The short version
- Barrels containing PFAS-laden firefighting foam have been removed from the Islip Fuel Depot in Oxfordshire following discovery by local campaigners.
- The developer asserts that professional testing shows contamination levels are minimal and well within safety limits, contradicting activist findings.
- Independent verification of the conflicting soil test results has not yet been provided to news organizations, leaving the extent of pollution uncertain.
Barrels containing firefighting foam liquid have been removed from a former fuel storage facility in Oxfordshire, resolving an immediate concern about potential chemical contamination at a site approved for residential development. The Islip Fuel Depot, which previously served as a storage and transfer point for the Royal Air Force and Esso, is now slated to become a housing estate with half of the units designated as affordable homes. The removal follows the discovery by local campaigners of approximately forty barrels left on the grounds, raising alarms about the presence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS or forever chemicals.
The controversy centers on conflicting assessments of soil safety at the location. Activists from the Gallos Brook community group reported finding extremely high levels of contamination in samples taken near the storage area. Their analysis, conducted by a UKAS-certified laboratory, indicated PFAS concentrations of 3.74 micrograms per kilogram. Specifically, they found that levels of PFOS, a persistent chemical variant, were two hundred and five times higher than the safety threshold established for residential land use. The group described these findings as potentially representing the highest soil contamination measured anywhere in the United Kingdom.
In response, Newcore, the developer responsible for the site, stated that it had identified the potential risk during earlier assessments and acted promptly upon becoming aware of the barrels in recent weeks. Hugo Llewelyn, the company’s chief executive, emphasized that the containers were sealed and likely never deployed during the Ministry of Defence’s operations in the twentieth century. He argued that successive surveys confirmed no pathway existed for the chemicals to cause pollution. The developer claimed the removal was handled in a responsible and professional manner, aligning with plans to clean up any identified contamination immediately.
Llewelyn strongly disputed the methodology and results presented by the campaigners. He alleged that the activists had trespassed unlawfully to obtain samples from a secured area specifically designed to hold firefighting foam. According to Llewelyn, finding PFAS in such a designated storage zone was unsurprising. He presented alternative data from professional Phase 2 investigations, which reportedly showed total PFAS levels of just 0.0641 micrograms per kilogram in the same area. This figure represents a reduction of approximately ninety-eight percent compared to the activists’ findings and suggests the soil is far less contaminated than initially feared.
The discrepancy between the two sets of data remains unresolved due to a lack of independent verification. The BBC has not been provided with official laboratory results from either party that could be independently verified. This absence of third-party confirmation leaves the true extent of contamination at the Islip Fuel Depot in question. The Environment Agency’s Chemical Compliance team has contacted the site owners to ensure the drums are managed properly, but it is unclear whether regulatory bodies have validated either set of soil test results.
The barrels in question were manufactured in 1988 by Angus Fire Armour, a company that previously settled a legal dispute out of court with residents in Yorkshire. Those residents had claimed exposure to PFAS near the manufacturer’s foam production plant. The connection to this manufacturer adds historical context to the current concerns, as PFAS chemicals are known for their persistence in the environment and potential health risks. The presence of these specific barrels at the Oxfordshire site has intensified scrutiny over how legacy industrial materials are managed during redevelopment projects.
The Islip Fuel Depot has outline planning permission for a mixed-use development that includes both market-rate and affordable housing. Newcore acquired the site in 2012, with Llewelyn noting that a Phase 1 assessment conducted last year already flagged the potential for contamination. The subsequent Phase 2 investigation was designed to address these specific risks. The developer maintains that any contamination identified through these professional surveys will be remediated before construction proceeds, ensuring the safety of future residents.
This incident highlights the broader challenges facing urban regeneration projects in areas with industrial or military histories. PFAS contamination has become a significant environmental issue across the United Kingdom, with nearby RAF Upper Heyford suspected to be another source of pollution from firefighting foam. As communities push for transparency and safety, developers face increasing pressure to demonstrate rigorous environmental stewardship. The outcome at Islip may set a precedent for how similar sites are assessed and remediated in the future.
What comes next depends on whether regulatory authorities accept the developer’s professional testing results or demand further independent analysis. If the lower contamination levels are confirmed, construction could proceed with standard remediation measures. However, if higher levels are validated, more extensive cleanup efforts may be required, potentially delaying the project and increasing costs. Until independent verification is available, residents and stakeholders remain divided over the actual risk posed by the site’s history.
The situation underscores the difficulty of balancing housing needs with environmental safety in post-industrial landscapes. While the developer asserts that risks are managed and minimal, community groups argue that the stakes are too high to rely solely on corporate assessments. The removal of the barrels is a tangible step toward addressing visible hazards, but the invisible threat of soil contamination remains a point of contention. Clear, verified data will be essential to resolve the dispute and move the project forward.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- BBC Science & Environment↗Chemicals at former fuel depot 'have been removed'
