In Pursuit of Accountability: Tracking the AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit Progress in 2024

Collaborative Post | Aqueous film-forming foams (AFFF) containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) were hailed as firefighting heroes for decades. Their ability to extinguish fuel-based fires efficiently made them indispensable in airports, military bases, and industrial facilities. However, the tide began to turn as scientific evidence mounted. It revealed the dark side of these wonder foams – their harmful impact on human health and the environment.

In 2024, numerous lawsuits are ongoing, seeking accountability from the manufacturers and users of AFFF for the damage caused. This article explores the complex web of these lawsuits, including their background, current status, implications, future outlook, and ethical considerations.

Background of the AFFF Fire Fighting Foam Lawsuit

​The story starts with PFAS, a group of man-made chemicals known for their persistence in the environment and bioaccumulation in humans.

TorHoerman Law states that PFAS exposure is linked to various health problems, including cancer, thyroid disorders, immune system suppression, and developmental issues in children. AFFF foams, widely used since the 1960s, contain two major PFAS chemicals: perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS).

As AFFF was deployed in training exercises and real-world fire emergencies, PFAS leached into soil and water, contaminating drinking water supplies and impacting ecosystems.

The first wave of firefighting foam cancer lawsuits against AFFF manufacturers like 3M, Chemours, and DuPont emerged in the mid-2000s. These primarily originated from communities with contaminated water sources near military bases or firefighting training grounds.

The firefighter foam cancer lawsuits alleged that the manufacturers knew about the dangers of PFAS. However, they failed to warn users about the dangers or disclose the information to regulatory agencies. Over time, the scope of litigation expanded, encompassing municipalities, water districts, and individuals diagnosed with PFAS-related illnesses.

Current Status of the Lawsuit in 2024

​As of February 2024, the AFFF firefighting foam litigation remains complex and multifaceted. Here's a snapshot of the current landscape:
​

• State-Level Lawsuits: Numerous lawsuits are ongoing in various states, targeting individual manufacturers, users, or both. These cases often focus on specific contamination sites or health concerns within the state.
• Centralized Multi-District Litigation (MDL): According to Lawsuit Information Center, as of February 2024, there are approximately 9,200 pending cases in the AFFF (firefighting foam) class action MDL-2873. These cases involve a mix of municipal water contamination and individual personal injury claims. There is a significant focus on allegations from former firefighters who claim to have developed cancer due to exposure.

The exact breakdown of cases in each category remains unknown. However, the majority of lawsuits are centered around personal injury or wrongful death claims associated with firefighting foam exposure.
​

• Class-Action Lawsuits: Communities or individuals exposed to PFAS from AFFF use have filed several class-action lawsuits. These cases seek compensation for medical expenses, property value decline, and other damages.

Significant Developments

• ​3M Settlement: 3M announced that it would pay $10.3 billion to settle litigation concerning PFAS, commonly called forever chemicals, found in drinking water. This announcement was reported by Bring Me the News. The payment will be distributed over a period of 13 years.
• DuPont Settlement Offer: According to LiveMint Reports, in 2021, DuPont reached an agreement with Chemours and Corteva. These are two companies spun off from DuPont's predecessor businesses to share future PFAS liability costs. This agreement, lasting until 2040, is capped at $4 billion. However, the offer has been met with mixed reactions from plaintiffs, with some considering it inadequate.

Legal Hurdles

Despite the above developments, many legal hurdles remain. Key issues include:

Scientific Causation: Establishing a direct link between individual health problems and AFFF exposure can be challenging. The complexity lies in proving causation beyond a reasonable doubt. It is particularly challenging given the wide range of health conditions associated with PFAS exposure and the presence of other environmental factors.

Joint and Several Liability: Determining the proportional responsibility of manufacturers and users for contamination is complex. With multiple parties involved in the production, distribution, and application of AFFF, allocating liability fairly among them presents significant legal challenges. Moreover, joint and several liability complicates matters, as defendants may be held liable for damages despite minimal contribution to contamination.

Scope of Damages: Quantifying the extent of environmental and health damages caused by PFAS is ongoing. The long-term impacts of PFAS contamination on ecosystems, drinking water sources, and human health are still being understood. 

As a result, accurately assessing and compensating for these damages remains a daunting task for legal proceedings. Efforts to quantify economic losses, medical expenses, and environmental remediation costs are ongoing but often face uncertainties and disputes among stakeholders.

Environmental and Health Implications

The widespread use of AFFF has left a lasting legacy of contamination. PFAS are highly mobile and persistent, meaning they travel long distances in water and remain in the environment for decades. This contamination presents a major risk to human health, including:

• Drinking water: PFAS have been detected in drinking water supplies across the US, raising concerns about potential health risks for millions of people.
• Ecosystem damage: PFAS can harm wildlife, impacting entire food chains and ecosystems.
• Public health concerns: Studies have linked PFAS exposure to various health problems, including cancer, thyroid disorders, and immune system suppression. The full extent of the health impact is still being investigated.

The ongoing lawsuits aim to hold polluters accountable for these environmental and health damages.

Potential outcomes could include:

• Remediation: Funding for cleaning up contaminated sites and ensuring safe drinking water.
• Medical monitoring: Programs to track the health of exposed individuals and provide necessary medical care.
• Research funding: Increased resources for researching the complexities of PFAS exposure and its implications for human health. It can facilitate more informed decisions regarding litigation and regulatory measures.

AFFF Lawsuit: A Fight for the Future

The AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits represent a landmark legal battle seeking accountability for widespread PFAS contamination and its associated health and environmental harms. While 2024 has seen significant developments, including settlements and ongoing MDL proceedings, the fight for justice is far from over and we are still facing numerous legal hurdles as the full impact of PFAS exposure continues to unfold.
​
The results of these lawsuits will have extensive repercussions. Successful cases could pave the way for stricter regulations on PFAS-containing products, as well as increased resources for remediation and research. They could also lead to compensation for affected communities and individuals. However, even the most favorable outcomes cannot undo the damage already inflicted.

​
Disclaimer: this is a collaborative post.