Suit Charges AFFF Foam Use Violation of EPA Hazardous Waste Disposal Guidelines
A new legal dispute calls into doubt whether agencies utilizing AFFF foam disregarded appropriate hazardous waste disposal rules established by environmental authorities
Tuesday, April 8, 2025 - Growing numbers of firefighting foam lawsuits are starting to center on how military facilities, industrial locations, and fire departments handled firefighting foam using PFAS chemicals. The main question in one recent lawsuit is whether AFFF use and disposal broke EPA guidelines pertaining to hazardous waste. Used for decades in high-risk fire settings, the foam includes persistent chemicals that might leak into soil and water. Now found in everything from drinking water to fish and human blood, these compounds don't break down readily. The plaintiffs assert that AFFF's ongoing use and inadequate disposal practices might have violated federal rules requiring rigorous treatment of drugs posing long-term environmental hazards. These cases contend that communities and workers were not given adequate information about the hazards, much as a firefighting foam cancer lawsuit based on failure to warn and harm from continuous exposure. These claims are also casting accusations at agencies and contractors who allegedly disregarded obvious signs and obligations, much as an AFFF lawyer may contend corporate negligence.
According to the claims, some agencies and facilities left extra foam in unsealed storage for years or dumped it into drains where it would leak into the environment. Depending on the classification of the foam, AFFF was occasionally burned or buried, actions that would have violated hazardous waste laws. Lawyers contend that even if AFFF wasn't marked as dangerous upon disposal, its acknowledged hazards should have encouraged more care. The lawsuits now under focus in this grey area of control are related Along with medical monitoring and cleanup expenses, plaintiffs are seeking responsibility--claiming agencies either knew about or disregarded safer options and disposal practices. Those being sued might respond that they followed the best standards at the time and lacked sufficient direction on the relative risk associated with PFAS compounds. The claims contend, however, that research and internal records going back years revealed mounting worry about these drugs. Should courts decide that AFFF should have been managed as a hazardous waste all along, it might affect the control of next materials and result in major fines or compensation for impacted areas. This lawsuit fits within a greater trend of environmental justice movements whereby long-term chemical exposure is being linked to political or business failures. Whether or whether it works, there is already increasing focus on how chemicals are disposed of once they are no longer in use and who should be accountable for that process failure.
By incorrectly disposing of the chemical-laced product, agencies using AFFF firefighting foam allegedly broke EPA hazardous waste regulations. The lawsuit raises issues about inadequate warnings, bad storage methods, and PFAS exposure. Like the approach used in other lawsuits, the case's claim revolves around negligence and the neglect of recognized hazards' protection of individuals. Should the lawsuit be successful, it might affect future management of hazardous substances and make companies responsible for health effects connected to antiquated firefighting strategies as well as for cleanup.
OnderLaw, LLC and The Overholt Law Firm, PC -