Indoor Fire Suppression Systems Role in Long-Term PFAS Exposure Risks

AFFF systems housed in factories and hangars may raise cancer risks by dispersing airborne PFAS chemicals

Wednesday, May 21, 2025 - Experts are looking at aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) in indoor fire suppression systems more closely as they consider if these systems might be causing long-term health hazards, particularly for maintenance and industrial personnel. Often placed in aircraft hangars, fuel stations, and other high-risk industrial sites as a quick-response solution for flammable liquid fires, AFFF--which comprises per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances--PFAS--has been routinely installed in Although its ability to put out flames is well-documented, what is now under issue is the degree to which PFAS from these systems linger in the air, on surfaces, and in confined locations, therefore raising exposure risk over time. Often working long hours inside large buildings, maintenance personnel can be especially vulnerable. Many AFFF cancer lawyers already deal with past and current workers who assert to have developed diseases perhaps related to ongoing PFAS exposure in these indoor conditions. A growing number of AFFF cancer lawsuits asserting that neither manufacturers nor employers advised of the possibility for chemical buildup and inhalation exposure inside buildings fitted with AFFF suppression systems now revolve around these claims.

One of the main problems is AFFF's behavior indoors once it's installed. Unlike outdoor applications, in which wind, rain, and sunlight can assist in diluting or breaking down chemical residues--AFFF used indoors usually leaves toxic particulates that can land on walls, machinery, tools, or even HVAC systems. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claims that PFAS compounds can persist in enclosed spaces for long periods of time and may re-aerosolize during cleaning, maintenance, or just human movement across the region. This means that residual PFAS contamination can still be an inhalation threat even in hangars or industrial facilities not subject to regular deep cleaning or air filter updates even if AFFF hasn't been lately used. Though thorough federal data is still being gathered, early studies detecting PFAS in indoor air and dust from establishments using AFFF have found levels sufficient to cause alarm. Growing knowledge makes it abundantly evident that long-term, low-level inhaled exposure could be just as harmful as direct foam contact. Workers in these settings sometimes show similar patterns of exposure: decades of employment, repeated maintenance chores close to foam-dispensing systems, and inadequate protective breathing equipment. Many AFFF cancer cases now contend that companies neglected to appropriately evaluate the hazards or offer sufficient safety instruction regarding airborne chemical risks.

Once considered just as a necessary safety precaution, what is now under review is a potential cause of a slow-developing health problem. There could be important consequences from this change. More focus is being paid to how fire suppression systems are built, maintained, and monitored as AFFF-related litigation grows--particularly in interior environments where PFAS can gather more readily. Calls for retrofitting current systems with cleaner substitutes free of fluorinated compounds are mounting. Routine PFAS air and dust testing in high-risk facilities might soon put pressure on regulatory bodies. The legal world is also starting to regard indoor PFAS exposure under the same weight as groundwater or soil contamination.

Information provided by AFFFLawsuitCenter.com, a website devoted to providing news about AFFF and PFAS cancer, lymphoma and leukaemia claims, including a free no-cost, no-obligation AFFF Lawsuit Claim.