Tainted Soil May Be Used For Public Works Projects Close to Firefighting Foam Sites
Repurposed soil from AFFF-contaminated sites could disseminate PFAS into parks, highways, and schools, therefore compromising public health over the long term
Thursday, May 22, 2025 - A new environmental hazard has emerged as worries over PFAS contamination from aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) mount: the use of tainted soil from old firefighting foam sites in public infrastructure projects. Sometimes unintentionally, soil from training grounds, airfields, or industrial areas where AFFF was extensively employed is being relocated and used in surrounding building across numerous communities. Often high in PFAS compounds, this soil is finding its way to sites including recreational parks, schoolyards, and road embankments. PFAS can contain local groundwater or cause long-term surface pollution since they are water-soluble and do not break down readily. Environmental health professionals are now alarmed about what was meant to be a cost-saving reuse of fill material, particularly as more testing shows the degree of residual PFAS in these reused soils. A few community members and advocacy groups have started looking into legal possibilities, including action involving an AFFF cancer attorney. The function of AFFF in public works construction is under review as more AFFF lawsuits alleging exposure hazards from contaminated sites are launched. Particularly in areas with a long history of foam-based firefighting action, the growing focus on where this dirt ends up has put municipalities and contractors on notice.
Poor control, inadequate testing procedures, or ignorance of the past of a site with AFFF often lead to the reusing of contaminated soil. Unless specific hazardous indicators are discovered, most of the time whenever a site is decommissioned or cleared for redevelopment, residual soil is deemed fit for relocation. However, without focused chemical testing, PFAS contamination is typically undetectable and inconspicuous, so it can pass through legal gaps. Environmental evaluations point to evidence of PFAS-laced soil already present in several municipal projects, raising questions among citizens and environmental health experts. These substances increase the risk notably for young children who are more sensitive to chemical exposure since they are close to playgrounds or community gardens. Particularly considering its possible connection to immunological dysfunction, thyroid problems, and certain malignancies, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) has recognized PFAS as an "emerging contaminant of concern." While no federal control now forbids the reuse of soil containing PFAS, some states have started developing screening criteria and providing direction for public building projects. These rules differ greatly from one jurisdiction to another and are sometimes non-binding, though. Public confidence is declining meanwhile when people learn that poisonous earth could be used for community infrastructure development. Some neighbors of recently constructed sites are advocating public disclosure of where recycled fill material has come from as well as testing and cleanup. Legal teams engaged in AFFF cancer litigation are intently observing these developments, noting the extension of liability from firefighting organizations to contractors and local governments.
In environmental policy and litigation, the handling and transportation of soil from recognized AFFF sites will probably take the front stage in the future. Public awareness rises will put more pressure on regulatory bodies to compel pre-transfer testing for all materials coming from previously contaminated sites and set enforceable limits for PFAS in reused soils. While developers and public works agencies may have to reassess procurement practices, municipalities could be obliged to keep more thorough records of soil provenance.
OnderLaw, LLC and The Overholt Law Firm, PC -