Key Takeaways

1. Firefighter foam lawsuits center on the use of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), which contains PFAS chemicals linked to cancer and environmental contamination.
2. Major manufacturers, including DuPont, Chemours, Corteva, and 3M, have agreed to multi-billion dollar settlements, but litigation is ongoing and continues to grow.
3. State and federal regulations are evolving, and affected individuals—especially firefighters—may be eligible for compensation due to health risks and water contamination.

Understanding the Firefighter Foam Lawsuit

What is AFFF and Why is it Controversial?

Aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) is a firefighting agent used to suppress flammable liquid fires, especially at airports, military bases, and industrial sites. AFFF contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a group of synthetic chemicals known for their persistence in the environment and the human body. PFAS are often called "forever chemicals" because they do not break down easily and can accumulate over time.

The controversy arises from scientific studies linking PFAS exposure to serious health issues, including several types of cancer, immune system effects, and developmental problems. Firefighters and chemical plant workers are at particular risk due to frequent exposure. Communities near sites where AFFF was used have also reported contaminated drinking water.

Health Risks Associated with PFAS

Multiple studies have shown that PFAS chemicals can accumulate in the blood of individuals exposed to AFFF. According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), PFAS exposure is associated with:

• Increased risk of kidney and testicular cancer
• Liver damage
• Thyroid disease
• Immune system effects
• Developmental issues in infants and children

Firefighters, in particular, have been found to have higher concentrations of PFAS in their blood compared to the general population. This elevated exposure has led to increased rates of cancer and other health problems among those who regularly used AFFF.

Allegations Against Manufacturers

The core of the firefighter foam lawsuits is the allegation that manufacturers—such as DuPont, Chemours, Corteva, and 3M—knowingly produced and distributed AFFF containing PFAS, despite being aware of the potential health and environmental risks. Plaintiffs argue that these companies failed to warn users and the public about the dangers, leading to widespread contamination and illness.

According to court filings and investigative reports, internal documents from some manufacturers allegedly show knowledge of PFAS toxicity dating back decades. The lawsuits claim that, despite this knowledge, the companies continued to market and sell AFFF for use in firefighting and industrial settings.

The Scope and Status of the Litigation

Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) and Number of Plaintiffs

Due to the large number of similar lawsuits, the federal court system consolidated these cases into a multidistrict litigation (MDL). As of May 2025, more than 9,300 lawsuits are pending in the AFFF MDL, with over 400 new plaintiffs joining in recent months (source). The MDL process allows one judge to oversee pretrial proceedings, streamlining discovery and legal arguments.

Plaintiffs include firefighters, military personnel, airport workers, and residents of communities with contaminated water. The lawsuits seek compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, property damage, and other losses resulting from PFAS exposure.

Major Settlements and Ongoing Cases

Several significant settlements have been reached:

• In December 2023, 3M and DuPont agreed to pay $10.3 billion to settle claims related to PFAS contamination of water systems (EPA announcement).
• DuPont, Chemours, and Corteva approved a $1.185 billion settlement to resolve water contamination claims (SEC filing).
• BASF agreed to pay $316.5 million to resolve lawsuits involving PFAS in firefighting foam (BASF press release).

Despite these settlements, the litigation is ongoing. Many individual and class action claims remain unresolved. The legal landscape is evolving as new plaintiffs join and additional evidence emerges.

Who is Eligible to File a Claim?

Those most commonly eligible to file AFFF lawsuits include:

• Firefighters (municipal, airport, military)
• Chemical plant workers
• Residents near sites where AFFF was used or manufactured
• Individuals diagnosed with cancer or other PFAS-related illnesses after exposure

Law firms continue to review and accept new cases nationwide. The scope of eligibility may expand as more is learned about PFAS exposure pathways.

Regulatory and Legislative Response

Federal Actions

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has taken steps to address PFAS contamination. In 2023, the EPA proposed the first-ever national drinking water standards for six PFAS chemicals (EPA PFAS page). The agency is also working to phase out certain PFAS uses and require manufacturers to report PFAS releases.

The Department of Defense has begun phasing out AFFF at military installations and is investing in PFAS remediation efforts (DoD PFAS page).

State Legislation

Several states have enacted laws restricting or banning the use of PFAS-containing AFFF. For example:

• California prohibits the use of AFFF for most firefighting purposes and requires notification of PFAS content (California Assembly Bill 1041).
• Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and New Hampshire have passed similar restrictions (New Hampshire PFAS Law).

These laws reflect growing concern about PFAS in the environment and the need to protect public health.

The Impact on Firefighters and Communities

Health and Financial Consequences

Firefighters face increased cancer risks and other health problems due to repeated AFFF exposure. Many have incurred significant medical expenses and lost income due to illness. Communities with contaminated water supplies have faced costly remediation efforts and property value declines.

The lawsuits seek to hold manufacturers accountable for these harms. Plaintiffs are pursuing compensation for:

• Medical bills and future healthcare costs
• Lost wages and reduced earning capacity
• Pain and suffering
• Property damage and cleanup costs

Environmental Remediation

PFAS contamination is difficult and expensive to remove from soil and water. Many affected communities are demanding that manufacturers pay for cleanup efforts. The EPA and state agencies are overseeing remediation projects, but the process is complex and ongoing.

Looking Ahead: Ongoing Litigation and Potential Settlements

The firefighter foam lawsuits are among the largest environmental mass torts in U.S. history. With over 9,000 cases pending and new plaintiffs joining, the litigation is expected to continue for years. Some legal experts anticipate a global settlement that could resolve most claims, but negotiations are ongoing.

Law firms and advocacy groups continue to investigate PFAS exposure and represent affected individuals. The legal and regulatory landscape will likely evolve as more information becomes available and as courts issue new rulings.

Resources and Further Reading

• EPA PFAS Information
• ATSDR PFAS Health Effects
• Department of Defense PFAS Spotlight
• California Assembly Bill 1041
• New Hampshire PFAS Law

Disclaimer:
This guide provides a general overview of the firefighter foam lawsuits and related legal developments. It is not legal advice. The litigation is ongoing, and the information is based on current allegations and public sources as of June 2024. Details may change as cases progress. For specific legal advice or representation, consult a qualified attorney.