We have helped to secure more than $80 billion in jury verdicts and settlements since 1955.
For years, airports worldwide were required to use aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) for fire suppression. AFFF is effective in fighting fires but contains PFAS, chemicals now known for their persistence in the environment and potential health risks. Unfortunately, standard fire response protocols and training led to widespread PFAS contamination in soil and water, causing major environmental issues.
With the EPA’s new PFAS regulations, these chemicals are now a significant concern for many airports.
Airports, which were required to use AFFF in their fire suppression systems without knowing the detrimental effects of this use, should not be held accountable for the costs of clean-up and transition to another, safer foam solution.
Our law firm is investigating these matters on behalf of airports. With our strong results in environmental litigation related to PFAS removal in water supplies, we have the knowledge and experience to help your airport navigate this complex situation.
If you would like to talk to our environmental lawyers about your airport’s PFAS AFFF clean-up, call us today for a free, no-obligation case evaluation. Call (800) 277-1193 or complete a short Free Evaluation Form.
Our law firm is part of a consortium of firms who are truly the leaders in this field. We are the only team to have taken numerous PFAS cases to verdict and won. Our team includes Rob Bilott, the lawyer largely responsible for unearthing the very existence of these chemicals from Dupont and 3M’s confidential company files; Mike London who serves as Co-lead counsel in the AFFF MDL; and Wes Bowden who served as co-lead trial counsel in the first and only AFFF MDL bellwether set for trial.
Several airports have reported severe PFAS contamination linked to the use of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF). Notable cases include:
August 2024 Updates About PFAS at Airports
U.S. Air Force: The U.S. Air Force said it doesn’t have to follow a May order from the EPA to reduce “forever chemicals” in Tucson, Arizona’s drinking water. The EPA wanted the Air Force to build a system to treat high levels of PFAS, harmful chemicals linked to health problems, which would cost around $25 million. The EPA warned that not following the order could lead to a fine of nearly $30,000 a day and possible lawsuits from citizens.
Brunswick Executive Airport, Maine: The Maine Department of Environmental Protection announced an accidental release of 1,450 gallons of AFFF at the Brunswick Executive Airport. The release led to significant PFAS contamination. Initial tests found extremely high levels of PFOS, a type of PFAS, in the foam and nearby water bodies.
May 2024 Updates About PFAS at Airports
FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 – President Joe Biden signed the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, bringing in new regulations for airports. A significant change is Section 767, which establishes a program to assist airports in replacing firefighting foams that contain dangerous PFAS chemicals.
2023 Updates About PFAS at Airports
November 2023 – O’Hare and Midway Airports, Chicago: The Chicago Sun-Times revealed that AFFF chemicals had leached into the groundwater beneath these airports, which were once military sites. The report highlighted that “tens of thousands of gallons of the foam” had been stored at both airports for decades. During this time, AFFF was used in both fire suppression systems and training exercises.
September 2023 – Gerald R. Ford International Airport Authority: The Michigan PFAS Action Response Team reported that the state of Michigan filed a lawsuit against the Gerald R. Ford International Airport for PFAS contamination. The lawsuit claims that the PFAS chemicals have polluted wells and streams around the airport, posing risks to public health and safety in Grand Rapids and West Michigan. The State of Michigan is asking the court to order actions that stop the contamination (known as injunctive relief). The lawsuit also aims to recover past and future cleanup and monitoring costs, and compensation for the damage done to natural resources, according to the attorney general’s office.
August 2023 – Military Sites: The Environmental Working Group (EWG) reported that 455 military sites, including various airports, have confirmed PFAS contamination. This is due to AFFF use in emergency responses and training exercises.
2021 Updates About PFAS at Airports
September 2021 – Nantucket Memorial Airport: Nantucket Memorial Airport, which had been bearing the cost of cleaning up drinking water contaminated by PFAS in firefighting foam, filed a lawsuit against several major global companies that made and sold these products. The airport had already spent over $5 million on PFAS-related expenses. The lawsuit listed numerous defendants, including 3M, DuPont, Chemguard Inc., Tyco, and others.
The national AFFF/PFAS litigation has thus far been focused on “receptors.” This would include:
Most likely, the next focus of the litigation will be on “sources.”
A source is any physical property where AFFF was used and now suffers from PFAS contamination. Quite likely, this includes every place where Class B AFFF was used on more than one occasion. Because there are so few events that require Class B foam, the vast majority of these source locations are areas that used AFFF in training. This includes fire stations, fire training facilities, and/or airports.
The EPA recently set new rules for PFAS in drinking water, requiring municipal water systems to remove six PFAS chemicals. This change, announced on April 10, 2024, goes beyond the old advisory levels.
These new EPA rules do not directly affect airports unless they also supply public drinking water. The problem arises when local water systems find PFAS levels above the new limits. In these cases, the providers will look for sources of contamination, and airports could be a primary focus. AFFF releases at airports are a major PFAS concern for two reasons:
Additionally, in April 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declared two common PFAS chemicals as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
CERCLA, also called Superfund, establishes a federal fund to clean up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. It also addresses accidents, spills, and other emergency releases of pollutants and contaminants into the environment.
Because PFOS and PFOA are on the CERCLA list of hazardous substances, any “source” of PFAS is strictly liable to any other property owner who has PFAS travel to their property from a source property. The fact that no enforceable national standards currently exist with respect to PFAS in soil does not release sources from this liability.
This mix of circumstances could lead to airports being held responsible for PFAS contamination. In turn, airports could suffer an impact on their environmental programs, property deals, and construction projects.
The most effective means to avoid the liability for the cost associated with removing PFAS from property owners’ soil is remediation of the PFAS source areas.
Source area remediation is very expensive. By way of example, a small city in Florida trained with AFFF at two three-bay fire stations. PFAS remediation experts calculated that their source area remediation would cost in excess of $30 million.
Rather than taking on the financial burden of remediation alone, PFAS source property owners are filing claims against the manufacturers of Class B foam for failing to warn those who trained with AFFF with respect to the dangers hidden in the product as well as failing to provide proper instructions for safe use and disposal.
Airports are increasingly taking legal action to recover cleanup costs from chemical manufacturers responsible for PFAS contamination. Pursuing these lawsuits can help airports reduce future expenses and secure funding for cleanup efforts.
By using product liability laws, airports can hold companies accountable for the harmful effects of their products. Major PFAS producers like 3M and DuPont were aware of the environmental and health risks of their chemicals, and they are now facing numerous lawsuits.
Many airports, alongside property owners, water systems, and states, are joining multidistrict litigation (MDL) to address PFAS contamination. MDL helps manage these complex cases more effectively across multiple federal courts.
PFAS contamination has led to significant legal battles, offering a promising path for airports to recover cleanup costs. Communities, states, and municipalities have already sued PFAS manufacturers for negligence and failing to warn about the dangers of their products.
In June 2023, our law firm secured a landmark $12.5 billion settlement with 3M Co., a major defendant in the national Aqueous Film-Forming Foams (AFFF) litigation. This settlement will help cover costs for water testing, infrastructure upgrades, and maintenance to ensure safe drinking water. The agreement will provide funds over 13 years to address contamination issues nationwide.
Airports can use similar legal strategies to pursue compensation for PFAS cleanup and mitigate their financial burden.
PFAS in soil is a problem because when it rains, the water moves through the PFAS contaminated soil and carries the PFAS downgradient to other surrounding properties and groundwater.
PFAS are key components of film-forming foam (AFFF). This foam is used to fight fuel fires at airports and industrial sites. For years, airports have used AFFF with PFAS to protect passengers, crew, and staff.
The FAA requires commercial airports to use AFFF for training, equipment testing, and firefighting, ensuring it meets strict performance standards, including those set by the U.S. Department of Defense. PFAS give AFFF its ability to quickly smother fires by forming a thick foam layer that deprives the fire of oxygen, cools it down, and prevents reignition.
Some manufacturers add PFAS chemicals to AFFF to help put out fires caused by flammable liquids and gases. These fires ignite easily and spread quickly. Lightwater is the brand name for a type of AFFF, developed by 3M, that is used in firefighting to extinguish flammable liquid fires. Lightwater is one of the earliest AFFF formulations. It contains PFAS and was extensively used from the 1960s until 2002.
From the late 1960s until 2019, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) required certain PFAS in its AFFF specification. Since 2006, the FAA has required commercial airports to use AFFF that meets this military standard.
According to the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC), firefighting foams can enter the environment in several ways, including:
The FAA is working to phase out AFFF because of the health and environmental risks from PFAS chemicals. In December 2022, Congress directed the FAA to create a plan to switch to fluorine-free foam (F3) for aircraft firefighting.
The FAA is partnering with the Department of Defense and others to ensure a smooth transition to the safe F3 alternative.
In January 2023, the DoD released new military standards for F3 foams. Manufacturers can now submit their F3 products for certification. Once approved, these foams will be listed as acceptable for use in airport firefighting under FAA regulations.
Until the switch is complete, airports must keep using AFFF.
On January 6, 2024, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) updated its standards for F3. These new guidelines don’t specify approved formulas but encourage the development of foams that meet DOD requirements.
This is a key step toward using PFAS-free foams in both military and commercial aviation, including at airports required to follow the Navy’s MIL-SPEC standards.
On May 16, 2024, President Joe Biden signed the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 into law, introducing new rules for airports. One of the key updates is Section 767, which sets up a program to help airports replace firefighting foams that contain harmful PFAS chemicals.
In 2020, Congress asked the Department of Defense (DoD) to create safer, fluorine-free firefighting foams. The DoD released these new standards in January 2023, and by September 2023, they identified the first F3 foam that meets these standards. The FAA now allows airports to use this safer foam.
The new PFAS Replacement Program will help airports cover costs like:
Airports can also apply for grants up to $2 million to make the switch to safer foams.
The FAA has released a plan to guide airports in their transition from old, fluorinated foams to the new F3 foams, focusing on issuing guidelines and setting requirements.
Many airports still have old stockpiles of AFFF due to its long shelf life. Unfortunately, material safety data sheets (MSDS) don’t always clearly show if PFAS is in the foam. Older AFFF used PFOS, a type of PFAS, but after PFOS was phased out, other PFAS were used instead. So, even if a product says it’s PFOS-free, it might still contain PFAS.
PFAS chemicals don’t naturally break down, so contamination from AFFF spills that happened years ago can still be present. Some states and local governments now require airports to test soil and groundwater for PFAS. Others are starting voluntary testing programs to address potential contamination before it becomes a bigger issue.
By clicking the "I agree" and "Submit for Free Evaluation" buttons, I agree to the POLICIES AND DISCLAIMERS, including arbitration provision therein, and consent to receive marketing emails, calls and/or texts, including those made using an automated system and/or artificial/prerecorded voice messages, from or on behalf of Levin Papantonio regarding their services in response to my inquiry at the telephone number(s) provided above, even if currently listed on any state, federal or corporate Do Not Call registry. I understand my consent to receive automated marketing calls/texts is not required as a condition of purchasing any services. However, if I do not consent, then I must call the law firm directly at 800-277-1193 in order to obtain services. I can revoke my consent at any time.
Levin Law