Posted on November 04th, 2019
Testing has shown that no foaming agent can equal the performance of AFFF for airport applications.
Historically, aircraft rescue and firefighting services were required to use aqueous film-forming foam containing PFAS compounds for extinguishing fires and for fire-training exercises and equipment testing and calibration. Although the aviation industry phased out the use of PFAS in the early 2000s due to the health concerns, that doesn't mean the problem has gone away.
Installations such as military bases, airports, fire stations, and refineries are potentially significant sources of PFAS contamination as a result of the use of AFFF to extinguish liquid hydrocarbon fires on these sites.
The Department of Defense used it at all aircraft hangars, airfields, and aircraft fueling stations. The FAA adopted the foam to fight fires at all commercial and military airports.
Products with PFAS are demonstrably superior for extinguishing petroleum fires on air force bases than previously used protein-based foams.
AFFF's chemical properties allow it to form a dense foam blanket that prevents oxygen from reaching the fire, making it highly effective at putting out hydrocarbon fuel fires such as oil, petroleum, and aviation fuels.
AFFF produces a thin aqueous film based on surface tension which spreads across the surface of the fuel, separating the fuel from oxygen, which suppresses vapor and can quickly extinguish petroleum fires on air force bases.
Civil aviation is another user, for airport rescue and fire fighting vehicles as well as for the protection of aircraft hangars.
As the information on possible contamination with PFAS becomes more known, more commercial airports have detected levels of PFAS contamination on the ground near their facilities.
Many commercial airports share facilities with the U.S. military or are located at former military airbases. The Department of Defense has identified over 400 military sites with significant legacy PFAS concerns, many of them either at airbases or airports.
While PFAS can lead to cancer over time, many residents living near commercial and civilian airports must come to grips with the fact that they have been exposed to dangerous chemicals for decades.
The presence of PFAS identified in the soil around the following airports:
Last year, Congress passed legislation that will give commercial airports the option to switch to firefighting foams that do not include the highly toxic fluorinated chemicals. The measure would apply to 533 airports and aircraft companies in the U.S. and allow the airports to stop using foam containing those chemicals within two years of the law's passage.
A lot of commercial airports already switched to PFAS-free spurred on by the growing awareness of the potential threats fluorinated firefighting foam represents. However, this hardly eliminated the danger. In an extensive study conducted by a Washington-based activist organization, public and private wells around dozens of commercial airports tested a concentration of PFOS in excess of the minimum EPA safety guideline of 70 parts per trillion, with some reaching values as high as 13,700 ppt. The same sample, taken near Westchester County Airport, New York, contained a concentration of over 56,000 ppt for all PFAS chemicals.
Gaining a basic understanding of potential human health and economic impact from PFAS in the environment is the first great step in addressing these chemicals. Other important steps airports can take to address PFAS:
Unfortunately, there are many airports that have yet to address PFAS, or even ask whether or not they should address PFAS.
PFAS compounds pose environmental risks at airport sites that should not be ignored or minimized. To tackle it properly requires an understanding of the background and consequences, how airports are currently responding, and what guidance may be issued in the future. Environmental Litigation Group, P.C. is committed to remaining educated on the topic so that we can thoroughly address our clients' PFAS concerns.