Decades of AFFF exposure: What firefighters at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport should know about PFAS risks in training

Previously considered the ‘gold standard’ in firefighting foams, AFFF can suppress jet fuel flames rapidly. However, these firefighting foams contain toxic chemical compounds known as PFAS. Short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, they have been associated with environmental and health risks, including life-threatening ones. In 2010, the Minnesota State Government conducted a comprehensive review of all establishments and critical sites using AFFF, including MSP.

MSP’s history of heavy AFFF use for training firefighters

Before, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandated all military bases and airports to have AFFF as part of their precautionary and safety measures. Aside from emergencies such as aircraft crashes, this firefighting foam is also used in training exercises.

As early as the 1980s, firefighting training operations at Minneapolis–St. Paul International Airport involved the use of AFFF. After the drills, the effluent—including the AFFF—was frequently washed into holding ponds or the surrounding environment to reset the burn pit. However, these training activities created repeated opportunities for occupational exposure.

Until Minnesota imposed the ban on AFFF, which took effect on January 1, 2026, approximately 40 gallons of this foam were used annually for training purposes at Minnesota’s biggest airport alone. In high-use FTAs (firefighting training areas), such as MSP, drills often occur weekly.

The outcome of decades of AFFF reliance in Minnesota’s airports

What made PFAS both an ecological and health concern was its inability to break down easily, earning it the nickname ‘forever chemicals.’ In other words, it can persist in the environment and, once ingested, can even accumulate in the human body. 

Authorities in Minnesota ranked MSP as a ‘priority site’ when it comes to addressing PFAS contamination in the state. They discovered that water samples here exceeded safe levels, reaching up to 10,000 parts per trillion (ppt). For reference, the prevailing enforceable limits for PFOS and PFOA in drinking water are at 4 ppt only. PFOS and PFOA are two of the most commonly detected PFAS chemicals in AFFF.

These are just some of the findings that led the state government to enact laws and regulations prohibiting the use of AFFF in airports, which formed part of a broader effort to eliminate PFAS.

Minnesota-St. Paul International Airport firefighters face risks

Among other reasons, the ban on AFFF in Minnesota aims to protect future firefighters from the harm linked to routine PFAS exposure. The state currently employs approximately 21,000 firefighters across 722 fire departments, making it one of the largest in the entire country.

However, many firefighters have already been exposed to the toxic PFAS. Some may not even be aware of it. In fact, studies have shown that compared to the general public, firefighters face greater risks of getting diagnosed with health conditions due to occupational exposure to toxic fumes and chemicals, including PFAS found in AFFF.

For firefighters and their families who have been suffering from health consequences tied to routine exposure to PFAS, it is important to get both medical and legal help.

Take the next steps with the help of ELG Law's AFFF attorneys

Firefighters in Minnesota, including those assigned to MSP, can seek compensation for the harm caused by PFAS by filing AFFF exposure claims. Our team of lawyers at ELG Law is ready to assist you every step of the way. Contact us today to learn how to get started.