Hubbry Logo
AnsulAnsulMain
Open search
Ansul
Community hub
Ansul
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Ansul
Ansul
Ansul
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Ansul is a corporation headquartered in Marinette, Wisconsin that manufactures fire suppression systems, extinguishers, and administers fire training. Ansul's initial activities included production of cattle feed, refrigerants and selected specialty chemicals. The name Ansul comes from ANhydrous SULfur dioxide (SO2), which was sold to die works and fruit preservers, and later as a refrigerant.[5] Production of fire suppression chemicals began in 1934. Virginia Chemicals, Inc. (now part of Celanese Corporation) acquired the Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Products Division of The Ansul Company in 1967,[6] and by 1983 Ansul had discontinued all other production at the facility in Marinette. The US government is a major customer for Ansul.[4][7]

Key Information

The ANSUL name is a premium brand of Tyco Fire Protection Products. The full line of ANSUL special hazard fire protection products includes fire extinguishers and hand line units; pre-engineered restaurant, vehicle, and industrial systems; sophisticated fire detection/suppression systems, and a complete line of dry chemical, foam, and gaseous extinguishing agents.[8] A common hand-held fire extinguisher produced by Ansul is the SENTRY brand stored-pressure fire extinguisher.[9]

History

[edit]

Ansul was created by Francis "Frank" G. Hood from the bankrupt Bastol Company, an enterprise started in Marinette in 1912. It remained independent until 1978, when it was acquired by Wormald International, an Australian corporation. Wormald was in turn acquired by Tyco International in 1990.[5] Ansul now exists as a brand of the Tyco Fire Protection segment of Tyco International,[3] which in turn is part of Johnson Controls International plc.

The company changed its name over the years but always kept Ansul as part of its name. From 1915 to 1963 it was the Ansul Chemical Company, from 1963 to 1981: the Ansul Company, and from 1981 to 1995 Ansul Fire Protection. The current name has been used since 1995.

Leadership

[edit]

Early leadership was quite stable, primarily under the Hood family. Once the company was acquired, turnover has been much more rapid as evidenced by this chronology of the presidents of Ansul:[5]

  • 1915–1938: Francis "Frank" G. Hood
  • 1938–1948: Harvey V. Higley
  • 1948–1949: Francis J. Hood
  • 1949–1974: Robert C. Hood
  • 1974–1976: Morris L. Neuville
  • 1976–1980: Terrell L. Ruhlman
  • 1980–1983: William A. Rickel
  • 1983–1986: Marc V. Gross
  • 1987–1990: J. Donald Roland
  • 1990–1992: Mark E. Mathisen
  • 1992–2002: Karl J. Kinkead
  • 2002–2007: Mark VanDover[10]
  • 2007–Aug 2007 as vice president.: Colleen Repplier[4][10]
  • 2006–present (2017): George R. Oliver (President of Tyco Fire Protection, formerly Tyco Safety Products)[3][11]

Product categories and trade names

[edit]
An Ansul restaurant fire suppression system pull station in a hospital cafeteria in Port Charlotte, Florida

ANSUL is the registered trade name for Ansul's products and is often used in conjunction with the trade name for their specific products, such as ANSUL SENTRY fire extinguishers.[12]

Portable fire extinguishers

[edit]
  • RED LINE
  • SENTRY
  • CLEANGUARD
  • K-GUARD

Large manual handline units

[edit]
  • MAGNUM

Vehicle fire suppression systems

[edit]
  • Checkfire

Restaurant fire suppression systems

[edit]
Ansul fire suppression system in a hospital cafeteria
  • PIRANHA
  • K-GUARD (Kitchen-Class Fire Extinguishers)
  • R-102
  • Kitchen Knight II (KK-II)

Industrial fire suppression systems

[edit]
  • I-101

Clean-agent fire suppression systems

[edit]
  • INERGEN
  • SAPPHIRE

Carbon dioxide fire suppression systems

[edit]

(No trade names known in this category)

Water-atomizing fire suppression systems

[edit]
  • AQUASONIC

Detection and control equipment

[edit]
  • AUTOPULSE

Dry chemical and dry powder agents

[edit]
  • FORAY
  • MET-L-X
  • LITH-X
  • NA-X
  • COPPER POWDER NAVY 125S
  • PLUS-FIFTY-B
  • PLUS-FIFTY-C
  • MET-L-KYL..

Firefighting foam products

[edit]
  • TARGET-7

Spill control products

[edit]
  • SPILL-X
  • SPILL-X-A
  • SPILL-X-S
  • SPILL-X-C
  • SPILL-X-FP

Recalls

[edit]

2001: In certain circumstances, seemingly isolated to McDonald's restaurants, detection cables in R-102 systems can fray, fatigue, and fail. Ansul will pay the suppression company to make repairs.[13]

2006: Ansul cooperated with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to voluntarily recall about 154,000 K-GUARD, SENTRY and FLAG FIRE Model Fire Extinguishers because if the fire extinguisher is dropped horizontally from a height of approximately 2 to 3 feet (0.91 m), the internal pick-up tube could crack and the extinguisher can fail to discharge properly.[14]

2006: SimplexGrinnell LP, ADT Security Services Inc., and Ansul Inc. were distributors for Tyco Fire & Security Fire Detection Systems made in China with faulty sensors. Sensors could experience reduced sensitivity to smoke in conditions of high humidity and high temperature. A product safety recall was conducted by the firm in cooperation with the CPSC.[15]

2009: Marine high pressure carbon dioxide systems are inadvertently discharging due to an internal pressure vent on the cylinder valve that may not be adequately venting pressure. This can cause the cylinder to actuate, which then causes all other cylinders on the system to actuate. Marine high pressure carbon dioxide valves with a date code range of 10–07 to 06-08 should be replaced.[16]

Litigation

[edit]

Ansul was among ten defendants in Miller v. Ansul Inc., Western Fire Protection, et al, Case #688690, San Diego County Superior Court, in 1995. Miller was injured while depressurizing an unrestrained Halon tank. Miller won the case.[17][18]

Former employee Daniel Grace successfully sued Ansul in 1999 for age discrimination. The case was decided by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.[19]

Ansul et al. were named as defendants in a 2005 lawsuit alleging that the use of Agent Orange by the U.S. military led to birth defects for Vietnamese children. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that the defending companies were operating under the direct order of the President and as such could not be sued for the consequences of the use of their product. The court also ruled the British had previously used Agent Orange during the Malayan Emergency in the 1950s and that they set the precedent for America's use during the Vietnam War.[20]

Environmental record

[edit]

Emissions

[edit]

Environmentally, Ansul ranked in 2002 among the dirtiest/worst facilities in the US for cancer risk (air and water releases) and non-cancer risk score (air and water releases)[21] due to chromium and copper. Chemicals discharged from Ansul in 2011[22] include:

Chemicals transferred to other sites:

Chemicals released to the air:

Chemicals released to surface water:

Arsenic contamination

[edit]

Surface water near Ansul is the adjacent Menominee River. The river bottom and groundwater are heavily contaminated with arsenic compounds that were released by Ansul from 1957 to 1977 as a result of herbicide manufacture, with certain spots of river sediment containing levels as high as 11,000 ppm arsenic.[23][24] For six of those years (1960–1966), arsenic-laden wastewater was discharged directly into the river.[24] These discharges and contaminations were the result of an accumulation of more than 95,000 short tons (86,000 t) of arsenic salt that was at one time stored on site.[25] The company consequently operated under two consent orders (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Consent Order 2A-73-714; and Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the WDNR, and Ansul, signed on September 28, 1990).[24] As a result of the US EPA AOC, Ansul agreed in February 2009 to spend an estimated US$28 million to:[26]

  • remove ≈74,000 cubic yards (57,000 m3) of arsenic-contaminated sediments from the Menominee River
  • construct an impermeable barrier wall to bedrock around 40 acres (160,000 m2)
  • cap or remove approximately 4.2 acres (17,000 m2) of surface soils contaminated with arsenic above 16-32 ppm
  • pump and treat contaminated groundwater

Total remediation efforts and their costs are:

  • 1976–1984, US$11 million to pump and treat contaminated groundwater and install a groundwater interceptor trench at the southern edge of the property.[26]
  • 1998–1999, US$12.4 million to dam and remove arsenic-contaminated sediments from the 8th Street Slip and install an impermeable barrier system to bedrock around the 8th Street Slip and an adjacent Salt Vault[26]
  • 2012–2013 (est.), $25 million to dredge and cap river sediments.[27]

In November 2011, the local newspaper reported that Tyco (Ansul) is still negotiating with the EPA and WDNR to work out a plan, which has been submitted to the EPA for approval. Disclosed at a meeting with the Local Menominee River Area of Concern Citizens Advisory Committee was a plan to partially dredge and partially cap the arsenic. Estimated to cost US$24 million and take two years, 100,000 cubic yards (76,000 m3) of contaminated sediment would be removed from an area of 3 acres (12,000 m2) - 3.5 acres (14,000 m2) acres around the Eighth Street Slip, which would be replaced with sand from another (undisclosed) area of the river and topped with stone. However, the EPA has indicated that it wants Ansul to dredge the sediment from all ≈19 acres (77,000 m2). The Tyco proposal also includes capping ≈3.5 acres (14,000 m2), leaving 100,000 cubic yards (76,000 m3) of contaminated sediment in place. If approved, this project would commence in June 2012.[28]

The Tyco proposal was rejected by the EPA in 2012, and 250,000 cubic yards (190,000 m3) of sediment was ordered to be removed from the main channel, the turning basin, areas directly east of the turning basin, the Sixth Street Slip, and the south channel. Tyco hired Sevenson Environmental Services of New York as the general contractor for the project, which began in July 2012.[29] (Sevenson was also the general contractor to clean up the infamous Love Canal site in New York.)[30] The project is slated for completion by Nov. 1, 2013, and the current estimate of cost is US$25 million.[27]

Tyco created a website in 2011 specifically for the cleanup project, featuring reports, news, and FAQs.[31]

Community impact

[edit]

The arsenic contamination of the river bed has been problematic for a neighboring corporation, Marinette Marine (MMC). MMC is a shipbuilder with government contracts. Among their limitations for vessel size is the ship's draft, which must be less than the depth of the Menominee River. MMC is located immediately upstream of Ansul, and because of the arsenic contamination of the river bed, MMC's desires to dredge the river have been stymied until Ansul's remediation efforts can be completed.[24] The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) estimated in 1986 that 40,000 cubic yards of sediment would need to be dredged.[32]

The arsenic contamination causes a beneficial use impairment (BUI) resulting in local regulations that restrict anchoring of boats adjacent to the Ansul property, as anchors may disturb the arsenic-laden sediments. A “Menominee River No Anchor Zone” is conspicuously posted.[33][34]

USA Today reported that Marinette schools are in the top 5 percentile for the most exposure to air pollution.[35] St. Thomas Aquinas Academy High School (formerly known as Marinette Catholic Central High School until 2004[36]) is adjacent to Ansul's property, and next to it is the Marinette Middle School (formerly Marinette High School until 1973). Marinette High School is adjacent to the Ansul Fire Technology Center, where tons of chemicals are used annually to train fire fighters.[37]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Ansul

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

Ansul is a brand of specialized and equipment, focused on protecting high-hazard environments such as commercial kitchens, vehicles, and industrial facilities. Founded in 1915 in , by Frank Hood as the Ansul Chemical Company—named after its initial product, anhydrous gas—the company transitioned to solutions in the 1930s, developing chemical extinguishing agents and systems. Acquired by in 1990 and now operating under , Ansul has become a benchmark in the industry, with its R-102 Restaurant Fire Suppression System designed to detect, interrupt, and suppress fires in like fryers, griddles, and broilers, safeguarding more food service kitchens than any competing brand. The brand's engineered systems emphasize rapid response and minimal residue, earning certifications such as EN 17446 for the R-102 in 2024, reflecting ongoing advancements in reliability and compliance for global applications.

History

Founding and Early Innovations

Ansul Chemical Company was established in 1915 in , by Francis G. Hood, who acquired the assets of the recently bankrupt Bastol Company, a local chemical enterprise founded in 1912. Initially, the firm concentrated on manufacturing specialty industrial chemicals, including anhydrous used as a , reflecting Hood's background in chemical processing and sales. This focus addressed practical needs in early 20th-century industry, such as safe handling of volatile substances in manufacturing and refrigeration sectors. By the mid-1930s, Ansul shifted toward solutions amid growing demand for effective suppression in industrial settings prone to chemical and hazards. Production of fire suppression chemicals commenced in 1934, enabling the company to develop agents tailored for rapid fire knockdown without the corrosiveness or limited efficacy of prevailing water-based or soda-acid alternatives. These early formulations prioritized empirical validation through tests, demonstrating superior performance on Class B fires involving oils and solvents, where traditional methods often failed due to re-ignition risks or residue damage. A pivotal breakthrough occurred in 1939 with the launch of the first cartridge-operated dry chemical fire extinguisher, which employed a puncture-style cartridge to instantly pressurize and disperse the powder, ensuring consistent flow rates independent of agent settling or valve corrosion common in stored-pressure units. This design stemmed from rigorous engineering to mitigate unreliability in prior extinguishers, such as inconsistent expulsion from CO2 or manual pumping mechanisms, and was substantiated by field trials showing effective smothering of flames via chemical interruption of the combustion chain. The innovation quickly gained traction in factories and vehicles, underscoring Ansul's commitment to verifiable, cause-based suppression over anecdotal improvements.

Mid-Century Expansion

During the 1940s, amid demands for reliable fire suppression in military vehicles and industrial settings, Ansul introduced the first cartridge-operated dry chemical in , enabling rapid deployment against and electrical fires common in fuel storage and machinery. This innovation addressed limitations of earlier water-based or foam-only methods, which were less effective on oil and fires, and supported wartime applications in carts and mobile equipment. Concurrently, Ansul established a training school in for in high-risk industries, fostering practical skills in extinguisher use and contributing to safer operations in expanding manufacturing sectors. Post-war industrial growth, particularly in and sectors, drove Ansul's diversification into fixed suppression systems using dry chemical agents, tailored for high-hazard environments like refineries where rapid knockdown was critical to minimize and damage. By the , these systems gained traction for protecting process equipment and storage tanks, as dry chemicals formed a barrier on surfaces to interrupt the more effectively than traditional water streams, which could spread hydrocarbon fires. Ansul's facility solidified as the primary manufacturing hub during this period, scaling production of extinguishers and components, which spurred local job creation in engineering, assembly, and distribution roles amid the company's drives for and technical positions. In the 1960s, Ansul advanced product lines with the Twin Agent system, integrating Purple-K dry chemical for quick knockdown with aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) for sustained suppression of fuel s, enhancing efficacy in and industrial applications such as hangars and offshore platforms. This development aligned with rising safety standards in expanding energy sectors, where empirical field tests demonstrated faster extinguishment times—often under 30 seconds for pool s—compared to legacy foam alone, reducing potential explosion risks in volatile settings. By the early 1970s, Ansul extended offerings to complete industrial firefighting units under the Magnum brand, further penetrating markets for refinery and airport protection, while Marinette's operations bolstered regional economic stability through sustained employment in a specialized cluster.

Leadership and Strategic Direction

Francis G. Hood founded Ansul in 1915 by acquiring assets from the bankrupt Bastol Company in , initially focusing on chemical production including sulfur dioxide for . As president, Hood directed the company's pivot to in 1934, introducing suppression chemicals developed through targeted research to address practical fire risks, prioritizing agents validated by empirical performance over unproven alternatives. This foundational strategy under Hood's leadership established Ansul's emphasis on causal mechanisms of fire suppression, such as rapid agent discharge efficacy in real-world conditions, rather than emerging regulatory preferences. Subsequent management, remaining stable within the Hood family through much of the mid-20th century, sustained investments in R&D to refine agent formulations and delivery systems, evidenced by the company's growth into specialized by the 1940s and 1950s. Leadership decisions consistently favored data-driven enhancements, including full-scale testing protocols that confirmed suppression reliability across fuel types, enabling market adaptation without deference to non-empirical trends. This approach contributed to Ansul's reputation for robust, field-proven solutions, with internal R&D efforts yielding innovations adopted in industrial sectors requiring high-stakes reliability. (historical context from company lineage) In the , executive direction shifted toward international , establishing preliminary global distribution channels ahead of the 1990 acquisition by , which accelerated expansion to over 85 countries by the 1990s. Sales growth in key industries, such as and commercial kitchens, reflected adoption rates driven by demonstrated system effectiveness in diverse operational environments, with leadership allocating resources to export-oriented adaptations while maintaining core commitments to tested suppression technologies. This era's strategic focus on scalable, evidence-based distribution supported sustained revenue increases, positioning Ansul as a leader in hazard-specific fire control prior to broader corporate integration.

Ownership Transitions and Mergers

In 1990, acquired Ansul Incorporated, integrating it into its portfolio and providing access to expanded resources that supported Ansul's specialization in suppression technologies. This transition marked Ansul's shift from independent operations to a within a multinational conglomerate, enabling scaled manufacturing and global distribution while preserving its focus on engineered . On January 25, 2016, Johnson Controls announced a merger with Tyco International, which was completed on September 2, 2016, forming Johnson Controls International plc headquartered in Cork, Ireland. Ansul continued as a premium brand under the Tyco Fire Protection segment, benefiting from Johnson Controls' broader infrastructure in building technologies and security, which facilitated enhanced operational efficiencies and market reach without altering Ansul's core product development autonomy. In 2023, Ansul discontinued production of its low-pressure fire suppression systems, reflecting strategic adjustments in response to evolving industry demands and system maintenance considerations. This decision streamlined the product lineup under International, prioritizing higher-efficacy alternatives amid regulatory scrutiny on CO2 applications.
YearEventImpact
1990Acquisition by Expanded R&D and global scale for Ansul's fire suppression expertise.
2016Merger with Integration into Johnson Controls International plc; Ansul retained as key brand in Tyco Fire Protection.
2023Discontinuation of low-pressure CO2 systemsFocused portfolio on modern suppression options.

Product Portfolio

Portable Fire Extinguishers

Ansul produces a range of portable extinguishers under its SENTRY and brands, designed for handheld use in commercial and industrial settings to combat Class A (ordinary combustibles), B (flammable liquids), C (energized electrical), and K (cooking oils) . These units employ dry chemical, wet chemical, (CO2), and clean agent suppressants, with models certified to meet ANSI/UL 299, 711, and equivalent ULC standards for reliability and performance. Dry chemical variants, such as ABC or BC powders, provide broad-spectrum suppression by interrupting the of , while CO2 displaces oxygen in enclosed spaces without residue. SENTRY stored-pressure models, available in sizes from 2.5 to 20 pounds, use compressed nitrogen to propel agents, enabling straightforward operation compatible with PASS (Pull, Aim, Squeeze, Sweep) training protocols and suitable for light to ordinary hazards like offices or workshops. RED LINE cartridge-operated extinguishers, in 10-, 20-, and 30-pound capacities, feature a separate pressurized cartridge for consistent delivery, minimizing failure risks from valve or hose issues and allowing field recharging in high-risk environments such as manufacturing facilities. Wet chemical units, like the 6-liter K-Guard model, deploy saponifying agents to cool and blanket Class K fires from vegetable oils, with UL ratings up to 60K and discharge durations of approximately 20 seconds. Performance metrics emphasize rapid suppression: a 10-pound SENTRY CO2 model achieves a 10-B:C UL rating with an 8.7-second discharge time and 6- to 10-foot effective range, while RED LINE 20-pound dry chemical variants deliver 1-A:20-B:C ratings at flow rates exceeding 1 pound per second for units over 10 pounds. Clean agent options, using FK-5-1-12, offer residue-free extinguishment for sensitive electronics with 1-A:10-B:C ratings and operating temperatures from -40°F to 120°F, supporting quick post-discharge recovery without cleanup. These designs prioritize user ergonomics, with ergonomic handles and visible pressure gauges in stored-pressure types, ensuring deployment within seconds for initial fire attack before professional response.

Handline and Mobile Units

Ansul handline and mobile units consist of wheeled extinguishers and foam cart systems designed for professional firefighters requiring extended discharge durations and greater agent volumes than handheld portables. These units facilitate manual operation in industrial environments, such as manufacturing facilities or chemical plants, where sustained suppression of Class A, B, or C fires demands mobility and precision. Wheeled configurations allow one-person towing and deployment, integrating hoses up to 100 feet for targeted application, while nozzles enable adjustable stream patterns to optimize agent distribution and minimize overspray. RED LINE wheeled dry chemical units, such as models 150-C and 350-C, hold 150 to 350 pounds of agent like FORAY or Purple-K, delivering flow rates of 3.5 pounds per second for discharge times exceeding 40 seconds on smaller models, providing coverage for fires involving flammable liquids or energized equipment. Operating in temperatures from -65°F to 120°F, these units feature aluminum nozzles for a solid stream up to 50 feet, supporting rapid knockdown in high-hazard scenarios without electrical conductivity risks from the agent. Handline nozzles compatible with these units, including low-expansion models, offer flow rates of 60, 95, or 125 gallons per minute, with shutoff valves and adjustments from straight stream to for versatile agent delivery in or dry chemical setups. Mobile carts supplement this with 36-gallon tanks on maneuverable frames, including hose reels for Class A and B suppression, achieving broad coverage through aspirated discharge that expands expansion ratios up to 8:1 for vapor sealing on fires. In industrial applications, these systems excel in scenarios like spill response or equipment protection, where high flow rates and integration allow operators to maintain distance while achieving effective agent throw and penetration, as evidenced by UL-listed for sustained operations without rapid agent depletion.

Vehicle Fire Suppression Systems

Ansul provides pre-engineered tailored for heavy-duty vehicles, including trucks, off-road equipment, and machinery, utilizing dry chemical agents like the A-101 system or liquid agents in the LVS system to target engine compartments and protect against Class A, B, and C fires. These systems feature automatic or manual actuation, with rugged components engineered for harsh environments such as underground and surface haul operations, where they help minimize downtime and prevent total vehicle losses by rapidly discharging suppressant upon detection. Detection in these systems relies on heat sensors integrated into CHECKFIRE series units, such as the CHECKFIRE 210, which monitor for anomalies and trigger suppression to interrupt fire spread in mobile applications, supported by field deployments demonstrating reliability in preventing escalation to catastrophic damage. Customization options allow adaptation to specific configurations, including excavators, draglines, wheeled loaders, and specialty off-road vehicles, ensuring coverage of vulnerable areas like electrical systems and fuel lines through tailored placement and agent distribution. The LVS system, updated in 2021 with a non-fluorinated liquid agent, offers stand-alone protection for off-road equipment, emphasizing quick cooling and suppression to safeguard operators and maintain operational continuity in industries like and . Recent advancements, including infrared-enhanced detectors introduced in 2025, further improve response times for high-value assets, underscoring Ansul's focus on empirical validation through rigorous testing for and in extreme conditions.

Restaurant Kitchen Protection Systems

Ansul restaurant kitchen systems utilize wet chemical agents to grease fires in commercial cooking areas, primarily through , where the agent reacts with hot cooking oils to form a soapy blanket that smothers flames, cools surfaces, and prevents re-ignition. The ANSULEX low liquid agent, central to these systems, provides rapid flame knockdown while minimizing damage to kitchen equipment due to its non-corrosive properties when properly applied. These systems are pre-engineered for installation over hoods, ducts, and appliances, with patterns validated through empirical testing in simulated hood environments to ensure coverage of high-risk cooking surfaces. The R-102 model features cartridge-operated delivery with fusible link detectors rated at specific temperatures, such as 360°F or 450°F, enabling actuation when heat exceeds safe thresholds in pre-piped hood assemblies. Fusible links serve as fixed-temperature releasing devices, integrating seamlessly into pre-piped installations for straightforward or new setups in ventilation systems. Appliance-specific or overlapping designs allow customization for various cooking configurations, including fryers, griddles, and ranges, while supporting remote manual pull stations for operator intervention. Complementing the R-102, the dual-agent system deploys wet chemical for initial flame suppression followed by water for enhanced cooling, addressing post-suppression heat risks in grease-heavy environments. This hybrid approach outperforms single-agent wet chemical systems in cooling cooking oils up to 15 times faster, reducing the potential for rekindling. Integration with mechanical and electrical shutoff valves ensures automatic interruption of fuel sources, such as natural gas or electricity, upon system activation, thereby curtailing oxygen and fuel supply to fires and minimizing re-ignition hazards. Valves, rated for pressures up to 10 psi, include clear open/closed indicators for post-event verification. Compliance with standards including UL 300, NFPA 17A, NFPA 96, EN 16282-7, and EN 17446 supports regulatory adherence in food service operations, with designs facilitating efficient recharge and inspection to limit operational disruptions.

Industrial and Special Hazard Systems

Ansul industrial and special hazard , such as the I-101 model, employ cartridge-operated dry chemical agents to address risks from flammable liquids, gases, energized electrical equipment, and ordinary combustibles in manufacturing and settings. These pre-engineered systems feature balanced pressure expulsion mechanisms for reliable agent discharge upon detection. The I-101 supports modular configurations for total flooding in enclosed spaces or localized application via overhead, sidewall, or tankside nozzles, enabling adaptation to diverse hazard profiles without residue concerns for electrical components. Tank capacities of 25 lb (11.3 kg) or 50 lb (22.7 kg) using ABC or BC dry chemical allow scalability from small enclosures—covering up to 1,000 cubic feet (28.3 m³) in total flooding setups—to broader industrial facilities. For combustible metals in processing environments, Ansul dry chemical systems deliver quick-response suppression, interrupting through rapid agent dispersal tailored to high-risk areas like or fabrication zones. Mechanical or electrical detection integrates with these designs, supporting low-temperature operations down to -20 °F (-29 °C) for versatile deployment in harsh industrial conditions.

Clean-Agent Suppression Systems

Ansul clean-agent suppression systems employ and agents to provide non-conductive, residue-free fire suppression suitable for protecting sensitive , centers, and other high-value assets where or would cause . These systems extinguish fires through chemical inhibition or oxygen displacement without leaving residues that require cleanup, enabling rapid restoration of operations. The SAPPHIRE system utilizes FK-5-1-12, a hydrofluorocarbon agent that suppresses fires by absorbing heat and interrupting the chemical reaction chain, discharging as a liquid that vaporizes into a gas for uniform distribution via fixed nozzles. FK-5-1-12 exhibits zero ozone depletion potential (ODP), a global warming potential (GWP) of less than 1, and an atmospheric lifetime of five days, offering a favorable environmental profile compared to legacy halons like Halon 1301, which had an ODP of 10 and GWP exceeding 7,000. Systems operate at pressures of 25 bar or 70 bar, with automatic activation linked to detection systems such as smoke or heat sensors, incorporating safety interlocks like dual detection signals or manual abort to prevent unintended discharge in occupied spaces. Inert gas alternatives, such as the INERGEN system, blend (52%), (40%), and (8%) to reduce oxygen concentration to 12-14% while elevating CO2 levels to maintain , achieving fire suppression through asphyxiation without or residue. This mixture has zero ODP and minimal GWP due to its composition of naturally occurring atmospheric gases, contrasting sharply with halons' persistent environmental impact. INERGEN systems, stored at 150-200 bar, integrate with early-warning detection for total flooding protection in enclosures up to thousands of cubic meters, featuring pressure relief venting and interlocks to ensure occupant safety during discharge, which produces no or visible discharge. Both system types prioritize minimal downtime in critical facilities like data centers, where suppression occurs in seconds to minutes upon detection, preserving equipment integrity and complying with standards such as NFPA 2001 for clean agent systems. For smaller enclosures, variants like the N-101 employ pure to create low-oxygen environments, discharging to suppress Class A, B, and C fires in volumes up to 148 cubic feet without conductivity risks.

Carbon Dioxide and Alternative Gas Systems

Ansul high-pressure carbon dioxide (CO₂) systems employ total flooding discharge to suppress fires in unoccupied enclosed spaces by displacing oxygen and reducing its concentration below the level required for combustion, typically achieving 34% CO₂ by volume to inhibit flame propagation through asphyxiation and cooling effects. These systems are particularly suited for hazards in power generation facilities, archives, semiconductor processing areas, and paint spray booths, where rapid agent release from pressurized cylinders—stored at around 850 psi—ensures effective fire knockdown within seconds, minimizing damage from water or residues. High-pressure designs facilitate modular storage and scalability, with discharge nozzles distributed for uniform agent dispersal in compliance with NFPA 12 standards. In contrast, Ansul's low-pressure CO₂ systems, which maintained liquefied CO₂ at approximately 300 psi in refrigerated storage tanks for larger-volume applications, were discontinued in 2023 amid heightened scrutiny of human exposure risks during unintended discharges. data, including historical incidents and physiological studies, indicate that CO₂ concentrations above 10% can induce rapid incapacitation via and hypoxia, prompting regulatory and manufacturer reevaluations favoring alternatives for any potential human presence. Low-pressure variants, once valued for cost-efficiency in industrial total flooding, posed amplified concerns due to slower pressure buildup and potential leaks in occupied-adjacent zones, leading to their phase-out without replacement in Ansul's portfolio. Post-discontinuation, Ansul recommends transitioning to inert gas systems such as INERGEN, a blend of 52% nitrogen, 40% argon, and 8% CO₂ that lowers oxygen to 12-15% while maintaining breathable CO₂ levels under 5%, achieving comparable fire suppression efficacy with knockdown times of 10 seconds or less for surface fires in tested enclosures. These alternatives, discharged from high-pressure cylinders, support hybrid configurations for power and archival protections, verified through UL-listed protocols to match CO₂'s interruption of the combustion triangle without conductivity or cleanup issues. i-Flow inert gas systems further enhance this by enabling sequential cylinder activation for optimized flow in varied hazard volumes.

Detection, Control, and Accessories

ANSUL detection systems integrate , , and detectors with automatic release mechanisms to initiate suppression upon identification. Rate-compensated detectors, rated for at temperatures such as °F or °F, account for lag to provide reliable sensing in ordinary and hazardous locations. detectors, including fiber-optic models extending up to 26 feet, offer early warning for rapid response. Control panels, such as the AUTOPULSE Z-10 releasing system, process signals from up to four initiating device circuits to trigger alarms and agent discharge, supporting both single- and dual-hazard configurations. These panels incorporate manual release inputs that override abort functions, with configurable delays from 0 to 30 seconds in 5-second increments for safe activation. Status monitoring features enable real-time oversight of system readiness and event logging. Accessories include piping components like black and chrome fittings, nipples, and stand-off brackets for secure installation, alongside nozzles designed for precise agent flow and distribution patterns. Specialized nozzles, such as those for R-102 systems, feature blow-off caps to protect against grease buildup while ensuring unobstructed discharge. These elements enhance system reliability by optimizing agent delivery without compromising detector sensitivity.

Suppression Agents and Foams

Ansul produces FORAY dry chemical suppressing agents, which are monoammonium phosphate-based formulations designed for multipurpose use on Class A (ordinary combustibles like wood and paper), Class B (flammable liquids and gases), and Class C (energized electrical equipment) fires. These agents are free-flowing, water-repellent powders that, upon application, melt on hot surfaces to form a barrier, interrupting the chemical chain reaction element of the fire tetrahedron while also smothering by excluding oxygen and providing some cooling. Empirical testing shows consistent performance across these fire classes, with rapid knockdown due to the agent's ability to coalesce and coat fuel surfaces, though it leaves a residue requiring cleanup. For grease-laden commercial kitchen fires (Class K), Ansul employs ANSULEX low-pH wet chemical agents, consisting of organic salts in an with a of approximately 8.2. These agents extinguish by saponifying hot cooking oils and fats into a soapy blanket, which removes the element through emulsification, excludes oxygen, and cools the surface to prevent re-ignition, addressing multiple components simultaneously. The low enhances equipment compatibility compared to higher-pH alternatives, reducing risks, while performance data indicate rapid flame knockdown within seconds on grease fires. Ansul foams, such as AR-AFFF concentrates like ANSULITE A335 (3%x3%), target polar solvent and Class B fires by forming an aqueous film that suppresses vapors, a foam blanket that excludes oxygen and cools via , and a barrier against reflash, targeting oxygen, , and elements of the fire tetrahedron. These exhibit low to medium expansion ratios (typically 7:1 to 20:1 for finished ) and superior burnback resistance, with testing showing sustained suppression for over 25 minutes on large-scale pool fires. In response to environmental concerns over PFAS in traditional AFFF, Ansul has developed non-fluorinated alternatives like NFF-331 (3%x3%), which match AR-AFFF application rates for fire control (achieving 90% control rapidly) and provide equivalent or longer drain times for enhanced burnback resistance on polar solvents, supported by UL 201 listing data confirming performance parity without .

Spill Control Solutions

Ansul's spill control solutions primarily consist of SPILL-X granular agents designed for the treatment of hazardous spills, emphasizing neutralization, solidification, and absorption to mitigate risks in industrial environments. These agents address spills of acids, caustics, s, , and fuels, converting reactive substances into non-hazardous forms to prevent further reaction or ignition. SPILL-X-A, formulated with citric and fumaric acids, targets mineral and organic acids, absorbing up to 3 gallons per package while neutralizing corrosive properties. Similarly, SPILL-X-C employs for caustic spills, achieving 1 gallon absorption per package and generating minimal heat during reaction. SPILL-X-S serves as a adsorbent, encapsulating organic solvents and fuels without neutralization. These products are deployed via SENTRY spill control kits and cases, which include applicators, protective gear, and guides for small-scale incidents in warehousing, transportation, and manufacturing facilities handling flammable or reactive liquids. By rapidly containing and deactivating spills—often within seconds of application—the solutions reduce vapor release and pooling that could ignite from sparks or heat sources, thereby interrupting potential spill-to-fire escalation sequences. Kits like the SPILL-X Treatment Kit equip responders with tools for efficient deployment, prioritizing speed to limit exposure and secondary hazards in high-risk areas. Integration with Ansul's broader suppression portfolio enhances overall hazard management; for instance, spill agents complement detection systems by addressing threats from leaked chemicals, as untreated spills of solvents or acids can serve as or accelerants in fire events. This proactive approach supports compliance with safety standards in sectors prone to liquid hazards, where empirical testing demonstrates effective spill volumes handled per unit weight of agent, minimizing cleanup time and environmental persistence.

Technological Innovations

Pioneering Developments

In 1939, Ansul pioneered the cartridge-operated dry chemical , the first of its kind to employ a separate, puncture-activated cartridge for agent expulsion. This addressed chronic reliability issues in prior extinguisher designs, such as soda-acid or stored- units prone to pressure loss from seals degrading over time, which could render them ineffective during emergencies; the cartridge system ensured fresh pressurization only upon use, slashing failure rates and enabling consistent performance across Class A, B, and C fires. Building on this, Ansul's dry chemical formulations, using agents like , excelled against Class B flammable liquid fires by chemically inhibiting the combustion , a causal leap from water-based suppressants that often spread such fuels. Military adoption during further substantiated these advances, with Ansul wheeled and portable units deployed for vehicle and facility protection, demonstrating durability in high-stakes, dynamic environments where rapid, non-conductive suppression was critical. Ansul also advanced early foam concentrate technologies tailored for Class B hydrocarbon fires, developing mechanical foam mixtures that formed stable blankets to exclude oxygen and suppress vapor release, with wartime validations confirming their scalability for large-scale suppression. These efforts culminated in foundational patents, such as mechanisms for efficient agent dispersal (e.g., US2719590A for extinguisher puncture and flow control), and rigorous testing protocols that influenced Underwriters Laboratories standards, establishing empirical benchmarks for agent efficacy, nozzle distribution, and post-discharge residue minimization.

Modern Advancements and Updates

In 2021, ANSUL launched Restaurant Electric Detection (RED) Technology, an electrically supervised system designed for commercial kitchens that enables centralized monitoring of up to 16 hazard zones with real-time status reporting. This advancement integrates linear detection wire with multiple temperature ratings to accommodate diverse cooking appliances, facilitating faster activation of compatible R-102 and PIRANHA suppression systems compared to traditional fusible link mechanisms. By providing continuous supervision and remote oversight, RED Technology reduces response times in high-volume environments, addressing gaps in legacy pneumatic detection where manual resets and limited zoning hindered efficiency. Concurrent with environmental regulations phasing out per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), ANSUL introduced the NFF 3x3 UL201 non-fluorinated foam concentrate in March , a patent-pending formulation effective against Class B and polar fires at 3% concentration. Independent testing demonstrated this foam achieving 90% fire control on fuels within seconds, surpassing UL 201 standards for knockdown and burnback resistance without relying on chemistry, which had dominated prior agents for its film-forming properties but raised persistence concerns in ecosystems. Comparative trials confirmed equivalent or superior vapor suppression to fluorinated predecessors on polar s, supporting transitions mandated by agencies like the U.S. EPA amid evidence of PFAS . In September 2024, ANSUL advanced flame detection with quad sensor technology, capable of identifying fires in under 10 seconds across conditions like smoke, dust, fog, and ambient light variations. This multi-spectrum approach enhances early warning in industrial and special hazard applications by filtering false alarms from non-fire sources, integrating with AUTOPULSE control panels for automated suppression release. Such data-driven refinements prioritize empirical response metrics over probabilistic modeling, yielding measurable reductions in detection latency as validated in controlled exposure tests.

Operations and Training

Manufacturing and Global Operations

Ansul maintains its primary manufacturing operations at its headquarters facility in Marinette, Wisconsin, an active plant spanning multiple sites that produce fire suppression systems, portable extinguishers, and specialized suppression agents. The Marinette operations include dedicated processes for agent formulation, such as aqueous film-forming foams and clean agents, enabling in-house production of proprietary blends tailored for industrial and special hazard applications. To support scalability and efficient global deployment, Ansul relies on an extensive network of authorized distributors spanning multiple continents, providing localized access to products, installation, and maintenance services. This distributor model facilitates rapid response times and customization for regional requirements, with factory-trained professionals ensuring consistent system integration worldwide. Quality assurance is enforced through ISO 9001 certification of manufacturing processes, incorporating stringent controls from raw material intake to final assembly, including empirical batch testing for agent efficacy and system reliability. These measures underpin the production of UL-listed and FM-approved components, minimizing variability and supporting high-volume output for diverse applications like and suppression systems.

Fire Safety Training Programs

Ansul offers hands-on training through its ANSUL Fire School, a program designed for and end-users requiring practical skills. The three-day curriculum, conducted seasonally from May through October on a 27-acre fire ground, integrates fire control science, extinguisher , , and recharging procedures with instruction. Participants engage in live- exercises, combating over 20 fires involving spills, fuel-in-depth scenarios, and pressurized gas or liquids using cartridge-operated and stored-pressure extinguishers, wheeled units, lines, and agents such as dry chemicals and . The emphasizes verifiable development in portable deployment, advancing participants from novice to proficient levels through repeated real-world simulations of high-pressure incidents. This approach fosters confidence in suppressing fires safely and reporting anomalies, with hands-on practice directly addressing common deficiencies in initial response efficacy observed in untrained individuals. Programs are adapted for industry-specific needs, including certification courses for professionals handling systems like the R-102 suppression, which cover hazard identification, installation, and tailored to commercial kitchen environments. These targeted sessions, available in-person and virtually, equip users with context-relevant techniques to enhance operational readiness without overlapping into or legal compliance training.

Safety Efficacy and Impact

Demonstrated Fire Suppression Effectiveness

Ansul , including the R-102 for commercial kitchens, achieve UL 300 listing through rigorous testing that verifies suppression of fires via , where the ANSULEX low-pH agent reacts with hot grease to form a soapy blanket, extinguishing flames and preventing re-ignition within seconds of discharge. These systems also carry FM approval, with discharge patterns engineered for uniform agent distribution, enabling total agent release in under 10 seconds to meet FM 5560 standards for rapid knockdown. In controlled tests, Ansul wet chemical agents demonstrate extinguishing rates superior to dry chemical alternatives for Class K fires involving vegetable oils, containing spills and cooling surfaces to below reflash temperatures faster due to the agent's dual physical and chemical action. Gaseous systems like and INERGEN, UL-listed and FM-approved, flood protected spaces to design concentrations in 10 seconds or less, interrupting chains in and electrical hazards without residue. Case studies in aviation highlight Ansul's effectiveness, such as installations at , where vehicle and equipment suppression systems contained potential hangar fires, limiting damage through quick detection and agent deployment tailored to fuel and risks. In petrochemical applications, Ansul dry chemical systems have proven containment in oil sector incidents by blanketing high-flash-point fuels, outperforming foam agents in wind-exposed scenarios where chemical interruption provides faster suppression rates. Comparative evaluations favor Ansul's specialized chemical agents over generic competitors for certain fuels, with laboratory tests showing suppression within seconds for grease and oil fires, attributed to optimized and reactivity that exceed basic UL ratings of alternatives like Range Guard.

Contributions to Lives Saved and Property Protection

Ansul's R-102 restaurant fire suppression system, deployed in commercial kitchens worldwide since its introduction, has contributed to protecting occupants by rapidly discharging ANSULEX low-pH agent to suppress grease and fires before they spread beyond the cooking area. According to (NFPA) data, properties equipped with systems experience an 87% lower death rate compared to those without, a reduction attributable to early intervention in high-risk environments like kitchens where cooking equipment ignites approximately 13,000 structure fires annually in the U.S. Ansul systems, UL-listed for compliance with NFPA 96 standards, facilitate this outcome through fusible link activation and targeted agent delivery, preventing escalation that could endanger staff and patrons. In equipped facilities, Ansul deployments correlate with minimized by confining fires to origin points, as the systems' pre-engineered design limits flame spread to ventilation hoods and appliances. Industry analyses indicate that such suppression averts average per-incident losses exceeding $25,000 in fires, with effective systems like the R-102 reducing the need for full closures or reconstructions. providers recognize this efficacy, often citing maintained Ansul installations as factors in lowered premiums and claim frequencies due to verifiable suppression performance in tested scenarios. Ansul's Aqueous -Forming (AFFF) concentrates have played a in contexts by enabling rapid knockdown of fires, preventing escalations in crashes and vehicle incidents since the . Developed with U.S. Navy input, AFFF forms a vapor-suppressing on liquid fuels, achieving near-instant extinguishment that has safeguarded personnel during high-hazard operations on bases and runways. Ansul-supplied foams, effective against polar solvents and , have been standard in hangars and depots, directly linking their deployment to avoided fatalities in -fed blazes where traditional methods proved inadequate.

Economic and Industry Influence

Ansul's primary facility in , employs over 500 workers, establishing it as a major local employer and contributing to economic vitality in the region through stable manufacturing jobs, including roles in production, assembly, and . These operations extend economic benefits beyond direct payroll by supporting a network of regional suppliers for raw materials, components, and logistics, fostering ancillary employment in transportation, warehousing, and vendor services that amplify local commerce in northeast . The company's premium positioning in the fire suppression market, characterized by high-reliability systems certified to rigorous standards such as UL and FM, has elevated industry benchmarks and spurred broader R&D investments across competitors. As a key player under , Ansul participates in ongoing innovation efforts to refine suppression agents and delivery mechanisms, influencing sector-wide advancements in special hazard protection for industrial, commercial, and vehicle applications. Ansul's global distribution model, facilitated through authorized channels, drives exports of U.S.-manufactured equipment, with American shipments comprising approximately 82% of international Ansul product , thereby supporting positive balances in specialized technologies. This export activity reinforces Ansul's leadership in niche markets like and industrial suppression, where its systems are integrated into international projects, promoting sustained demand and economic multipliers in the global .

Regulatory and Recall History

Product Recalls and Safety Alerts

In November 2006, Ansul, in cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, voluntarily recalled approximately 154,000 units of K-GUARD Wet Chemical, FLAG FIRE KITCHEN ONE Wet Chemical, FLAG FIRE Water, and SENTRY Water fire extinguishers manufactured between January 2003 and October 2006. The issue stemmed from a potential crack in the pick-up tube if the extinguisher was dropped from a height of 2 to 3 feet, which could prevent proper discharge during activation and pose risks to users in a fire emergency. Affected units were identified by specific serial numbers listed on the manufacturer's website, and consumers were instructed to contact Ansul for free replacement extinguishers or inspections. Subsequent safety notices addressed valve-related concerns in select models. Johnson Controls, Ansul's parent company, issued a notice for K-GUARD model K01-3 Class K fire extinguishers due to risks in the assembly under certain environmental conditions, recommending replacement with valves to ensure reliability. This proactive measure targeted distributors and end-users for inspection and upgrade, preventing potential operational failures without escalating to a full . Ansul's response protocols emphasized rapid identification, free remediation, and enhanced manufacturing quality controls, such as improved material durability testing for pick-up tubes and valves, to mitigate recurrence. These actions aligned with industry standards for voluntary compliance, focusing on empirical modes observed in drop tests and field reports rather than widespread defects.

Compliance with Fire Standards

Ansul undergo rigorous certification processes to ensure compliance with key standards from Underwriters Laboratories (UL) and the (NFPA), which establish empirical thresholds for fire suppression efficacy based on tests involving real fuels like cooking oils. The R-102 restaurant system, for instance, is UL-listed to UL 300 specifications, demonstrating effective knockdown and prevention of reflash in fires, a standard updated in 1994 to address changes in cooking media that rendered prior dry chemical agents insufficient. Similarly, compliance with NFPA 17A for wet chemical systems and NFPA 96 for commercial cooking ventilation requires verifiable performance in suppressing grease-laden vapors and protecting hoods, plenums, and ducts, thereby validating operational reliability over speculative design constraints. Following the Montreal Protocol's restrictions on ozone-depleting Halon agents, Ansul transitioned to clean agent systems by the early 1990s, aligning with NFPA 2001 standards for clean agent fire extinguishing systems that mandate equivalent or superior suppression without atmospheric harm. These adaptations involved reformulating agents like FM-200 to achieve rapid heat absorption and interruption of the , as confirmed through standardized discharge and toxicity tests that prioritize causal fire dynamics—such as cooling and chemical inhibition—while meeting U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for low . International certifications further underscore Ansul's adherence, with the R-102 system earning EN 17446 approval from the Institution in April 2024 after multi-phase extinguishing trials simulating European kitchen hazards. Empirical validation occurs via third-party audits embedded in these listings, including live- demonstrations that measure suppression times, agent distribution uniformity, and post-discharge integrity, ensuring systems exceed minimum code thresholds rather than conforming to overly cautious interpretations that could undermine practical effectiveness. Such testing protocols, replicated across UL, ULC, and CE markings, provide quantifiable evidence of compliance, with no residue or electrical conductivity issues observed in certified configurations.

General Litigation Overview

Ansul has faced limited litigation unrelated to its Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) products, primarily consisting of contractual insurance coverage disputes and earlier defenses concerning fire suppression technologies. These cases typically centered on verifiable breaches of policy terms rather than allegations of widespread product defects or harms. For instance, in the 1990s and early 2000s, Ansul initiated coverage claims against multiple insurers for environmental cleanup costs at its facility, stemming from arsenic and solvent contamination identified under federal and state regulations. A key example is Ansul, Inc. v. Employers Insurance Company of Wausau (2011AP2596, Wis. Ct. App. 2012), where Ansul sought reimbursement for investigation and remediation expenses notified to insurers as early as 1991. The court granted summary judgment to the insurer, ruling that Ansul breached notice-prejudice and cooperation clauses by delaying notification to certain carriers—such as Lloyd's of London until 2003—and by commencing litigation against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency without policyholder consent. This decision, affirmed on appeal, denied coverage from Employers Insurance but did not extend to all policies; Ansul resolved claims with other insurers during the proceedings. Similar disputes, including Ansul LLC v. Ace American Insurance Company (2022CP4005289, S.C. Cir. Ct.), involved analogous arguments over policy obligations for site liabilities, often culminating in settlements without admitting fault. Historically, Ansul defended against patent claims in the late , as in Ansul Company v. Uniroyal, Inc. (306 F. Supp. 541, S.D.N.Y. 1969), seeking a of non-infringement and antitrust relief for alleged misuse on dry chemical fire extinguishing compositions. Uniroyal counterclaimed for infringement, but the case highlighted competitive tensions over core extinguishing formulations without evidence of monopolistic practices succeeding against Ansul. No major or competitive suits disrupted operations in the or ; resolutions, including oppositions like Ansul v. Chemguard Inc. (TTAB 2003, terminated), were confined to narrow issues with negligible financial or strategic impact. Overall, these litigations resulted in targeted settlements or dismissals, preserving Ansul's market position under Tyco ownership since 1985 and affirming contractual enforceability over speculative damages.

Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) Disputes

Ansul, as a manufacturer of fire suppression products, supplied Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) concentrates used by the U.S. military starting in the 1960s for extinguishing jet fuel and hydrocarbon fires on naval vessels and bases. The U.S. Navy's development of AFFF in that era addressed the need for rapid suppression of high-flash-point flammable liquid fires, where traditional foams failed due to fuel volatility and reignition risks, enabling Ansul's formulations to meet military specifications for vapor sealing and burn-back resistance. Ansul is named as a in Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) No. 2873, consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the District of since 2018, encompassing over 10,000 cases alleging PFAS chemicals in AFFF caused contamination, personal injuries including cancers (e.g., , testicular), and among firefighters and nearby communities. Plaintiffs contend manufacturers concealed PFAS persistence and toxicity risks known since the , seeking billions in remediation and compensatory damages, with settlements from co-defendants like totaling over $12 billion by 2024 for water system claims. Counterarguments in the litigation highlight epidemiological uncertainties, with recent analyses indicating no established causal links between PFAS exposure and certain claimed outcomes like or after controlling for confounders such as and occupational exposures. Independent reviews emphasize that while PFAS bioaccumulate, dose-response data from AFFF-specific scenarios often fall below thresholds for adverse effects observed in high-exposure animal models, questioning direct attribution amid broader environmental PFAS sources. These disputes underscore tensions between AFFF's proven superiority in empirical [Class B fire](/page/Class B_fire) tests—achieving faster extinguishment and lower reignition rates than most fluorine-free alternatives in high-stakes polar solvent and simulations—and regulatory pressures to phase out PFAS despite incomplete alternatives. In response, Ansul introduced non-fluorinated Alcohol-Resistant Synthetic Fluorine-Free Foam (AR-SFFF) agents compliant with emerging standards like Mil-Spec for land-based applications, with lab demonstrations showing vapor suppression and extinguishment times comparable to legacy AFFF in select tests under controlled conditions. However, field validations reveal variability, as F3 foams lack AFFF's self-sealing film mechanism, potentially extending suppression times by 20-50% in dynamic, wind-affected fires without adjusted application rates. This transition prioritizes empirical performance parity where feasible, balancing litigation-driven restrictions with AFFF's historical role in preventing catastrophic losses.

Environmental Considerations

Emissions and Operational Impacts

Ansul's manufacturing operations, primarily at the Stanton Street facility in , involve the production of fire suppression agents that result in regulated releases of air and water emissions, including volatile organic compounds and from chemical processes. These releases are managed under permits issued by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), ensuring compliance with federal EPA standards for pollutant discharge elimination systems. For instance, the facility's discharge permit, reissued effective January 1, 2021, authorizes specific discharges from metal finishing and associated manufacturing activities while imposing limits on parameters such as , , and heavy metals. Air emissions from production processes are similarly controlled through state-issued permits, which require monitoring and adherence to thresholds under administrative codes and federal Clean Air Act provisions. The parent company, , which oversees Ansul operations, has implemented such as process optimizations and emission capture systems across its facilities, contributing to a reported 48% reduction in absolute Scope 1 and 2 since 2017. These measures align with broader industry practices for minimizing fugitive emissions during agent formulation and packaging. The facility reports annual toxic chemical releases via the EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) program, disclosing on-site and off-site transfers for covered substances, with historical data indicating managed quantities without exceeding permit limits. Empirical data from regulatory monitoring, including stack emissions and sampling, show no attributable spikes in local air or parameters linked to routine operations, as verified through ongoing compliance reporting to EPA and DNR. This controlled profile reflects standard practices in chemical , where emissions are routinely below industry benchmarks for similar-scale producers of specialty chemicals.

PFAS Contamination from AFFF

Aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) manufactured by , a under Tyco Fire Products, incorporates per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as to enable rapid fire suppression on Class B fuels. These chemicals' persistence in the environment stems from legacy applications, particularly runoff during repeated fire training drills at airports, military bases, and industrial facilities, where AFFF was discharged into soils and surfaces, leading to leaching into . Studies have identified elevated PFAS concentrations, including (), in plumes extending from such sites, with detections linked directly to AFFF use over decades. Regulatory actions targeting PFAS in AFFF began in the , culminating in mandates for phase-out; the U.S. Department of Defense, a major user, committed to replacing PFAS-based AFFF across installations by October 2024 under the for Fiscal Year 2020, though extensions to 2026 have been sought for some sites due to logistical challenges. Remediation efforts at contaminated sites involve substantial costs, with DoD estimates exceeding $2.1 billion for foam replacement and cleanup, yet these address legacy persistence without undermining AFFF's historical role in preventing fire-related casualties and property losses. AFFF's deployment was justified by its superior performance in forming a vapor-suppressing aqueous on fuel surfaces, achieving extinguishment times and burnback resistance unmatched by early alternatives for high-hazard Class B scenarios like spills. Fluorine-free foams (F3), developed as substitutes, demonstrate reduced efficacy in standardized tests for polar solvents and large-scale fires, often requiring higher application rates or longer suppression durations compared to PFAS-based AFFF. This film-forming mechanism remains critical where public safety risks from uncontained fires outweighed environmental trade-offs prior to viable F3 maturation.

Arsenic and Local Site Issues

The Ansul Inc. facility in , historically manufactured -based agricultural herbicides, resulting in localized contamination of and with traces. concentrations were detected in on-site soils and groundwater monitoring wells, with off-site migration prompting remediation efforts. Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action program administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the site's owner, Tyco Fire Products LP (successor to Ansul), conducted voluntary investigations and cleanups starting in the early 2000s. Key measures included excavating and disposing of contaminated soils, installing a sheet pile barrier and slurry wall around the facility perimeter to contain arsenic-impacted groundwater, and treating on-site groundwater via pump-and-treat systems. Approximately 300,000 cubic yards of arsenic-bearing materials were removed, treated, and properly disposed of, with off-site soils remediated to levels at or below 16 mg/kg total arsenic. A 2006 health consultation by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) evaluated in sediments adjacent to the facility and concluded it posed a for activities like or , recommending and further site-specific assessments. Post-remediation soil sampling confirmed risk reductions, enabling partial delisting of related beneficial use impairments in the adjacent Lower Area of Concern by 2020, after sediment cleanup in the river turning basin. Groundwater monitoring continues to detect and volatile organic compounds, but treatment upgrades have achieved over 98% reductions in discharge mass limits per state permits.

Community Effects and Remediation

PFAS contamination originating from Ansul's (now Tyco Fire Products, a subsidiary) firefighting foam testing and manufacturing at the Marinette facility has prompted significant community interactions, including resident complaints about well water usability and restrictions on recreational activities in affected waterways. Concentrations in private wells have reached up to 2,200 parts per trillion (ppt) near biosolids fields and 2,100 ppt near the Fire Technology Center, leading to advisories against using contaminated for drinking, cooking, or irrigation. Johnson Controls/Tyco provides bottled water to impacted households as an interim measure, while evaluating permanent fixes such as municipal water hookups or well replacements. These responses address immediate exposure risks, though residents continue to voice frustrations over long-term uncertainties in public forums. Remediation encompasses soil excavation of hotspots, groundwater extraction and treatment systems (GETS), and surface water remediation in key ditches, conducted under Department of Natural Resources (DNR) oversight and a 2009 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrative Order on Consent. Site-wide corrective actions trace back to 1990 for legacy contaminants, with PFAS-specific efforts intensifying after 2017 disclosures of off-site migration. Monitoring involves quarterly sampling of , , private wells, and biota like , with results tracked in the DNR's Bureau for Remediation and Redevelopment Tracking System (BRRTS) database and PFAS Data Viewer for public access. Transparency is furthered through regular public meetings and , including one in September 2025, where residents submit queries via dedicated channels. State health advisories emphasize avoiding PFAS-laden foam contact and limiting consumption of Bay of Green Bay or Marinette-area deer liver, but dedicated surveillance programs have not yielded conclusive evidence of excess disease incidence tied to local exposures. General PFAS research links the chemicals to risks like and testicular cancers, yet Marinette-specific epidemiological data remains limited without demonstrated causal clusters. Counterbalancing these challenges, the facility sustains local and economic activity, having operated in Marinette since 1907 and supporting stability through jobs in and related . This contributes to amid remediation timelines projected to extend years.

Risk-Benefit Analysis of Suppression Technologies

Fire suppression technologies, such as those developed by Ansul for commercial kitchens, industrial equipment, and special hazards, have empirically demonstrated substantial reductions in fire casualties and economic losses. According to (NFPA) data from 2015 to 2019, civilian fire death rates were 89% lower in properties equipped with automatic suppression systems compared to those without. Similarly, fatality rates in sprinklered structures were 87% lower, with injury rates 27% reduced, underscoring the causal priority of rapid extinguishment over uncontrolled fire spread. In 2022, U.S. fires caused 3,790 civilian deaths and billions in , yet suppression activation in 99.2% of incidents limited operations to five or fewer heads, minimizing escalation. These systems preserve in and contents annually by containing fires at , far outweighing documented environmental and costs from agent residues when viewed through empirical risk prioritization. Untreated fires impose immediate, high-mortality hazards—evidenced by annual U.S. losses exceeding $20 billion—against which managed post-suppression residues represent lower-probability, remediable exposures. NFPA analyses confirm suppression's net positive, as operational effectiveness (90-95% in controlled studies) directly correlates with averted deaths and damages, irrespective of . Critiques of legacy agents like aqueous film-forming foams overlook parallel advancements in alternatives, such as Ansul's INERGEN clean agent systems, which deploy non-toxic, residue-free gases safe for occupied spaces and environmentally neutral. Fluorine-free foams, while transitioning, have shown viability in large-scale tests for certain applications, though not universally matching legacy performance yet, highlighting the need for balanced evaluation over blanket phase-outs that could elevate fire risks. This disproportionate emphasis on historical agents risks undermining innovations that sustain suppression efficacy without compromising safety gains.

References

  1. https://www.ansul.com/
  2. https://fox59.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/812596520/how-ansul-fire-suppression-systems-became-a-benchmark-in-commercial-kitchen-safety
  3. https://www.johnsoncontrols.com/media-center/news/press-releases/2024/04/17/ansul-r-102-restaurant-fire-suppression-system-receives-en-17446-certification
  4. https://www.wjhl.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/812596520/how-ansul-fire-suppression-systems-became-a-benchmark-in-commercial-kitchen-safety
  5. https://marinette.wi.us/DocumentCenter/View/181/A-Brief-History-of-Riverside-PDF
  6. https://alchetron.com/Ansul
  7. https://www.facebook.com/groups/274988438373433/posts/730506782821594/
  8. https://www.firesafetysupply.net/shop/ansul-435148-red-line-purple-k-high-flow-extinguisher-20-lb-hf-i-a-20-g-1/
  9. https://www.kiwiresourceprotection.com/products/ansul
  10. https://www.zippia.com/ansul-careers-15021/history/
  11. https://fire.fandom.com/wiki/Ansul_Inc.
  12. https://www.ansul.com/industrial-fire-supression-systems/dry-chemical-fire-suppression-system
  13. https://fire-chief.com/extinguishing-systems/dry-chemical-fire-suppression/refinery-offshore-processing/
  14. https://www.cbs42.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/812596520/how-ansul-fire-suppression-systems-became-a-benchmark-in-commercial-kitchen-safety
  15. https://industrytoday.com/where-theres-smoke-theres-ansul/
  16. https://www.fireengineering.com/fire-safety/tyco-fire-protection-products-celebrates-century-of-success/
  17. https://investors.johnsoncontrols.com/~/media/Files/J/Johnson-Controls-IR/tyco/2015/tyco-fy15-form-10-k.pdf
  18. https://investors.johnsoncontrols.com/~/media/Files/J/Johnson-Controls-IR-V2/quarterly-reports/2016/jci-plc-2016-10-k.pdf
  19. https://www.sdmmag.com/articles/93929-tyco-to-rebrand-as-johnson-controls
  20. https://www.orrprotection.com/mcfp/ansul-industry-news
  21. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/monty-watt-037a22b4_it-would-seem-that-ansul-is-dropping-their-activity-7081746950500335616-Beok
  22. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products
  23. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/cartridge-operated/redline_cartridge_operated_hand_portable_extinguishers_fsp/red-line-cartridge-operated-hand-portable-fire-extinguishers
  24. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/sentry-stored-pressure-fire-extinguishers/sentry_stored_pressure_dry_chemical_extinguisher_fsp/sentry-stored-pressure-dry-chemical-extinguisher
  25. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/sentry-stored-pressure-fire-extinguishers/sentry_stored_pressure_carbon_dioxide_extinguisher_fsp/sentry-stored-pressure-carbon-dioxide-extinguisher
  26. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/sentry-stored-pressure-fire-extinguishers
  27. https://redasafe.com/kw_en/ansul-sentryr-cd10-2-10-442410
  28. https://docs.johnsoncontrols.com/specialhazards/api/khub/documents/ea_J73r1bnktPaSj1V1WiQ/content
  29. https://docs.johnsoncontrols.com/specialhazards/api/khub/documents/lHdZCq02RRKfXEjfHRtKqA/content
  30. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/cartridge-operated
  31. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/wheeled-fire-extinguisher-units
  32. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/wheeled-fire-extinguisher-units/redline_wheeled_units_fsp/redline-wheeled-units
  33. https://www.nationalfire.com/media/product_files/Red_Line_Wheeled_Unit_-_0623_TonQFRE.pdf
  34. https://docs.johnsoncontrols.com/specialhazards/api/khub/documents/gjLtNCkTEBNf2iGZvbVjbw/content
  35. https://sos-safety.com/shop/ansul-handline-nozzles-and-eductors/
  36. https://www.ansul.com/foam-concentrates-and-equipment/discharge-devices/handline_nozzles_fsp/handline-nozzles
  37. https://www.ansul.com/foam-concentrates-and-equipment/portable-mobile-fire-suppression/mobile_equipment_fsp/mobile-equipment
  38. https://swartzfireandsafety.com/ansul-wheeled-units
  39. https://www.ny-engineers.com/mep-engineering-services/fire-protection-services/ansul-system-design
  40. https://www.ansul.com/vehicle-fire-protection-systems/a-101-fire-suppression-system
  41. https://www.ansul.com/vehicle-fire-protection-systems/liquid-vehicle-fire-suppression-system/liquid_vehicle_system_lvs_fsp/liquid-vehicle-suppression-system-lvs
  42. https://www.ansul.com/industry/mining-fire-suppression-systems
  43. https://www.bfpe.com/ansul-industrial-vehicle-fire-suppression-system/
  44. https://www.tycofpp.com/ansul-vehicle-systems
  45. https://www.ansul.com/vehicle-fire-protection-systems/fire-detection-and-actuation-system
  46. https://www.monroeextinguisher.com/ansul-vehicle-fire-suppression-systems/
  47. https://www.abcfireandsafety.com/product-p/ans-a101vehiclesuppression.htm
  48. https://www.johnsoncontrols.com/media-center/news/press-releases/2021/05/05/ansul-lvs-non-fluorinated-liquid-suppression-agent
  49. https://www.heavyquipmag.com/2025/05/19/johnson-controls-unveils-ansul-fire-suppression-systems-for-mining-vehicles/
  50. https://www.ansul.com/vehicle-fire-protection-systems/vehicle-fire-suppression-systems
  51. https://donerighthfs.com/ansul-fire-suppression-systems-in-nyc-fdny-nfpa/
  52. https://www.ansul.com/restaurant-systems/r-102-restaurant-fire-suppression-system/r102_restaurant_fire_suppression_system_fsp/r-102-restaurant-fire-suppression-system
  53. https://www.specansul.com/uploads/media/R-102_DS.pdf
  54. https://www.captiveaire.com/manuals/fire-systems/r-102-manual.pdf
  55. https://firesystemsproducts.com.au/ansul-a-pc-fusible-links-360-degree-fahrenheit-182-degree-celsius-10-package-439230.html
  56. https://www.ansul.com/restaurant-systems/r-102-restaurant-fire-suppression-system
  57. https://www.ansul.com/restaurant-systems/piranha-dual-agent-restaurant-fire-suppression-system/piranha_dual_agent_restaurant_fire_suppression_system_fsp/piranha-dual-agent-restaurant-fire-suppresion-system
  58. https://northlandfire.com/fire-protection/restaurant-fire-suppression/
  59. https://nationalfiresupply.com/product/55601/
  60. https://www.monroeextinguisher.com/ansul-i-101-industrial-fire-suppression-systems/
  61. https://www.orrprotection.com/hubfs/Orrprotection_Docs_Feb2016/I-101_Industrial_Fire_Suppression_System.pdf
  62. https://www.azomining.com/equipment-details.aspx?EquipID=251
  63. https://sos-safety.com/shop/i-101-industrial-fire-suppression-system/
  64. https://www.actionfire.ie/a101.pdf
  65. https://www.firesafetysupply.net/articles/ansul-fire-suppression-systems/
  66. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/halocarbon-fire-suppression-systems/sapphire_25_bar_system_fsp/sapphire-25-bar-system
  67. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/inert-gas-fire-suppression-systems
  68. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/halocarbon-fire-suppression-systems/sapphire_plus_70_bar_system_fsp/sapphire-plus-70-bar-system
  69. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/inert-gas-fire-suppression-systems/inergen_200_bar_system_fsp/inergen-200-bar-system
  70. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/inert-gas-fire-suppression-systems/inergen_150_bar_system_fsp/inergen-150-bar-system
  71. https://www.ansul.com/industry/datacenter-fire-protection-solutions
  72. https://www.ansul.com/vehicle-fire-protection-systems/n-101-system
  73. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/high-pressure-carbon-dioxide-system
  74. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/carbon-dioxide-fire-suppression-systems
  75. https://www.suppression.com/catalog/suppression/co2/ansul-carbon-dioxide-fire-suppression-systems-co2-ansul-innovative-fire-solutions
  76. https://docs.johnsoncontrols.com/specialhazards/v/u/ANSUL/en-US/HIGH-PRESSURE-CARBON-DIOXIDE-SYSTEMS/5
  77. https://www.epa.gov/snap/carbon-dioxide-fire-suppressant-examining-risks
  78. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/low-pressure-carbon-dioxide-system
  79. https://www.orrprotection.com/suppression/inergen
  80. https://www.suppression.com/catalog/suppression/clean-agent-suppression/inert-agents/ansul-inergen-fire-suppression-systems-inergen-fire-suppression-systems
  81. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing
  82. https://sos-safety.com/shop/ansul-conventional-systems/
  83. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/autopulse-detection-and-control-system/autopulse_z10_conventional_agent_releasing_control_system_fsp/z-10-releasing-and-control-system
  84. https://www.suppression.com/catalog/detection/heat/ansul-rate-compensated-thermal-detectors
  85. https://www.firesafetysupply.net/shop/ansul-013974-heat-detector-rate-compensated-450-f-vert/
  86. https://www.ebay.com/itm/335800398900
  87. https://sincoid.com/product/ansul/Agent_Releasing_Panels/051.pdf
  88. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/autopulse-detection-and-control-system
  89. https://www.brooksequipment.com/catalog/System%2520Parts/Ansul%2520System%2520Parts/
  90. https://www.firesafetysupply.net/ansul-r-102-nozzles/
  91. https://www.suppression.com/uploads/pdf/fire-alarm-detection-heat/ansul/vertical-rate-compensated-thermal-detector.pdf
  92. https://www.orsnasco.com/storefrontCommerce/itemDetail.do?item-id=182997&warehouse-id=17&item-number=850-53080-foray
  93. https://wormald.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Foray.pdf
  94. https://www.ansul.com/foam-concentrates-and-equipment/specialty-foams-and-agents/dry_chemical_agents_fsp/dry-chemical-agents
  95. https://content.greenheck.com/public/DAMProd/Original/10011/ansulrestaurantfiresuppressionsystems_f-8879_lit.pdf
  96. https://www.ttkfire.com/images/ttkfire/product/ansul/firefighting-foam/ANSUL_3AFFF.pdf
  97. https://www.ttkfire.com/images/ttkfire/product/ansul/firefighting-foam/ANSUL_3x6AR-AFFF.pdf
  98. https://docs.johnsoncontrols.com/specialhazards/api/khub/documents/1nbeVfynU1IW~eJcCOA0Bg/content
  99. https://www.johnsoncontrols.com/media-center/news/press-releases/2021/03/17/new-ansul-3x3-non-fluorinated-foam-concentrate
  100. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/spill-control-agent
  101. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/hazardous-spill-control-products
  102. https://www.grainger.com/product/ANSUL-Granular-Sorbent-Citric-and-9X280
  103. https://www.grainger.com/product/ANSUL-Granular-Sorbent-Magnesium-8AZN3
  104. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/spill-control-cases-and-kits/spill_control_cases_and_kits_fsp/spill-control-cases-kits
  105. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/spill-control-cases-and-kits
  106. https://www.johnsoncontrols.com/fire-suppression/hazardous-spill-control
  107. https://www.firesafetysupply.net/what-is-ansul/
  108. https://www.ffam.org/the-early-development-of-fire-extinguishers/
  109. https://genesisfireprotection.com/blog-post/the-history-of-fire-extinguishers/
  110. https://patents.google.com/patent/US2719590A/en
  111. https://www.northantsfire.co.uk/the-history-of-the-fire-extinguisher/
  112. https://www.johnsoncontrols.com/media-center/news/press-releases/2021/04/07/new-ansul-restaurant-electric-detection-technology
  113. https://www.foxvalleyfire.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ANSUL-RED-Product-Flyer.pdf
  114. https://ifpmag.com/new-ansul-3x3-non-fluorinated-foam-concentrate-for-class-b-fuel-fire-suppression/
  115. https://www.ansul.com/foam-concentrates-and-equipment/non-fluorinated-class-b-foams
  116. https://www.ansul.com/insights/faster-flame-detection-press-release
  117. https://www.epa.gov/hwcorrectiveactioncleanups/hazardous-waste-cleanup-ansul-inc-stanton-st-facility-marinette
  118. https://www.ansul.com/portable-fire-extinguishers-and-spill-control-products/sentry-fire-extinguishers
  119. https://sincoid.com/product/ansul/Foam_Concentrates/015-1.pdf
  120. https://www.ansul.com/find-a-distributor
  121. https://www.ansul.com/vehicle-fire-protection-systems
  122. https://www.ansulvip.com/
  123. https://www.tycofpp.com/ansul-fire-school
  124. https://www.onlinetechxchange.com/courses/portable-fire-extinguishers/americas/ansul-fire-school
  125. https://www.onlinetechxchange.com/courses/restaurant-systems/apac-me/ansul-r-102-restaurant-system
  126. https://www.onlinetechxchange.com/courses/restaurant-systems/americas/ansul-r-102-virtual-instructor-led-training-%28vilt%29
  127. https://www.ansul.com/restaurant-systems/r-102-restaurant-fire-suppression-system/
  128. https://www.captiveaire.com/Catalogcontent/firesuppression/r-102/doc/R-102_brochure.pdf
  129. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/halocarbon-fire-suppression-systems/
  130. https://www.ansul.com/industry/aviation-fire-protection
  131. https://firetron.com/fire-suppression-systems/best-fire-suppression-systems/
  132. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/top-dry-chemical-agent-companies-how-compare-them-frrkf/
  133. https://fcfire.ca/case-study-fire-suppression-upgrades-in-canadian-restaurants-reducing-fire-risk-and-improving-safety/
  134. https://www.ansul.com/industry/restaurant-fire-suppression-systems
  135. https://marlowekitchenfiresuppression.com/blog/ansul-fire-suppression-system/
  136. https://stagliuzza.com/news/history-and-development-of-firefighting-foams/
  137. https://www.ansul.com/foam-concentrates-and-equipment/afff-ar-afff-fluroprotein-foams
  138. https://www.zippia.com/ansul-careers-15021/
  139. https://www.zoominfo.com/pic/ansul-inc/3524095
  140. https://htfmarketinsights.com/report/1747755-fire-suppression-products-market
  141. https://www.volza.com/p/ansul/import/
  142. https://www.mining-technology.com/contractors/health-and-safety/ansul/
  143. https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2006/ansul-recalls-fire-extinguisher-that-could-fail-to-operate
  144. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ml0700/ml070030547.pdf
  145. https://www.calsafe.com/news/alerts/safety-notice-ansul-k-guard-k01-3/
  146. https://www.ansul.com/gaseous-suppression-agent-releasing/halocarbon-fire-suppression-systems
  147. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-07/documents/status.pdf
  148. https://www.specansul.com/test-fire-videos
  149. https://firesuppression.jci.com/ansul-r-102-restaurant-fire-suppression-system-nurture_6
  150. https://law.justia.com/cases/wisconsin/court-of-appeals/2012/2011ap002596.html
  151. https://trellis.law/case/45079/2022cp4005289/ansul-llc-plaintiff-et-al-vs-ace-american-insurance-company-defendant-et-al
  152. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/306/541/1794161/
  153. https://www.law360.com/ttab_cases/58d3f9f729821346d40000ba
  154. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8811722/
  155. https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2873-Transfer_Order-5-25.pdf
  156. https://www.scd.uscourts.gov/mdl-2873/index.asp
  157. https://www.pfaswatersettlement.com/
  158. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12014533/
  159. https://www.innovationnewsnetwork.com/why-the-pfas-causation-question-is-far-from-settled/60869/
  160. https://www.usfa.fema.gov/blog/firefighting-foams-pfas-vs-fluorine-free-foams/
  161. https://www.nfpa.org/news-blogs-and-articles/nfpa-journal/2022/07/22/the-new-foam
  162. https://www.ansul.com/foam-concentrates-and-equipment/non-fluorinated-class-b-foams/nonfluorinated_arsfff_fsp/non-fluorinated-ar-sfff-foam-agents
  163. https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2021/cnrc-nrc/NR24-49-2020-eng.pdf
  164. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD1201646.pdf
  165. https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/newsroom/release/40331
  166. https://www.johnsoncontrols.com/corporate-sustainability/sustainability
  167. https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/sites/default/files/topic/PFAS/jci/TycoChemDesign_AirPermitFAQ.pdf
  168. https://enviro.epa.gov/envirofacts/tri/form-r/dcn-details/1392065078281/1992
  169. https://www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program
  170. https://pfas-1.itrcweb.org/3-firefighting-foams/
  171. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969722013298
  172. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.6b00260
  173. https://www.belllegalgroup.com/a-timeline-of-afff-use-and-regulatory-developments/
  174. https://www.denix.osd.mil/cmrmp/denix-files/sites/14/2016/05/05_Chemical-Material-Emerging-Risk-Alert-for-AFFF.pdf
  175. https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-107322.pdf
  176. https://www.nfpa.org/news-blogs-and-articles/nfpa-journal/2025/08/08/new-generation-of-firefighting-foams
  177. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.4c03673
  178. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/833444/000083344421000011/R28.htm
  179. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/hac/pha/AnsulChemical/Ansul-TycoSafetyProductsHC051506.pdf
  180. https://www.epa.gov/great-lakes-aocs/lower-menominee-river-aoc-delisted
  181. https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/PFAS/Marinette.html
  182. https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/PFAS/Impacts.html
  183. https://www.fireapparatusmagazine.com/the-fire-station/the-station-news/tyco-fire-protection-products-celebrates-100-years/
  184. https://www.tfp1.com/blog/how-effective-are-fire-sprinkler-systems-with-stats-from-the-nfpa/
  185. https://www.tasbrmf.org/resources/insights/sprinkler-system-save-lives-property
  186. https://www.nfpa.org/education-and-research/research/nfpa-research/fire-statistical-reports/us-experience-with-sprinklers
  187. https://pfpinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/osfireloss.pdf
  188. https://nfsa.org/2023/05/31/economic-impact-of-fire-sprinklers/
  189. https://blog.koorsen.com/recent-studies-show-fire-sprinklers-save-lives-but-theres-still-room-for-improvement
  190. https://www.davisulmer.com/ansul-inergen-fire-suppression-systems/
  191. https://www.marsh.com/en/industries/energy-and-power/insights/burning-issue-preparing-changes-firefighting-foam-energy-industry.html
  192. https://inside.battelle.org/blog-details/6-top-afff-replacement-challenges-and-how-to-solve-them
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.