[Peetwo]

Contamination of Australia's Defence Force facilities and other Commonwealth, state and territory sites in Australia.
On 30 November 2015, the Senate referred the following matter to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and report:-

Contamination of Australian Defence Force facilities (Part A) reporting by 4 February 2016, and contamination of other sites using firefighting foams (Part B) reporting by 30 April 2016.

Murky's mob drawn into Defence Inquiry - It was inevitable that the PFOS, PFOA contaminate issue (Part B) would eventually require a response from both Airservices & the Department of Infrastructure & Regional development:

111

Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (PDF 147 KB)  Attachment 1 (PDF 751 KB)  Attachment 2 (PDF 982 KB)  &..

113 - Airservices Australia (PDF 1426 KB) 

To begin it is extremely encouraging that the Dept & ASA have very much been on the front foot with this matter (PFOS/PFOA contamination), basically ever since it was first brought to their attention back in 2003. However there would have to be some serious concerns about where potential contamination has been identified...

Extracts from ASA submission:

..From the early 1980s until the early 2000s, a fire fighting foam called 3M Lightwater was used. This product contained perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) as an active ingredient and other PFCs such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). Following increasing concerns about the possible environmental and health impacts of PFOS, in 2003 Airservices changed to another approved fire fighting foam called Ansulite that was understood to not contain PFOS or PFOA. It was later found to contain trace amounts of both of these chemicals. In 2010, Airservices transitioned to a PFC free foam, Solberg RF6, at all airports where Airservices provides ARFF services with the exception of the joint civil/military airports of Darwin and Townsville1.

Airservices initiated investigations which have identified 56 sites where rescue fire fighting services at airports were provided and:

• at 20 sites, aqueous film forming foams (AFFFs) have not been used (although there may have been some extremely low levels of residues in equipment or materials transferred from other locations); and

• 36 sites (both Current and Historical Sites) have, or are suspected of having, PFC residues as a result of AFFF use (further details are provided at Appendix D).

Key actions taken include:

• Since 2009, Airservices has worked with Commonwealth, State and Territory health and environment experts, regulators, policy agencies, airport owners and operators, and research institutions to inform development of appropriate national standards and guidelines including screening levels for soil and water. This work is ongoing.

• In 2010, Airservices engaged an expert to undertake a voluntary health study on ARFF staff’s exposure to PFCs.

• Airservices has undertaken soil, surface water and groundwater sampling at current fire training grounds where PFCs were used between the 1980s and 2003.

• Airservices is undertaking risk assessments of airport sites where fire fighting foams containing PFCs have been used to determine if any migration of PFC residues from fire stations and training grounds has occurred which may have impacted beneficial users. Further site testing may commence following the outcomes of the risk assessment and will be based on a range of factors developed in consultation with regulators and experts.

• Airservices is undertaking a number of research and development activities to better characterise and develop solutions to the PFC issue as it applies to our sites.

In 2014, Airservices and the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (DIRD) engaged GHD Pty Ltd to develop a risk-based framework, ‘Managing PFC Contamination at Airports’, to guide decision-making when dealing with contamination issues on airport sites. The framework was finalised in June 2015.

o GHD reviewed international screening levels and other guidance to develop screening levels that could be used in this management framework. Airservices has adopted this framework in its operations nationally.

o The framework has been provided by Airservices to DIRD, and it has subsequently been distributed to the airport lessee companies and DIRD’s Airport Environment Officers as well as the Department of the Environment and the Department of Health. The draft interim framework and screening levels have no regulatory authority.

Airservices will continue to take a proactive approach to managing risks as a result of past use of fire fighting foams that contained PFCs and, for this purpose, is continuing engagement with regulators to assist in the identification and development of practicable responses.

Remember that due to their design these chemicals do not easily breakdown over time &  can leave a residue in soil, water & underground for many, many years. In some airport sites, like for example Port Hedland, this may not pose much of a risk to the general public but highly built up areas, next to a river & on a floodplain, like Bankstown must be giving Murky & Co a few sleepless nights...      

In an update to the Senate Inquiry part (B) above, it seems highly likely that the reporting date (11 May 2016) will now not occur due to the DD election. That doesn't mean the inquiry will also be dissolved, it just means it will delayed till the next Parliament.

At a State level today (that is somewhat coincidental??) I note that the NSW EPA issued a media release:

EPA investigations into PFCs underway in Armidale and Tamworth

Media release: 3 May 2016

Following the announcement on 19 February 2016 of a state-wide investigation program into perfluorinated compounds (PFCs), the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) today confirmed testing for PFC contamination at the Armidale Fire and Rescue NSW (FRNSW) and Tamworth Regional Airport firefighting training sites.

Sampling undertaken at both of these sites earlier in the year showed the presence of PFCs in both soil and water.

NSW EPA Manager Hazardous Incidents, Andrew Mitchell, said the discovery of PFCs was not unexpected due to use of PFC containing firefighting foams at the sites in the past.

“The preliminary samples indicate that PFCs are present and that further investigation is warranted. This initial testing by the EPA is a precautionary approach to help us better understand the extent of PFC use and their possible presence in the local environment,” Mr Mitchell said.

“The EPA is now working with FRNSW, Armidale Dumaresq Council, Tamworth Regional Council and NSW Crown Lands to discuss the need for next steps and keeping residents and the local community informed of the investigation’s progress.”

PFCs are a group of chemicals that include perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). As these have water, grease and oil repelling properties, PFCs have been widely used in a range of industrial and consumer products both in Australia and internationally, including in fire retardants, water proofing, food preparation, food packaging, furnishings, clothing and recreational equipment.

Due to their wide-spread use over many decades, PFCs are commonly found in the environment at low levels and their presence does not necessarily indicate a risk to human health.

“PFCs are emerging contaminants and the environmental and health impacts are not yet determined. The EPA investigations are an important step towards identifying and managing PFCs in the environment.”  

For more information about the state-wide investigation program and/or PFCs, visit www.epa.nsw.gov.au/MediaInformation/pfcinvestigation.htm or call the Environment Line on 131 555.  

Contact: EPA Public Affairs
Page last updated: 03 May 2016

Back to the inquiry, I note that Keith Campbell (Bankstown fame) has recently made a submission - 126 Mr Keith Campbell    -  (PDF 13220 KB) :



MTF...P2