VIDEO: Government takes PFAS environmental contamination case to court

LINDSAY CLOUT:  At that time, nobody knew anything about the chemical. We didn’t know what it meant, we didn’t know what it was, we didn’t know where it came from.

ADAM HARVEY, REPORTER: On the floodplain in Fullerton Cove, north of Newcastle, it’s been raining lately. So the chemicals called PFAS are close to the surface. 

LINDSAY CLOUT:  The reason that PFAS is such a major issue here is that it’s so close in contact with our everyday life. As an example, I can show you just how high the water table is. 

ADAM HARVEY:  PFAS is the name of a group of synthetic chemicals that stay in the environment decades after they were last used, often in firefighting foam. 

At Fullerton Cove, five kilometres from a RAAF base, they remain a problem for locals. 

Lindsay, what can’t you do with this water?

LINDSAY CLOUT: Specifically drink it, we don’t use it for washing, putting in swimming pools, any recreation use, really the essence of the restriction is to stay away from groundwater. 

ADAM HARVEY:  The Federal Government last week announced it would sue chemical company 3M over the cost of cleaning up PFAS at 28 Defence Force sites. 

LINDSAY CLOUT:  It's something that needed to happen. These people need to be held to account for what they have done. So, I see it as quite a positive move. 

But then on the flip side of that, unfortunately it has brought the issue, the PFAS contamination issue back to the surface for the community.

ADAM HARVEY:  3M firefighting foam containing PFAS was used at the RAAF Williamtown base from the 1970s until 2004. 

LINDSAY CLOUT:  We were told nothing to see here. There's no known health impacts from being exposed to this chemical. Don't you worry about it. You can just move on. 

Now people are hearing, well, there is a recognition that this is a dangerous chemical because 3M are being pursued. So yeah, it's made people angry. 

ADAM HARVEY:  This lawsuit is over environmental damage, not health problems but the PFAS in 3M’s firefighting foam gets into blood.

(Archival footage)

REPORTER:  What does it feel like in there under the foam?

FIREFIGHTER:  It's not too bad, you can breathe in it, it just gets in the back of your throat a little slight burn, that's all. 

REPORTER:  Can you see anything? 

FIREFIGHTER:  Oh a lot of foam. 

(End of archival footage)

ADAM HARVEY:  And some of the firefighters exposed to the foam say they’ve had serious health problems.

GRAEME MURPHY, RETIRED FIREFIGHTER:  We got to a stage where we were actually almost covered totally in foam. We're maintaining extinguishers using this foam. Back in 2007, I got diagnosed with thyroid cancer and I'm one of the lucky ones. I've got through that. I've now got prostate cancer, but I've been to many a funeral with my colleagues that haven't been so lucky.

ADAM HARVEY:  Asked about the impacts on firefighters, 3M cited a New South Wales Department of Health report which said the cancer risk of PFAS was low.

Mick Tisbury led the fight to ban the use of PFAS foam around the world. He’s pleased the government is pursuing 3M but says the action should go further and pursue the company over the possible health damage.

MICK TISBURY:  If there was no health effects, then why are the federal government supplying bottled water to those affected communities? Why are they banning fishing in certain waterways? Why do they even have thresholds if it's completely safe, why do they have safe exposure levels?

ADAM HARVEY: Firefighters are state employees. It’s the federal government suing 3M about environmental cleanup. 

PETER KHALIL, ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR DEFENCE:  This is not a case about personal injury or health or health claims. It is solely focused on the environmental, economic and cultural impacts and the costs that we've incurred in dealing with those impacts.

GRAEME MURPHY:  It's extremely, extremely frustrating. Yeah, we shouldn't have to battle to prove the risks associated with our job.

ADAM HARVEY:  In the US, the Environmental Protection Agency warns of the risk to human health from PFAS chemicals.

PROF. NICHOLAS CHARTRES, UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY:  The Australian government's position on this is divergent to those authoritative reviews. 

They don't recognise the human health effects such as cancer and immunological effects and cardiovascular disease effects that are being recognised by other authoritative bodies.

ADAM HARVEY:  Class actions against 3M overseas over environmental damage have been settled out of court but in both the US and Australia, the health impacts have been difficult to prove even in long term studies. 

PROF. MARTYN KIRK, ANU, NATIONAL CENTRE FOR EPIDEMIOLOGY AND POPULATION HEALTH:  So the communities we looked at were communities that were surrounding Defence Force bases, where they had the water had become contaminated, and so people had higher levels of PFAS in their blood. 

So we did see evidence of higher levels of cholesterol and some other markers of kidney function, but in terms of causes of mortality, causes of death or cancer, we didn't see elevated rates for the majority of them.

ADAM HARVEY:  3M says it stopped selling PFAS foam in Australia two decades ago. It says Defence continued to use foams containing PFAS long after 3M had taken that action. 

At Defence sites including Williamtown, PFAS levels are being reduced by extensive filtering and engineering projects. 

And a project pioneered by Mick Tisbury has successfully reduced the levels of PFAS inside firefighters by encouraging them to donate blood. Something that is not considered dangerous for recipients. 

MICK TISBURY:  So I'm rapt about that and we're getting the same results for those firefighters who are participating in the treatment since it was published and peer reviewed, it's exceeded our expectations.

ADAM HARVEY:  You may be able to reduce PFAS levels in blood and in the water table, after a lot of money and effort. 

But what lingers in places affected by the chemicals is the emotional toll of the long fight to prove that damage has been done. 

MARTYN KIRK:  You can go back and find it in the water even though it was applied three or four decades ago, and it has had a huge impact on communities. We see that communities suffered psychological distress for a wide range of reasons, the uncertainty about health, the impact on property prices, and the fact that they can't eat their own homegrown produce.