Transport Canada was concerned about forever chemicals, known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), as far back as the 1980s, files obtained through an access-to-information request confirm.
Thousands of chemicals fall within the PFAS family, and some have been linked to liver and prostate cancer, pregnancy-induced hypertension, fatty liver disease and to affecting lipid function, which is linked to Type 2 diabetes.
For decades, Transport Canada — along with the Department of National Defence (DND) and the National Research Council of Canada — conducted firefighter training exercises at airports across Canada with aqueous film-forming foams that contain PFAS.
The foams were seen as an effective way to fight jet fuel fires, but their use at sites across the country contaminated groundwater with the forever chemicals.
(Curtis Hicks/CBC)
Alex Templeton, a partner with the McInnes Cooper law firm in St. John’s, is leading a propopsed class-action lawsuit over the contamination of drinking water wells located near several airports in Newfoundland. In order to proceed, the class action must be certified by a judge.
The class action’s lead plaintiffs are Eddie and Susan Sheerr, “homeowners who one day had Transport Canada knock on their door asking if they would consent to a well test being done,” Templeton told CBC News.
It turned out their wells were “significantly in exceedance” of new drinking water guidelines set by Health Canada that say the total sum of several types of PFAS should next exceed 30 nanograms per litre.
Transport Canada managed the firefighter training exercises at airports near the Newfoundland and Labrador towns of Torbay and Logy Bay–Middle Cove–Outer Cove where the contaminated wells were located.
Through access-to-information requests, Templeton obtained several Transport Canada documents, including a 1984 report that determined toxicity of the effluent at the firefighter training sites could be extremely high.
Surfactants, a catch-all term at the time for what are now known as PFAS, were identified as one of the most significant sources of pollution in that effluent.
“So while the firefighter training exercises were ongoing at airports across Canada, they were concerned about the environmental impacts of the effluent that was being produced by these exercises,” Templeton said.
“And Transport Canada had evidence, again, as far back as 1984 that while these firefighter training exercises could be useful, they also could result in effluents that were extremely high in toxicity.”
The 1984 report, a “Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment of Fire Fighting Training Area Effluents and Transport Canada Facilities,” concluded that typical “effluents may be toxic at concentrations as low as 88 ppm, and that surfactants and fuel residuals may be persistent.”
A 1990 report showed that Transport Canada had concerns at that time about the risk of contamination of groundwater from run-off at those firefighter training areas.
In 1986, Transport Canada stopped the firefighter training exercises at the airport in Timmins, Ont., because a report from an engineering firm discovered a large amount of groundwater pollution at that site.
The documents confirm Transport Canada put standards in place in 1979 to contain effluent at those sites through proper grading and barriers, such as clay or gravel.
But the documents also raised concerns over those standards as being outdated (by 1990) and how they did not address how winter conditions, with snow and ice, could impact run-off. The 1990 report also found 30 per cent of surveyed sites across Canada did not even meet the 1979 standards.
“The current AK standard for construction and design of FTAs [firefighter training areas] issues in 1979 is outdated and does not address today’s environmental concerns,” the report said.
The standards set in 1979 also didn’t address the treatment or disposal of the effluent from the firefighting foams.
In an email to CBC News, Transport Canada spokesperson Flavio Nienow said firefighting activities at airports were conducted in accordance with policies and environmental practices in place at that time.
“As Transport Canada became aware of the potential environmental impacts associated with these activities, training was consolidated at larger airports across the country, reducing the number of training sites over time,” the email said.
“PFAS was not known to be a contaminant at the time.”
Templeton responded by email that Transport Canada’s response runs counter to concerns raised in the 1984 and 1990 reports he obtained through access to information.
Concerns in North Bay
The reports have raised new concerns in North Bay, which is dealing with a $120-million clean-up effort to remediate a site at the airport and remove PFAS from the drinking water.
The firefighting foams seeped into the groundwater and made their way to Lees Creek, which flows to Trout Lake, the source of North Bay’s municipal drinking water.
The lake currently contains around 58 nanograms of PFAS per litre of water. While the amount is equivalent to only a few drops in an Olympic-sized swimming pool, it exceeds Health Canada’s drinking water guidelines of 30 nanograms per litre.
“Why was it not followed up on? Why was there not better communication between Transport Canada and National Defence?– Liza Vandermeer, North Bay resident
Ottawa-based law firm Mann Lawyers filed a proposed class-action lawsuit over PFAS contamination in North Bay.
The proposed class action alleges DND was aware in 2011 that PFAS levels in groundwater near the airport exceeded Health Canada drinking water guidelines at the time.
The North Bay Parry Sound Health District says DND informed it about groundwater monitoring at the airport in 2016.
The next year, the city posted an advisory urging people not to consume fish from Lees Creek.
CBC News asked DND if Transport Canada shared information from the 1984 and 1990 reports at the time, but did not receive a response.
Liza Vandermeer, a North Bay resident and former employee with Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment who responded to spills and cleaning contaminated sites, said she was appalled at the findings from the documents.
“They’d already identified this as a serious concern back in 1984,” she said.
“And why was it not followed up on? Why was there not better communication between Transport Canada and National Defence?”
