Bipartisan frustration is mounting over delays by the U.S. Department of Defense in addressing contamination caused by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) at military sites nationwide. Lawmakers from both parties are increasingly critical of the Pentagon’s slow progress in cleaning up these persistent chemicals, which have been linked to serious health issues including certain cancers and developmental problems.

PFAS, often called “forever chemicals,” were widely used in firefighting foams at military bases for decades due to their effectiveness in extinguishing fires. However, the chemicals do not break down easily in the environment and have contaminated water and soil in many communities, particularly those near installations where firefighting drills were conducted. Service members and residents near bases have raised concerns over long-term exposure to PFAS and its associated health risks.

The backlash intensified following reports that the Pentagon had postponed cleanup operations at nearly 200 military sites, with some delays extending up to 20 years. This includes locations like the former Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda, Michigan, where decades of firefighting foam use have severely polluted local water supplies and surrounding land. Lawmakers representing affected areas have repeatedly pressured the Department of Defense to accelerate its remediation efforts.

Representative Jack Bergman of Michigan, a retired three-star Marine Corps lieutenant general and a strong supporter of former President Donald Trump, has been particularly vocal in calling out the Pentagon. Representing a district heavily impacted by PFAS contamination, Bergman emphasized the Pentagon’s failure to fulfill cleanup promises and its ongoing disregard for affected communities. “I am running out of ways to explain to my constituents why the service they trusted with their community continues to treat them this way,” Bergman wrote in a May letter to defense officials.

The issue has fostered a rare display of bipartisan cooperation. In July, Democratic Representatives Kristen McDonald Rivet and Debbie Dingell of Michigan and Republican Representatives Jen A. Kiggans of Virginia and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, co-chairs of a bipartisan PFAS task force, sent a joint letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth condemning the Department’s ongoing deprioritization of cleanup operations. They stressed the importance of protecting the health of troops and communities alike.

Experts note that the scope of PFAS contamination is vast and challenging to address. Jennifer Field, a professor of environmental toxicology, explained the difficulty lies in the chemicals’ mobility in water and their persistence in the environment, often resulting in large contamination plumes. The Government Accountability Office has described the number of military sites requiring assessment as “overwhelming,” further complicated by gaps in historical knowledge about where PFAS-containing materials were used on each base.

At Wurtsmith Air Force Base, for example, the Pentagon identified contamination in 2010 and is not expected to complete its remedial investigation until 2027, after which cleanup efforts can commence. Currently, no widely available technology exists that can rapidly or fully remove PFAS from soil and water, complicating remediation efforts further.

Local environmental advocates like Tony Spaniola, co-chair of the Great Lakes PFAS Action Network, have highlighted the broad ecological impact, noting that contamination affects not only drinking water but also local wildlife including fish and game, which many residents rely on for sustenance.

The growing bipartisan pressure reflects a consensus that addressing PFAS contamination at military sites is urgent and necessary to protect both national security personnel and surrounding communities from the long-term consequences of exposure. The Pentagon has yet to publicly respond in detail to inquiries about the reasons behind the delays or its plan to expedite cleanup operations.