ‘current’ use…

‘Knowledge on these products has been evolving as NZDF has investigated and in November 2017 our suppliers advised they had not supplied us foams containing PFOS or PFOA above trace levels since 2002,’ it replied in a statement…

Defence did not use the most comprehensive testing available, which combines standard testing with what’s called TOP Assay, so while it is able to discount the presence of PFOA except at trace levels, it will not have detected many PFASs in the foam, including precursors of PFOA…

Defence has not specified what it means by “trace” levels despite being asked to release the exact numbers – except in one case, when Tridol S concentrate returned a reading of 3000 parts per billion of PFOA.”

Read the full article by Phil Pennington