The Hidden PFAS Hazard Inside Public Safety Training Environments

Awareness of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) has accelerated rapidly across the public safety community, and for good reason. Research from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) shows that firefighters face 9% higher cancer diagnoses and 14% higher cancer-related mortality than the general population. PFAS exposure is a significant contributor: studies from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the University of Notre Dame have confirmed measurable PFAS concentrations in turnout gear, dust and fire station environments.

Most conversations about PFAS understandably center on where responders spend the bulk of their time — stations, apparatus bays and PPE. Yet one of the most consequential exposure sources often sits right in the background: the training environment. These campuses aren’t only places where responders learn skills; they’re immersive ecosystems where repeated burns, equipment wear and decades of legacy practices can quietly accumulate PFAS in ways that facilities may not fully recognize. Because public safety training centers that serve fire, law enforcement and EMS frequently operate like small cities, they absorb thousands of training hours annually, moving a steady stream of students, staff and equipment through their spaces. Over time, these activities leave a footprint.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, PFAS compounds are both highly persistent and highly mobile, migrating through soil and stormwater at rates much faster than previously understood. For campuses with long histories of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) use or unlined burn pits, this creates a perfect storm: contaminated soils, compromised drainage systems and aging structures that continue to shed PFAS particles long after the original training exercises have ended. As agencies modernize these training hubs — rebuilding facilities, replacing props, upgrading gear programs and rethinking curriculum — PFAS mitigation needs to be more than a compliance checkbox. Instead, it should be foundational to planning, design and long-term operations, ensuring that the places built to prepare and protect responders don’t inadvertently expose them to additional risk.

Turnout Gear: When Protection Becomes a Pathway

Turnout gear remains one of the primary exposure pathways because the materials designed to protect firefighters also contain PFAS-based treatments and moisture barriers. NIST testing revealed the presence of more than 20 PFAS compounds across the inner, middle and outer layers of firefighter ensembles. These compounds are intentionally added as durable water-repellent (DWR) treatments and moisture barriers, but the durability that makes them effective on the fireground also makes them persistent in the environment. And they don’t stay put. Heat, abrasion, laundering and UV exposure accelerate material breakdown, releasing PFAS-containing particles into the surrounding environment. Thus, what begins as a protective layer can become a steady source of contamination in apparatus bays, gear rooms and training structures.

A 2022 study published in Environmental Science & Technology Letters detected PFAS-containing dust throughout fire stations, underscoring how easily these particles migrate. Training environments intensify this effect: recruits stress-test gear daily, and multi-agency academies mix older PFAS-treated gear with newer PFAS-free systems, increasing the risk of cross-contamination.

As manufacturers advance PFAS-free turnout gear and NFPA 1971/1970 standards advance, training centers will need to plan for systems that support safe handling and decontamination, including:

• Clean/dirty zoning

• Labeled and separated storage for PFAS vs. PFAS-free gear

• Controlled wash/dry facilities with proper exhaust

• Decontamination workflows that reduce cross-contamination

When these design and operational strategies align, they help prevent PFAS from becoming an unwanted “bonus layer” in training environments, protecting not just the gear but the people who depend on it.

Foam, Extinguishers and Legacy Contamination: Yesterday’s Agents, Today’s Liability

While turnout gear represents an ongoing, personal exposure pathway for individual responders, the materials used around them, particularly historical firefighting foams, introduce a much broader facility-wide challenge. If turnout gear is the “mobile” source of PFAS in training environments, then AFFF and other legacy suppression agents are often the “anchored” ones, quietly lingering in soils, infrastructure and props long after their last use.

PFAS contamination from AFFF use is entrenched: a 2023 Department of Defense report identified more than 700 affected training sites. And those impacts aren’t confined to the places where foam was applied. PFAS can persist for decades, moving through unlined pits, stormwater channels and groundwater systems, meaning contamination often extends beyond the original training areas.

Beyond foam pits or burn pads, many campuses unknowingly house additional PFAS sources, including:

• Legacy Class B foam extinguishers containing PFAS

• Fuel spill props historically used with AFFF

• Buried piping or storage tanks contaminated with PFAS residuals

The good news is that today’s PFAS-free alternatives, including fluorine-free foams (F3), PFAS-free wetting agents and water-mist technologies, can support many training scenarios without contributing to contamination. While the full efficacy of many of these alternatives is still being studied, research indicates these new materials can be effective in extinguishing liquid fuel fires under the right conditions, without the environmental and health risks associated with PFAS-based agents. Transitioning to safer suppression tools, however, requires a phased, strategic approach:

• Conducting a full inventory of extinguishers, foams and storage tanks

• Removing PFAS-containing suppression agents wherever possible

• Limiting foam use to lined, controlled environments

• Transitioning to F3 foams, PFAS-free wetting agents or water-mist systems

Taken together, these steps significantly reduce environmental liability while preserving training quality. By addressing legacy contamination head-on, agencies can ensure the next generation of responders learn in environments designed to protect both immediate safety and long-term health.

A Practical, Research-Backed Roadmap for PFAS Reduction

Guidance from UL’s Fire Safety Research Institute (FSRI) has helped the fire service adopt a clear hierarchy for exposure reduction, a structure that adapts well to PFAS mitigation:

1. Eliminate the Hazard. Phase out PFAS-based foams and extinguishers and remediate contaminated soils or drainage channels.

2. Substitute Safer Alternatives. Adopt fluorine-free foams and PFAS-free gear and integrate simulation technologies to reduce live-burn reliance.

3. Apply Engineering Controls. Use lined burn pads, sealed drainage systems, PFAS filtration and dedicated wash/dry spaces to contain contaminants.

4. Strengthen Administrative Practices. Standardize decontamination routines, handling protocols and environmental monitoring.

5. Use PPE as the Final Layer. Rely on particulate-blocking hoods, respiratory protection and NFPA-aligned laundering as a last line of defense.

Together, these tiers create a practical roadmap for reducing exposure without compromising training quality, and they position agencies to make measurable progress even as PFAS regulations and product technologies continue to evolve.

Building the Next Generation of Safe Training Facilities

Public safety training centers are mission-critical infrastructure — the environments where responders build skills, resilience and readiness for the realities of the field. Yet these same spaces often represent some of the most complex PFAS challenges in the public sector. Legacy materials, outdated suppression agents and decades of high-intensity use have created conditions that require thoughtful, forward-looking design solutions. Addressing PFAS isn’t simply a matter of compliance; it’s an opportunity to rethink what a training campus can and should be.

Design plays a pivotal role in that shift. When PFAS mitigation becomes a core design and operational priority, the conversation moves from “Can we fix this?” to “How do we build a system that protects responders for the next 30 years?” That starts with understanding how soils, drainage systems, ventilation, gear flow, building materials and training props interact — and how smart planning can help isolate, manage or eliminate PFAS before it reaches people or the environment.

In our work, we collaborate with clients to identify the pressure points where PFAS exposure can be reduced through design. This often includes questions such as:

• How does gear move across campus? Mapping circulation early helps locate clean/dirty boundaries, design appropriate storage and avoid cross-contamination between PFAS and PFAS-free ensembles.

• Where does training runoff go, and how should it be managed? Designing stormwater systems that include lined burn pads, controlled collection basins or filtration technologies can prevent contaminants from migrating off-site.

• What materials are specified inside training buildings? Selecting PFAS-free finishes, sealants and coatings support healthier interiors while aligning with evolving sustainability goals.

• How can building systems support safer practice? Ventilation strategies, negative-pressure gear rooms, compartmentalized mechanical zones and durable wash/dry facilities can significantly limit the spread of airborne and particulate PFAS.

• Where can simulation reduce PFAS reliance? Integrating digital props, simulated smoke and AR/VR labs eases the demand for repeated live-burn evolutions, improving safety without diminishing instructional value.

These conversations, combined with a clear understanding of how each campus operates, enable us to design facilities that actively support PFAS reduction goals rather than simply react to them. Effective mitigation occurs when planning and design align with the training culture, operational realities and the day-to-day demands of emergency response. When communities integrate research-informed best practices into that process, they gain a structured approach to decision-making—one that ensures every investment, from replacing a prop to reconstructing a burn pad, contributes to long-term health, operational efficiency and environmental stewardship.

Designing safer, more resilient training environments begins with understanding how responders actually utilize these spaces and where PFAS risks can be mitigated through improved planning and smarter systems. At RDG Planning & Design, we collaborate with public safety agencies to translate that insight into facilities that enhance performance, promote wellness and adapt to the evolving demands of the profession. Through thoughtful collaboration and purposeful design, we can create environments built not only for readiness and realism, but for the protection of the people who protect all of us.