Last month, the U.S. Department of Defense issued a new specification for fluorine-free foam (“F3”) that would replace the PFAS-containing AFFF (Aqueous Film-Forming Foam), still widely used by the U.S. military and airport firefighting crews. This is an important step in reducing or ending the use of AFFF, which continues to be used in select applications because it has no adequate replacement. The new specification limits PFAS content in the F3 foam to 1 part per billion. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has been working with the U.S. Navy to develop the new specification, and has advised that it will permit usage of F3 at facilities under its oversight once qualified products have been introduced.
PFAS: When Confronted With Potential Liability, Know Your History
Last month, on the heels of our trilogy of blogs related to the Impact of PFAS on Environmental Litigation (Virtual) Conference hosted by Perrin Conferences, TRG attended a subsequent PFAS webinar, which is the subject of this week’s blog.
“Do the Homework on Corporate History” was one of six key takeaway points from the Identification of PFAS Sites and Questions of Legal and Insurance Coverage webinar hosted by Perrin Conferences. The webinar cautioned that, while companies attempting to understand their liability often turn first to insurance archaeology, instead their initial step should be to fully understand their own corporate history and how they became liable in the first place. The webinar pointed out that sales, acquisitions, and mergers all may have affected liability, as well as any active insurance policies.
PFAS: Civilian Usage and Disposal
This week we continue our series of blogs reflecting on material covered in the “Impact of PFAS on Environmental Litigation (Virtual) Conference” hosted by Perrin Conferences by examining the growing focus on civilian usage and disposal of PFAS.
When certain PFAS chemicals first became cause for concern, it was the manufacturers of the chemicals themselves—firms such as DuPont and 3M—that were the focus of litigation. As focus broadened to end-users and disposers of chemicals that contained harmful PFAS, it was largely the military that came under scrutiny due to its widespread use of AFFF firefighting foam, as we described in last week’s blog. Today, however, there is also widespread focus on civil users, distributors, and disposers of PFAS-containing material, a point driven home by conference presenters.
PFAS: Military Usage Still a Major Concern
Last week we began our series of blogs reflecting on material covered in the Impact of PFAS on Environmental Litigation (Virtual) Conference hosted by Perrin Conferences, with a look at the federal government’s recent actions to address PFAS in the environment. This week, we’ll take another look at military sources of PFAS contamination. TRG has been a pioneer in researching historical usage and disposal of PFAS end-products such as AFFF during the last decade. In the coming years, we expect our research into AFFF and other PFAS and PFAS-containing chemicals to continue to grow, as our current and future clients in both government and the private sector seek out our in-depth knowledge of the relevant federal, state, and local records and our ability to provide detailed information relevant to their cases.
PFAS: Bold Actions by EPA Expected to Create New Liabilities
When it comes to PFAS contamination liability, be proactive. That was one of several important messages conveyed at the Impact of PFAS on Environmental Litigation (Virtual) Conference hosted by Perrin Conferences, which Taylor Research Group (TRG) recently attended. Readers familiar with TRG’s work will know that research into PFAS end-product usage and disposal has been one of our specialties for many years now. Yet within environmental law these chemicals—the best known and most infamous being PFOS and PFOA*—have existed in a sort of limbo.