PFAS Water Contamination Lawsuit | October 2024 News & Update

Oct 26, 2024

Millions of families in the U.S. may have had drinking water contaminated with PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl) substances commonly known as “forever chemicals.” PFAS include perfluorooctane sulfonate (“PFOS”) and perfluorooctanoic acid (“PFOA”). These chemicals have been used for various industrial purposes for years, including use in firefighting foam products used to put out chemical fires.

Using PFAS around the country has led to widespread groundwater contamination. Exposure to PFAS in contaminated groundwater has been shown to cause cancer and other health conditions. If you have been diagnosed with cancer after being exposed to water contaminated with PFAS, you may be able to file a lawsuit and get financial compensation. This page will provide news and updates about PFAS litigation and our estimated settlement value of these cases.

If you have cancer and believe it was from PFAS exposure, call our PFAS lawyers today at 800-553-8082 or get a no-obligation free consultation online.

We start by keeping you abreast of the latest news, information, and updates related to PFAS water contamination lawsuits.

States with the most residents exposed to PFAS through public water systems include Florida and California, while private wells in Michigan, North Carolina, New York, and Ohio are particularly affected. The EPA recently set the first national standards for six types of PFAS, limiting exposure levels to 4 parts per trillion for specific chemicals like PFOA and PFOS, although the goal is zero exposure. The study’s predictive model aims to prioritize future water testing efforts, especially for private well users, who may have limited access to water quality information.

This was a comprehensive study. The researchers analyzed 1,238 groundwater samples to understand how urban development and well depth influence PFAS contamination but did not estimate exact concentrations or factor in water treatment efforts.

In a new lawsuit filed last week, a New York firefighter has brought an AFFF ulcerative colitis lawsuit against several chemical manufacturers, including 3M Company, DuPont, Chemours, and others. The plaintiff alleges that prolonged exposure to drinking water contaminated with AFFF, containing toxic chemicals like PFOA and PFOS, led to a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff was exposed to these hazardous chemicals over an extended period due to the defendants’ manufacturing and distribution of firefighting foam products used in the vicinity. The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the plaintiff’s severe personal injuries and ongoing suffering.

Ulcerative colitis, while not as frequently discussed as cancers in water contamination litigation, is a significant and debilitating condition linked to PFAS exposure. This chronic inflammatory bowel disease causes long-term inflammation and ulcers in the digestive tract, leading to severe abdominal pain, diarrhea, fatigue, and weight loss. PFAS found in AFFF and other industrial chemicals, are known to accumulate in the human body and disrupt the immune and gastrointestinal systems.

Studies have clearly shown that exposure to high levels of PFAS can increase the risk of developing ulcerative colitis, as these chemicals trigger immune responses and inflammation in the digestive system.

The Department of Defense is intensifying its efforts to address widespread PFAS contamination on military installations in response to mounting health concerns over these toxic “forever chemicals.” Following new EPA drinking water standards that set the safety threshold at 4 parts per trillion, the DoD issued a directive to prioritize PFAS cleanup across hundreds of military sites.

Currently, investigations are underway at 350 locations, with plans to assess an additional 150 sites in the next two years. This is good news. This move signals the DoD’s commitment to accelerating remediation efforts and improving transparency after facing criticism for its slow response to PFAS contamination, which, as you know if you are reading this, has been linked to serious health issues like cancer and thyroid disorders.

The DoD’s updated strategy goes beyond just meeting federal guidelines, aiming for stricter measures to mitigate risks to military families and surrounding communities. As scrutiny increases, the DoD’s handling of PFAS contamination will be closely monitored as a test of its commitment to safeguarding public health on and around its bases.

Lawyers representing a group of residents in the town of Elkton, Maryland have formally notified W.L. Gore & Assoc. (the company that makes Gore-Tex fabric) that they are planning to file suit against Gore for allegedly polluting the groundwater with PFAS. Gore’s primary manufacturing facility is located in Newark, Delaware, only a few miles from Elkton. The lawyers for the Elkton residents claim that Gore has been dumping PFAS into the ground in violation of federal laws.

A Texas man has filed a new lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, alleging that exposure to AFFF containing toxic chemicals like PFOA and PFOS caused him to develop thyroid disease. The plaintiff, a Texas resident named in the lawsuit, claims that the exposure occurred through contaminated drinking water in his area. The lawsuit states that the plaintiff unknowingly ingested the chemicals over a prolonged period, leading to severe personal injuries, pain, and emotional distress.

The plaintiff alleges that the companies involved, including 3M Company, Dupont de Nemours, Chemours, and others, manufactured and distributed AFFF and related products containing these hazardous chemicals. The lawsuit claims that the defendants were aware of the health risks posed by PFOA and PFOS but failed to provide adequate warnings or take measures to protect consumers. The case seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the plaintiff’s injuries and calls for a trial to be transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, where the plaintiff resides and was exposed to the chemicals.

Our lawyers are seeing more claims involving Port Hueneme Naval Base in California. We are investigating these claims.

A new study concludes that both historical uses of firefighting foam at Fairchild Air Force Base and a local landfill could have contributed to the PFAS contamination in Airway Heights, Washington.

Initiated after detecting unusual PFAS levels in 2017, the study examined potential sources like wildfires, landfills, aircraft crash sites, and pesticide use on nearby farmlands. Researchers employed interviews, document analysis, and reviewed scientific and media articles to compile their findings.

This comprehensive analysis suggests that the contamination is likely due to multiple sources, including, echoing the Camp Lejeune debacle, long-standing practices at the base and local waste management methods.

The 7th Circuit ruled that an Illinois lawsuit against 3M regarding PFAS contamination should remain in state court.

The panel determined that the federal officer removal statute does not apply because Illinois is not seeking damages for PFAS contamination related to the U.S. military’s use of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) at the Rock Island Arsenal. Instead, Illinois is pursuing damages for contamination solely from PFAS discharged from 3M’s facility in Cordova.

Despite 3M’s attempts to argue for federal jurisdiction based on its role as a federal contractor, the court upheld the previous decision to remand the case to state court, emphasizing that Illinois had clearly limited its claims to those not involving AFFF contamination.

Our legal team is actively investigating potential lawsuits related to PFAS chemical exposure at Mohawk and Shaw facilities.

An Illinois lawsuit concerning PFAS pollution in the Mississippi River has been remanded to state court after 3M failed to demonstrate federal jurisdiction.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled that 3M did not have a viable federal defense against claims that it violated state laws by contaminating the river with PFAS.

3M had attempted to use the federal government contractor defense, arguing unsuccessfully once again that PFAS could have come from its own facility or a nearby military installation. However, the court determined that Illinois is only seeking relief for pollution originating from 3M’s Cordova facility, making the federal defense irrelevant and affirming an earlier district court ruling.

3M removed to federal court today a lawsuit filed by 88 plaintiffs who allege PFAS exposure near various miliary bases across the country. The plaintiffs are seeking compensation for personal injuries, property damage, and environmental harm caused by the contamination of groundwater from PFAS substances like PFOS and PFOA, which are known to be toxic, persistent, and bioaccumulative.

The complaint details the history of PFAS usage, the known dangers associated with these chemicals, and the alleged failures of the defendants to warn of these risks. It accuses the defendants of knowing the harmful effects of these chemicals on human health and the environment, yet continuing to produce and sell them without proper disclosures or precautions. The legal action is based on claims of negligence, failure to warn, and the direct link between exposure to PFAS and various health problems experienced by the plaintiffs.

The EPA will begin testing private drinking water wells for PFAS contamination near U.S. Army bases, as part of a pilot program announced on Friday.

The initiative, which may expand to other Army locations, aims to identify the presence of PFAS that could be leaking from military sites. The selected bases include:

The hope is that it eventually does every base so we can all see what is what. The agency recently set a strict drinking water standard for several PFAS, including a non-enforceable goal of zero parts per trillion for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), reflecting what our lawyer have been saying for a long time: no safe level of these chemicals exists.

A new lawsuit was filed on Friday on behalf of an Ohio man who is seeking damages related to the alleged contamination of his drinking water by fluorochemical products, specifically those contained in AFFF.

Plaintiff says contaminated drinking water has resulted in his developing testicular cancer, necessitating medical treatments including an orchiectomy—a surgical procedure involving the removal of one or both testicles.

The lawsuit details that the defendants were aware of the harmful effects of their fluorochemical products for decades but continued to manufacture and sell them without adequate warnings or instructions, contributing to the contamination of public drinking water sources. Adkins seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the injuries and economic losses suffered due to the defendants’ alleged negligence, defective product design, failure to warn, and fraudulent misrepresentation.

The deadline to file a Camp Lejeune water contamination claim is a month away.

Concerns about the risk of PFAS go behind just drinking water and firefighting foam. A new lawsuit has been filed by Rebekah Badilla against Kenvue Inc. and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., alleging that certain Band-Aid products contain PFAS without informing consumers.

The proposed nationwide consumer class action, filed in federal court, claims that Band-Aid products, including Band-Aid Flexible Fabric Comfortable Protection Bandages and Band-Aid Water Block Tough-Strips Waterproof Adhesive Bandages, contain PFAS, which were designated as hazardous substances by the EPA in April 2024.

The lawsuit argues that Kenvue markets these bandages with health-focused claims, misleading consumers into believing they are made with safe materials. Badilla’s complaint highlights the serious health risks associated with PFAS exposure, such as cancer, liver damage, decreased fertility, and increased risk of asthma and thyroid disease, as noted by the CDC.

Badilla asserts that Kenvue uses PFAS in its adhesive bandages for their waterproof qualities and accuses the defendants of knowingly concealing this information from consumers. She seeks to represent a nationwide class of potentially millions of consumers, as well as a New York subclass, alleging violations of the New York Deceptive Trade Practices Act and unjust enrichment. The suit demands restitution for the class members, claiming that if consumers had known about the PFAS content, they would not have purchased the products or would have paid significantly less.

The lawsuit also points out that testing by watchdog group Mamavation found PFAS in several Band-Aid products, confirming Badilla’s claims. Kenvue Inc., created from Johnson & Johnson’s healthcare division spinoff in 2023, is named alongside Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. as defendants.

A new water contamination lawsuit alleges that 3M, Toray, and Daikin have knowingly contaminated the environment with PFAS in Decatur, Alabama.

The plaintiff, a long-time resident of North Alabama, claims that prolonged exposure to contaminated drinking water has resulted in his prostate cancer diagnosis. The lawsuit details that PFAS chemicals, including PFOA and PFOS, persist in the human body and accumulate over time, causing severe health issues such as various cancers, thyroid disease, and infertility. Despite being aware of the toxicity of these chemicals since the 1970s, the companies continued to release them into the environment.

The plaintiff’s water sources, historically containing PFAS levels far exceeding the proposed safety limits, are cited as the cause of his prostate cancer.

The case was filed in Alabama state court in removed to federal court by the defendants on Friday.

Newsweek has a good map of the drinking water problem areas.

Connecticut firefighters have filed a proposed class action lawsuit against 3M, DuPont, and 17 other companies, alleging exposure to harmful levels of PFAS in their protective gear.

The lawsuit, initiated by the Uniformed Professional Fire Fighters Association and five firefighter unions, claims that firefighters absorbed these toxic chemicals through their skin, particularly while sweating, and also ingested and inhaled them. They accuse the companies of knowing the dangers of the equipment but misleading users by marketing them as safe, failing to warn about significant health risks, and profiting from these actions.

This PFAS claim seeks compensatory and punitive damages and demands that the companies stop making PFAS-containing gear. Additionally, it calls for the establishment of a medical program to monitor and diagnose health issues related to PFAS exposure.

Two water utility associations, the American Water Works Association and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, have petitioned a federal court to challenge the EPA’s national limits on PFAS in drinking water. The rule, issued in April, sets parts per trillion limits on five PFAS substances and introduces a novel approach for limiting mixtures of three of these substances along with perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS). The associations argue that the EPA did not use the best available science or the most recent data and that the rule does not address concerns related to the affordability of safe drinking water for households.

This is frustrating. By opposing the science-based regulations intended to mitigate the known risks of PFAS contamination, these utilities undermine efforts to protect millions of Americans from harmful chemicals in their drinking water. We all get it, we have to be mindful of the economic impact of these rules. But there is an urgent need to address these toxic substances’ long-term health effects.

A new investigative has shed new light on how 3M was aware for decades of the severe health risks posed PFAS and yet chose to ignore warnings and suppress information.

The report highlights research conducted by former 3M chemist Kris Hansen. At her supervisor’s request in 1997, Hansen began testing human blood for perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), a type of PFAS. Her findings indicated that PFOS was present in human blood worldwide. Hansen discovered that these chemicals only appeared in human blood after 3M began manufacturing them.

Hansen’s work was stifled by 3M, which concealed its own research from the 1970s and 1980s that already indicated PFAS accumulated in lab rats and humans, causing adverse health effects. It wasn’t until May 2000 that 3M acknowledged finding PFAS in human blood. Even then, it downplayed the health risks.

Hansen is no hero. She was very prolific among scientists looking that these chemicals. She kept her mouth shut remained silent about her findings until 2022, when she spoke to ProPublica after her position at 3M was eliminated. She does not have good answers for why she did not speak up sooner. But better now than never.

A North Alabama woman has filed a new PFAS water contamination lawsuit against 3M, Daikin America, Toray Fluorofibers (America), and other unidentified defendants. She alleges that these companies discharged toxic PFAS chemicals, including PFOA and PFOS, into the Tennessee River in Decatur, Alabama. PFAS chemicals are known to be toxic and carcinogenic, accumulating in the human body and causing diseases such as cancer, thyroid disease, and infertility.

The lawsuit claims that since the 1970s, 3M knew about the harmful effects of PFAS but failed to prevent their release and misled the public about their safety. Similarly, Toray and Daikin continued to release these chemicals despite knowing the risks.

The plaintiff claims this water contaminated with PFAS led to her diagnosis of hypothyroidism. She seeks damages for the injuries caused by the defendants’ negligent and reckless actions, which resulted in the contamination of her drinking water. The lawsuit includes counts of negligence, wantonness, private nuisance, battery, and fraudulent concealment.

The case was filed in Alabama state court but will be removed to federal court.

Attorneys representing public water systems in a South Carolina multidistrict litigation over “forever chemicals” in drinking water announced Tuesday an agreement in principle with BASF Corp., which will pay $316.5 million to resolve the claims.

The settlement funds will help ensure compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act by funding monitoring, treatment, and remediation of PFAS found in drinking water due to their inclusion of AFFF. In the announcement, plaintiffs’ attorneys stated that $312.5 million will be placed in an escrow account for class members, while $4 million will be set aside for administrative costs. The deal is subject to court approval.

We are slowly, thankfully, getting rid of these water contamination lawsuits so their can be more focus on the personal injury claims.

Ornua Foods North America Inc. faces a new lawsuit over its Kerrygold Butter products due to alleged misrepresentations about the packaging’s safety. There have been some losses in similar PFAS suits of late. But this lawsuit was upheld by New York federal court Judge Frederick Block, who found it “distinguishable from several recent, non-binding cases where consumer products allegedly contained PFAS.”

The plaintiff in this PFAS lawsuit argues that chemicals migrate from the packaging into the butter, posing health risks such as fertility issues, developmental delays, and increased cancer risk, among others. The butter’s packaging prominently stated that the product is “PURE IRISH BUTTER,” a claim brought into question when Ornua recalled its products in early 2023 following a New York state law banning PFAS in food packaging.

The plaintiff filed the lawsuit accusing Ornua of false advertising, deceptive business practices, and selling adulterated or misbranded products, among other claims. Her class action lawsuit seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief.

The EPA has finalized a rule that classifies PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA, aimed at facilitating the cleanup of contaminated sites. This rule mandates entities like businesses and military facilities that release one pound or more of these chemicals within a 24-hour period to report such releases. Although immediate cleanup or testing isn’t compulsory, the designation significantly increases potential liability, opening the door for costly cleanup orders and associated litigation. Entities may also face lawsuits from other parties attempting to recoup cleanup costs.

In a new lawsuit, a resident of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania alleges she was exposed to contaminated drinking water containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are harmful chemicals linked to various health issues. As a result of this exposure, the plaintiff developed kidney cancer and underwent significant medical treatment, including a nephrectomy (surgical removal of a kidney). The lawsuit claims that this exposure caused the plaintiff severe personal injuries, pain, and emotional distress, and continues to pose a risk of further health complications. The plaintiff also incurred and will continue to incur significant medical expenses due to the ongoing health issues caused by the exposure to these toxic substances.

The complaint details that the defendants failed to warn about the dangerous properties of these fluorochemical products despite knowledge of their potential harm. As a result of exposure to contaminated drinking water containing these chemicals, the plaintiff claims to have developed severe health issues, including kidney cancer. This led to significant personal suffering, medical expenses, and ongoing health risks.

Who did the plaintiff sue? Who didn’t she sue? This is the a laundry list of defendants: 3M, AGC Chemicals Americas, Amerex, Archroma U.S., Arkema, BASF, Buckeye Fire Equipment, Carrier Global, ChemDesign Products, Chemguard, Chubb Fire, Clariant, Corteva, DuPont de Nemours, Dynax, E.I. DuPont de Nemours, Kidde PLC, National Foam, Raytheon Technologies, The Chemours Company, The Chemours Company FC, Tyco Fire Products, United Technologies, and UTC Fire & Security Americas.

Tyco Fire has joined 3M, Chemours, Corteva, and DuPont in agreeing to settle a good chunk of the PFAS lawsuits against it. The $750 million settlement resolves lawsuits from cities affected by PFAS contamination through its firefighting foam products. This settlement will fund remediation efforts for the public water systems involved.

A federal district court has ruled that Vermont’s lawsuit against 3M Co., alleging that the company damaged natural resources by disposing of products containing PFAS in state landfills, will remain under state jurisdiction. The decision by District Judge William K. Sessions III to keep the case in Vermont’s Superior Court was due to 3M’s undue delay in seeking to transfer the case to federal court.

This PFAS lawsuit, initiated five years ago, is part of Vermont’s broader litigation against multiple PFAS manufacturers, including E. I. du Pont de Nemours and the Chemours.. This case specifically targets the contamination from various consumer and industrial products, not just firefighting foam, that have contributed significantly to the state’s PFAS pollution.

Two North American cities, Vancouver in Canada and Concord in New Hampshire, U.S., are leading a significant shift in firefighting gear by allocating public funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment that does not contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

This move is a direct response to the increasing concerns over the health risks associated with PFAS, chemicals known for their persistence in the environment and potential links to cancer. Vancouver’s city council has approved a substantial investment for PFAS-free firefighting gear, with an expectation to outfit the entire department by January 2025. Similarly, Concord’s investment will provide PFAS-free gear to its firefighters, responding to the high incidence of cancer among the firefighting community.

These purchases represent a broader effort that should be commended to mitigate occupational cancer risks, spurred by firefighter unions and backed by recent developments in textile technology that meet safety standards without using PFAS.

Two plaintiffs have initiated a class action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and others in federal court in New York against Brumis Imports, Inc., alleging that the company’s Brooklyn Steel-branded nonstick cookware contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

These chemicals are known for their health risks and environmental persistence. Despite promoting the cookware as health and environmentally friendly, the lawsuit contends that Brumis Imports failed to disclose the presence of PFAS in their products, contrary to their marketing claims.

This lawsuit follows the company’s own disclosure of PFAS use in their products to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, which was later made public by the advocacy group Defend Our Health. The plaintiffs are seeking damages and injunctive relief for violations of New York’s General Business Law, fraud, and other claims.

A Pennsylvania resident filed a lawsuit against 3M and other chemical manufacturers, claiming that the companies’ fluorochemical products led to the contamination of the state’s water supply. The plaintiff alleges to have consumed this contaminated water and, as a consequence, developed kidney cancer, which necessitated medical interventions, including surgery.

Her PFAS drinking water lawsuit attributes the plaintiff’s suffering, pain, emotional distress, including fears of cancer recurrence, and financial losses to the ingestion of water tainted with the defendants’ chemicals. Moreover, the plaintiff asserts that these fluorochemicals continue to reside in their body, posing ongoing risks of further disease and potential cancer recurrence.

As expected, Judge Gergel greenlit 3M PFAS drinking water settlement on Friday.

The settlement, ranging between $10 billion and $12.5 billion, spares 3M from potentially prolonged legal disputes with utilities over its responsibility for the damages caused by its PFAS, which have been used for decades in specialized firefighting foams released directly into the environment. But there is more litigation on the horizon for3M, starting with the AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits.

Recreational Equipment Inc. (REI) successfully dismissed a proposed class action lawsuit accusing it of falsely advertising waterproof clothing as safe and eco-friendly despite the fact that it contains PFAS.

A federal judge in Washington state ruled on Friday the plaintiff, Jacob Krakauer, did not have standing because he failed to test his purchased jacket or any similar model for PFAS.

Krakauer’s allegations were based on the company’s omission of PFAS in their product labeling and reliance on REI’s environmental certifications. However, his claim was weakened by the absence of testing on the specific jacket model and the fact that REI disclosed the use of short-chain PFAS in their products when no alternatives exist. The court found Krakauer’s allegations too vague and his expectations of a PFAS-free product unreasonable, given the company’s disclosures.

Krakauer has been given three weeks to amend his complaint.

A new PFAS lawsuit was filed in the AFFF MDL last week. The plaintiff, an adult residing in Guin, Marion County, Alabama since 1974, is the duly appointed personal representative of the estate of his late spouse His spouse, born in 1972 and a fellow resident of Guin, Marion County, Alabama, passed away in 2022 at age 50.

During her life, she was regularly exposed to PFAS products manufactured by the defendant, 3M. This exposure led to a breast cancer diagnosis, which ultimately caused her death.

3M Company has been implicated in environmental pollution through the discharge of PFAS-contaminated wastewater into Purgatory Creek, a vital water source for Marion County. This pollution extends to ground and surface waters.

His 3M PFAS lawsuit accuses the company of disposing solid waste laden with PFAS chemicals at a landfill close to the cities of Guin and Twin in Marion County. This caused a chemical runoff into the local sanitary sewer system managed by the Guin Water Works and Sewer Board (GWWSB), as well as into the area’s watersheds, creeks, streams, and private water sources. GWWSB, which supplies drinking water to the communities in and around Guin, including Twin, Hamilton, and Winfield, has been providing water contaminated with PFAS due to 3M’s activities. The decedent, a consumer of GWWSB’s water, used this contaminated water for drinking and household purposes, resulting in direct exposure to PFAS.

The EPA released a draft analysis focusing on the health hazards of perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), a type of PFAS. The analysis examines potential birth weight reductions resulting from PFNA ingestion. Birth weight is a critical indicator of infant health, as it can impact various aspects of a baby’s development and well-being. Low birth weight infants can face increased risks of health complications, including respiratory issues, feeding difficulties, infections, and developmental delays.

PFNA is primarily used in the production of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), commonly used in industrial equipment.

The EPA has sent the Navy a letter about PFAS contamination in Hawaii. It emphasizes the need to expedite the Red Hill PFAS Remedial Investigation (RI) and conduct bi-monthly sampling for PFAS in facility wells. The letter also suggests evaluating data to identify trends, sampling storage tanks for PFAS, and responding to comments on groundwater sampling programs.

Six out of the 21 monitoring wells around Red Hill detected PFAS levels exceeding EPA standards last year. This prompted the EPA and Hawaii health department to urge the Navy to investigate further. The groundwater tested is not directly used for drinking but is part of the same aquifer system relied upon by the Navy and civilian water utilities, which maintain that their delivered water is safe.

PFAS contamination gained public attention after a November 2022 spill of PFAS-containing firefighting foam at Red Hill. Test results continue to show PFAS presence at the spill site, known as Adit 6. Regulators found high concentrations of an older PFAS variant, PFOS, in soil near Adit 6 and groundwater under a different part of the facility, suggesting historical contamination. This indicates a broader PFAS issue at Red Hill that certainly warrants further investigation.

Coty Inc. successfully defended against a consumer protection lawsuit in federal court in New York claiming that purchasers overpaid for two of its mascaras, alleging the presence of PFAS. Judge Analisa Torres ruled that consumers failed to provide sufficient evidence, including details about the testing methodology and the extent of PFAS presence in the products.

The lawsuit followed a 2021 study from Notre Dame, which found PFAS in some waterproof mascaras. However, the court previously dismissed the suit for failing to demonstrate that consumers relied on Coty’s statements about its brand. Despite denying the consumers’ request to dismiss the suit without prejudice, Torres allowed them to seek leave to amend their complaint if they could present new facts to support their claims.

Honestly, I cannot tell whether all of these consumer class action lawsuits are a part of the solution or a part of the problem. Our lawyers are focused on injury and and wrongful death claims and I sometimes fear that the water contamination and consumer class action suits are distracting those lawsuits from people who have suffered direct instead of theoretical injury from PFAS/AFFF.

Three Connecticut residents have filed a proposed class action against Kimberly-Clark Corp., alleging that the company contaminated private wells near its New Milford manufacturing plant with toxic chemicals. This PFAS lawsuit claims that Kimberly-Clark’s emissions from its facility’s smokestacks spread PFAS into the air and surrounding area, poisoning private drinking water wells.

Kimberly-Clark’s New Milford facility, which has been producing paper products since the 1950s. The suit claims it utilizes forever chemicals in its manufacturing process, potentially leading to health issues and property devaluation.

The complaint outlines two proposed classes: one for property owners affected by the contamination and another for those who ingested the contaminants.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced that substances commonly referred to as “forever chemicals” are no longer permitted for use in the production of food packaging that is resistant to grease, such as containers used for take-out food.

This great decision eliminates a significant pathway through which people have been exposed to these awful chemicals.

The U.S. government submitted three motions to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, explaining why it believes the court should reject claims that the military is responsible for environmental damage attributed in New Mexico to the use of fire-fighting foams containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

These motions respond to claims of nationwide environmental harm and damage alleged by the state of New Mexico and four dairy farms, which they attribute to activities at Cannon Air Force Base. The government argues for the dismissal of New Mexico’s claims due to lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under section 113(h) of CERCLA. This section restricts federal courts from hearing challenges to ongoing cleanup efforts. I’m not sure why a civil lawsuit for the damages relates to the Air Force’s ongoing investigation and remediation efforts at CAFB and why money damages for the harm caused would interfere with these efforts.

They also assert that the use and handling of AFFF were integral to the Air Force’s military mission, and the decisions challenged by the plaintiffs are examples of discretionary, policy-based decisions made in furtherance of that mission. Such decisions are protected under the FTCA’s Discretionary Function Exception (28 U.S.C. § 2680(a)), which essentially provides immunity to the United States for actions taken as part of a government official’s discretionary functions or duties, as long as the actions are not illegal or based on statutory violations.

Should the court side with the federal government, absolving it of liability – I don’t think it will – water contamination lawyers will change gears and file against the PFAS makers.

In a new PFAS lawsuit filed in the Circuit Court of Madison County, Illinois, the plaintiff, a resident of Bethalto, Madison County, alleges that his diagnosis of testicular cancer was caused or contributed to by exposure to PFAS, TCE, and other toxic chemicals. These substances were reportedly manufactured, sold, distributed, marketed, designed, supplied, stored, and/or used by various defendants, including Shell USA, Phillips 66, Aton, Safety Kleen Systems, 3M, and others.

The complaint describes the plaintiff’s long-term exposure to PFAS through drinking water in Wood River, Madison County, where he was born and raised. The lawsuit includes several counts against the defendants, covering negligence and strict liability for design defect and failure to warn in connection with the PFAS chemicals.

Additionally, specific counts are directed against industrial defendants and Safety-Kleen Systems, outlining their roles in the plaintiff’s exposure to harmful substances. The complaint argues that the defendants were aware or should have been aware of the risks associated with PFAS and TCE but failed to protect public health, contributing to the plaintiff’s cancer diagnosis. The plaintiff seeks compensatory damages exceeding $50,000.00, along with other relief deemed appropriate by the court.

In 2024, policymakers in 36 states are set to review over 450 bills targeting toxic chemicals, with a significant focus on PFAS, as per a report by Safer States, an alliance of environmental organizations. This initiative marks a potential record year for PFAS bans, extending beyond mere prohibitions to include measures like monitoring and testing of PFAS in various environments, and labeling restrictions in products such as firefighting equipment.

The movement gains momentum from diverse groups including firefighters, farmers, and families, aiming to mitigate the risks associated with petrochemicals and toxic materials. Additionally, at least 25 states will contemplate laws to curb plastic pollution and waste, while no fewer than 15 states are expected to examine regulations on harmful chemicals in cosmetics, alongside other environmental health issues like microplastics in drinking water and chemical disclosure. This effort reflects a broader push towards eliminating toxic substances from consumer products and adopting safer alternatives.

Seneca County filed a federal lawsuit this morning against a former Army depot in New York highlighting that the depot’s use of firefighting foam contaminated the county’s drinking water with PFAS, leading to serious health concerns.

Sampling of the plaintiff’s drinking water on September 10, 2019, revealed PFAS levels significantly above New York State’s maximum contaminant levels (MCL) for PFOA and PFOS, with PFOA at 1,360 ppt, PFHxS at 2,790 ppt, and PFHxA at 1,090 ppt.

The complaint underscores that the Seneca Army Depot (SAD) stored and utilized large quantities of aqueous film-forming foam containing PFCs for firefighting and explosion training exercises, knowingly releasing these hard-to-breakdown chemicals into the environment until about 2009 despite awareness of their toxicity.

The PFAS lawsuit alleges that the Department of Defense’s prolonged use of these dangerous substances has led to their infiltration into the air, soil, groundwater, and ultimately, the county’s water supply. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, the lawsuit seeks reimbursement for the costs of investigating this contamination and funding for a water treatment system to eliminate PFAS from Seneca County’s water.

Carneys Point Township in New Jersey is seeking to delay the final approval of a significant $393 million settlement between the state and Solvay Specialty Polymers USA LLC, the American branch of a Belgian chemical company, concerning contamination from “forever chemicals.”

The township argues that the rush to settle the case has led the state and its external legal representatives to overlook legal protocols. Filed motions to intervene by the township aim to stay the settlement’s approval pending the resolution of two additional lawsuits against both the state and Solvay.

The crux of Carneys Point’s argument is that the proposed settlement deviates from the legal requirement for Solvay to establish a $315 million cash trust for remediation, accusing the state of allowing Solvay to circumvent this obligation with a lesser commitment of $214 million in non-cash guarantees and $101 million in cash escrow, which the state can deploy at its discretion.

The township further criticizes the state’s retainer agreement with its external counsel on the grounds of legality, alleging an inappropriate arrangement to pool funds from this and other contamination cases for contingency fees, contrary to legal stipulations limiting attorney fees to 10% of natural resource damages.

A North Carolina court has ruled that current subsidiaries and spinoffs originating from the chemical giant E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. may be accountable for alleged contamination from PFAS company.

The context for this ruling is a legal action that accuses these entities, stemming from a lawsuit initiated in 2020, of contributing to pollution affecting the state’s air, land, and water through their activities at the Fayetteville Works chemical plant in North Carolina. The lawsuit names all three DuPont companies, including E.I. du Pont and The Chemours Co., blaming them for the dissemination of PFAS chemicals.

The EPA has proposed two significant waste rules aimed at addressing the management of hazardous wastes, including specific PFAS chemicals.

These initiatives would empower the EPA, alongside state and local governments, to mandate investigations and remediation efforts for PFAS contamination.

The most important new rule seeks to classify nine particular PFAS chemicals as hazardous constituents under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enhancing the regulatory framework for managing PFAS-containing waste.

The proposed rules, which will be open for public comment, are part of the EPA’s new hustle to regulate PFAS through multiple legal avenues, including the Toxic Substances Control Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act.

A new PFAS lawsuit was filed last week by the Village of Johnson City. It centers on allegations of environmental contamination and damage caused by PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) emanating from the United States Air Force (called Plant 59).

The Village asserts that for six decades, the activities at USAF Plant 59 have created a substantial risk of PFAS contamination to surface soils, sediments, stormwater runoff, and groundwater, ultimately threatening the safety and quality of the Village’s drinking water supply. The lawsuit accuses USAF Plant 59 of knowing or recklessly disregarding the risk that such contamination would substantially harm the Village and its water customers.

This PFAS lawsuit outlines two primary claims:

The lawsuit seeks various forms of relief, including monetary damages for the continuing trespass and public nuisance, reimbursement for past and future costs incurred by the Village to investigate and mitigate the contamination, payment for or reimbursement of the costs of installing a treatment system to remove PFAS from the Village’s water supply, reasonable attorney fees and legal expenses, and any other relief deemed just and proper by the Court.

There is no question that PFAS contamination at military bases across the United States represents a significant health risk, with some bases showing alarmingly high levels of these hazardous chemicals. For veterans stationed at these locations, unknowing exposure to PFAS and potentially other toxic substances has had health implications.

The 3rd Circuit deliberated yesterday on whether the EPA’s health advisory for two PFAS (hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid and its ammonium salt), known as “GenX chemicals,” constitutes a legal requirement.

The Chemours Company is challenging the 2022 advisory, which suggests that concentrations above ten parts per trillion in drinking water may pose health risks, such as liver abnormalities.

The critical issue in the oral arguments was whether such advisories are regulatory and enforceable. The EPA argued that they are informational, non-enforceable, and not regulatory, as per the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Chemours countered that these advisories have immediate practical implications. It cited an example of a Utah waste permit where compliance with the advisory is enforceable under state or federal law.

We discuss this case more in our January 2nd update below.

This is a big ruling. It will probably come faster than most 3rd Circuit rulings.

Which military bases pose the greatest risk of PFAS?

Today is a step forward in addressing the PFAS problem. The EPA is set to release a comprehensive list of PFAS substances that companies must report under a new regulation. This regulation mandates companies to submit extensive data encompassing over a decade of information on production, use, worker exposure, health impacts, and other relevant aspects of these chemicals.

In a new PFAS water contamination lawsuit, a group of long-time residents of North Alabama allege they unknowingly ingested water contaminated with PFAS chemicals released by the defendants. This contamination resulted in various diseases for each plaintiff, including pancreatic cancer, kidney cancer, and hypothyroidism, as a consequence of their exposure.

The plaintiffs in Cowart v. 3M seek damages and relief from the defendants for their negligent and willful discharge of PFAS chemicals into the Tennessee River, which contaminated the plaintiffs’ water and caused their illnesses.

The Sixth Circuit Court will not reconsider a previous decision that vacated class certification for a lawsuit involving 11 million Ohio residents against 3M Co. and other companies. The residents accused these companies of selling products containing harmful “forever chemicals.” The decision not to rehear the case was confirmed by a recent order, which indicated that no judge requested a vote for a rehearing.

See the November 28th update below for more information.

The CDC has ignored the PFAS problem for years. Not anymore. Now, they have updated their recommendations for healthcare professionals on how to test and treat individuals who have been exposed to PFAS.

The new Clinician Guidelines on PFAS highlight the current gaps in scientific understanding regarding the impact of PFAS exposure and emphasize the absence of established medical treatments to reduce the levels of these harmful substances in the bloodstream.

U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín of the Northern District of California has dismissed two class action lawsuits alleging that certain tampon brands contain harmful “forever chemicals.” a ruled ”n favor of Edgewell Personal Care, finding the cases concerning O.B. Organic and Playtex Gentle Glide product lines lacking in substantial evidence.

The judge noted that the plaintiffs on alleged testing for per and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals (PFAS), were insufficiently detailed, lacking specific results or findings to support them. The judge also found that references to patent applications and product labels, which plaintiffs argued implied the presence of these chemicals, were speculative and failed to establish a plausible link to the presence of PFAS in the tampons.

A woman has filed a proposed class action lawsuit against Health-Ade LLC in federal court in New York, alleging that the company deceptively markets its kombucha drinks as health products despite containing harmful levels of PFAS. This lawsuit is part of many legal actions concerning PFAS in various consumer items. Independent lab tests revealed PFAS chemicals in Health-Ade Ginger Pineapple Belly Reset and four other products. Morton asserts that PFAS exposure is linked to severe health risks, including cancer and liver damage, as outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The plaintiff’ in the class action is that she was misled by the company’s promotion of kombucha as supporting health, a happy gut, and being natural and organic. She argues that no reasonable consumer would expect a health-marketed product to contain dangerous PFAS, and she would not have purchased it if she had been aware of the substances and their risks.

In the lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, the plaintiff seeks to hold Tyco Fire Products LP, Chemguard, Inc., and several other defendants responsible for injuries he alleges were caused by their products. Specifically, the victim claims that these companies manufactured and sold per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) or products containing PFAS, including aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), which led him to develop testicular cancer.

The man asserts that he was exposed to elevated levels of PFAS in his drinking water provided by the City of Wood River, where he was born and raised in Madison County, Illinois. So he hired a PFAS water contamination lawyer to file a lawsuit. He alleges that PFAS was discharged into the air and the water in the area where he lived. His claims focus on the impact of PFAS in AFFF, a product used by some defendants, including Tyco, which was manufactured by military specifications (MilSpec AFFF).

Based on Tyco’s claim under the federal “government“ contractor” defense, the case has been moved from the state court to the federal court. This defense, which is garbage and will not carry the day, argues that they are not liable for torts related to the design and manufacture of MilSpec AFFF because their actions were in line with military specifications and requirements. This defense is consistently misused, and this case is no exception.

Companies and industrial sectors in Maine that use PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) in their products must notify the state’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) by March 1.

This notification is the first step in complying with a state law that, effective January 1, 2030, will ban the sale and distribution of any product containing intentionally added PFAS unless the DEP deems it essential.

The DEP will create a draft list of products with essential PFAS uses by May, ahead of formal rulemaking.

Maine adopted this approach in 2021, becoming the first state to implement the European concept of restricting PFAS use to essential applications only. The law’s disclose requirements led to requests for additional time from thousands of domestic and international businesses, including prominent companies like Abercrombie & Fitch, Campbell Soup, and Yamaha. These requests were partly due to delays in the state clarifying industry obligations, leading to a postponement of the disclosure mandate.

Notable PFAS compounds reported include perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), classified as a human carcinogen, perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), known to harm the liver, and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), commonly known as Teflon. The law aims to limit PFAS usage to essential applications only, considering the associated health risks.

As you probably remember, DuPont, Chemours Co., and Corteva Inc. have proposed a $1.185 billion settlement to address national PFAS contamination issues.

The settlement is moving along nicely. Only seven out of more than 14,000 drinking water utilities have objected to this proposed settlement:

This is one of a few objections out of 4,000. Judge Gergel still needs to approve the settlement. But everyone seems to think that is a done deal, especially now.

But this settlement is not the end of the road. Less than 10% of plaintiffs are included in these preliminary settlements. Other plaintiff groups, including those in bellwether lawsuits against companies that produced PFAS-containing products, continue to move forward with their claims. These include lawsuits focusing on health impacts and environmental damage caused by PFAS exposure.

Additionally, attorneys representing 28 US states and territories have proposed a joint approach to address common legal issues raised by these governments. Their claims focus on public health and environmental harm, product liability, and allegations of illegal marketing practices related to PFAS products. They want to break off their claims, which I think would be good news for all plaintiffs.

Will AFFF settle in 2024?

There is a lot of anger about PFAS in orange juice. But these are not viable lawsuits (yet).

Chemours Co. is seeking a judicial review of a recent EPA regulation that imposes restrictions on hydrofluorocarbons in several industries. This rule, introduced in October, explicitly targets using HFCs in refrigeration, air conditioning, foam production, and aerosol products.

HFCs are awful, maybe thousands of times worse for the environment than carbon dioxide. The new rule also establishes a procedure for submitting and assessing petitions to limit HFC usage in particular sectors, sets compliance deadlines for these restrictions, and bans the production of specific equipment that utilizes HFCs known for their high global warming potentials.

The Chemours Co. has reached an agreement with the EPA to perform environmental sampling for PFAS around its Washington Works facility in Washington, W.V. This arrangement, made under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), mandates Chemours to conduct comprehensive analyses of soil, surface water, sediment, groundwater, and waste produced by the facility.

The objective is to assess the extent of contamination by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The EPA intends to ensure that Chemours implements necessary measures based on the sampling outcomes to enhance the protection of nearby communities against these persistent environmental contaminants, commonly referred to as “forever chemicals.”

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has expedited the review of Inhance Technologies LLC’s challenge to the EPA.

These orders, set to take effect on February 28, 2024, demand Inhance to cease its PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) production, a process involving fluorine gas on plastic containers. Inhance filed for this review on December 8, contesting the EPA’s directive on December 1. Concerned about the potential bankruptcy before the appeal. Inhance sought a speedy appeal and a stay on the orders, which the EPA, bending over backward to be fair, agreed not to oppose. So the Fifth Circuit has put these orders on hold.

Inhance Technologies uses a specific process to fluorinate plastic containers. The EPA is putting its foot down because it believes this releases harmful PFAS chemicals. In December 2023, the EPA ordered Inhance to stop this process, potentially putting their business at risk.

Inhance disputes the EPA’s order, claiming they lack scientific backing and are unjust. They have initiated legal action, contending:

The EPA has filed sealed orders elaborating on the risks posed by some PFAS and the scientific studies Inhance must conduct for permission to resume PFAS production. These orders discuss the potential health and environmental risks of PFAS found in various consumer and industrial products.

The district court will hold a video conference soon to manage this case further.

This PFAS risk to our military is finally getting more attention. The upcoming defense policy bill mandates greater transparency from the Pentagon regarding its cleanups of PFAS.

The bill includes over $1 billion for environmental remediation of PFAS and other contaminants at military sites. It requires detailed reporting on PFAS-related expenditures, including testing, remediation, disposal, and community outreach. The Department of Defense (DoD) must also provide the Armed Services Committees with a schedule for PFAS testing and cleanup, including cost estimates. The bill also calls for a Government Accountability Office assessment of the DoD’s PFAS designations and remediation efforts.

There is no question that there has been frustration over slow and inadequate responses at military sites. The Camp Lejeune lawsuits helped bring issues to the forefront. Certainly, this is not enough, but it’s a start.

New EPA data reveals that 44 million Americans are exposed to PFAS, toxic “forever chemicals,” in their drinking water, based on tests. This data, part of the EPA’s Contaminant Monitoring Rule, indicates widespread PFAS contamination, which is believed to be more extensive than reported. Environmental Working Group studies suggest over 200 million Americans might be affected. The EPA continues to collect data, with more results expected by 2025, highlighting the urgent need for action against PFAS contamination.

Minnesota focuses on preventing PFAS pollution as a more cost-effective strategy than treatment. The state highlights the high costs of treating wastewater for PFAS, which is unaffordable compared to the state budget. Current efforts include identifying PFAS sources, reducing their entry into wastewater plants, and exploring treatment methods like supercritical water oxidation. Additionally, Minnesota is enacting laws to ban non-essential PFAS uses, recognizing pollution prevention as significantly more efficient than engineered solutions.

In Rhode Island, the Department of Health has proposed a new regulation concerning public drinking water (216-RICR-50-05-1). This regulation introduces new guidelines for monitoring and managing contamination levels in drinking water.

Key among these guidelines is requiring any newly built or significantly modified wells to conduct tests, including checks for PFAS levels. Should these tests reveal PFAS concentrations exceeding 20 parts per trillion (ppt), there is a mandatory obligation to notify the relevant authorities.

To put this “ppt” in context, one part per trillion equals one trillionth of a whole. So one part per trillion is like one drop of water diluted into 20 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has ordered Inhance Technologies LLC to cease production of three highly toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) due to significant public health risks. The directive, effective February 28, 2024, also extends to another six PFAS that result from a process used to strengthen plastic containers, which inadvertently generate toxic chemicals like PFOA, PFNA, and PFDA.

This decision follows a 2020 investigation initiated by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), which revealed the presence of PFAS in a pesticide on plastic containers. The EPA’s action is a step in the right direction. It needs to do more.

The IRAC has declared that Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) causes human cancer. Another PFOS has been classified as “possibly “carcinogenic to humans.” These findings were published in the Lancet Oncology.

This update from IARC marks a change from its 2016 stance on PFOA, previously considered “possibly “carcinogenic,” and represents the agency’s agency’s view of PFOS.

This is a pretty big deal.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has rescinded its approval for Chemours Co. to import waste materials containing PFAS from its factory in the Netherlands to a facility in North Carolina. This decision, communicated via email to Bloomberg Law, comes after considerable scrutiny and pressure from local, state, federal, and international entities. This scrutiny arose following the EPA’s initial EPA’s conditional approval in September for importing these wastes, which Chemours intended to recycle.

Ohio has reached a proposed $110 million settlement with DuPont de Nemours Inc., The Chemours Co., and Corteva Inc.

This settlement addresses the state’s claims these companies for the environmental damage caused by their discharge of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) into the air and water from 1950 to 2013.

Ohio Governor Mike DeWine and other state officials have hailed the settlement as a significant victory for environmental restoration efforts.

Yesterday, the 6th Circuit dismissed a PFAS class action lawsuit. The lawsuit – with Kevin Hardwick as the lead plaintiff – centered around trace amounts of five chemicals in his bloodstream, part of a widely used family in modern life. He could not identify the manufacturers of these chemicals or determine if they might cause future illness. Furthermore, he currently shows no sickness or symptoms from these chemicals.

Despite the lack of specific allegations against individual defendants, Hardwick filed a contaminated water lawsuit against ten companies, seeking to represent a huge class – nearly every person residing in the United States. The district court had earlier certified a class of about 11.8 million Ohio residents.

The defendants appealed, arguing that Hardwick lacked the standing to bring this case. The Sixth Circuit agreed with this argument and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss it, citing insufficient basis and lack of standing.

The EPA has completed the development of new regulations targeting companies that have used PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) in their products.

This update was incorporated into the Toxic Substances Control Act, mandating that companies that have produced PFAS since early 2011 must now provide comprehensive reports to the EPA. These reports should detail usage, production volume, byproducts, disposal methods, and exposure levels.

Earlier this year, a consumer class action lawsuit was filed against McDonald’s that the fast-food icon has been selling food in packaging that contains harmful chemicals known as PFAS. PFAS are notoriously toxic to the human body, and studies have linked exposure to PFAS to various types of cancer, hormone abnormalities, and reproductive complications.

This PFAS lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of Illinois and alleges that McDonald’s represented to consumers that its food packaging is safe, sustainable, and non-toxic. McDonald’s motion to dismiss over the summer, challenging the validity of the plaintiff’s standing to represent the proposed class of consumers. The plaintiffs filed a response in opposition last week, and a hearing should be set in November.

3M and Wolverine World Wide agreed to settle a class action lawsuit for $54 million that alleges they caused the release of PFAS chemicals into the environment in Kent County, Michigan.

PFAS may increase levels, according to a new study in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

The EPA proposed last week to ban twelve PFAS that formerly were pesticide ingredients. The proposal would remove them from the EPA’s list of ingredients approved for use in pesticide products.

Opening statements on money in Washington state in another trial that claims Bayer/Monsanto caused neurological injuries to teachers and students at a school in western Washington.

A new study in the journal Exposure and Health tells us that two PFAS – perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) – will cost us billions of dollars (and untold patient suffering) from cancer and other diseases.

This week, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommended that doctors test patients at risk for high PFAS levels.

Coty and Noxell fought back against a class action lawsuit that claims these makeup manufacturers misled consumers that CoverGirl TruBlend Pressed Powder was safe, arguing in federal court in California that the plaintiffs suffered no physical injury. They claim the lawsuit’s claims about PFAS in the product were too general to support a claim.

PFAS are per-fluoroalkyl and poly-fluoroalkyl substances. These synthetic chemicals are known for their ability to resist grease, water, and oils. The two most common types of PFAS are perfluorooctane sulfonate (“PFOS”) an“ perluorooctanoic acid (“PFOA”).

PFAS has been around for over 60 years and during that time they have been widely used in a number for a number of industrial and consumer purposes. PFAS were used in non-stick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics, cleaning products, and paints. The most significant use of PFAS, however, was in aqueous film-forming foam (“AFFF”) commonly called firefighting foam.

PFAS are called “forever chemicals” because ”hey have proven highly resistant to almost any environmental degradation. As a result, when PFAS are introduced into the environment, they never degrade, get diluted, or go away.

In recent years, environmental studies and testing have identified widespread PFAS contamination of groundwater across the United States. Groundwater is highly susceptible to PFAS contamination because of these chemical properties.

PFAS can easily be released into the environment at any location where the chemicals are manufactured, used, disposed of or spilled. PFAS are highly mobile chemicals so once released into the environment they are easily transported by rainwater run-off. By this route, PFAS end up in lakes, ponds and reservoirs. PFAS also seep through the soil (where they are not filtered like other chemicals) and end up in the groundwater.

Groundwater contamination with PFAS is widespread near areas where PFAS were manufactured. Water contamination is also highly likely near locations where PFAS products were regularly used or disposed of. For example, airports are frequent contamination sites because firefighting foam is frequently used in training exercises. Once the firefighting foam is sprayed, the PFAS make their way into the groundwater with minimal dilution.

Drinking water standards in the United States have a long history, stretching back more than a century. The earliest formal standards were established by the U.S. Public Health Service in 1914. At that time, the primary focus was on ensuring that the water supply was free of harmful bacteria, specifically targeting bacterial plate count and coliform bacteria. These early efforts laid the groundwork for a more structured approach to regulating water safety, though they were limited by the scientific understanding of the time.

As the understanding of waterborne contaminants expanded, so too did the scope of the regulations. By 1925, some inorganic constituents were added to the list of harmful substances that required regulation, recognizing that harmful chemicals, not just bacteria, could pose serious health risks. The regulations evolved further in 1942, reflecting a growing awareness of different pollutants.

A significant milestone came in 1963 with the publication of the Water Quality Criteria, which became a reference point for water safety standards. This document provided a comprehensive list of the water pollutants known at the time and their potential health impacts. One of the chemicals it highlighted was trichloroethylene (TCE), a solvent widely used in industrial processes. Even in 1963, TCE was recognized as a substance that could have serious health consequences if it contaminated drinking water. The Water Quality Criteria identified chlorinated hydrocarbons, the chemical family to which TCE belongs, as pollutants that posed significant risks to human health.

This evolving understanding of what makes drinking water unsafe has continued to shape regulations over the decades, with increasingly sophisticated methods for detecting and regulating both biological and chemical contaminants.

TCE is the most common organic contaminant in groundwater, the source of 93% of public water systems. TCE is present in up to one-third of our drinking water sources.

TCE levels in private wells (used for crop irrigation and drinking water for about 10% of Americans) are not monitored. Contact with TCE can be elevated for people using TCE-containing cleaning products, residents of some industrialized areas, or people living near facilities where TCE is released in a sanctioned or unsanctioned manner into the soil, groundwater, and/or drinking water wells.

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), enacted in 1974, established comprehensive drinking water safety standards in the United States. This landmark legislation mandated the implementation of both primary and secondary drinking water standards to ensure water quality and public health protection. Under the SDWA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is tasked with setting Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), which are enforceable standards specifying the maximum permissible amount of a contaminant in public water systems.

An MCL is derived from the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG), which represents the level at which no known or expected health effects occur, allowing a margin of safety. Notably, the MCLG for carcinogens is set at zero, reflecting a zero-tolerance policy for cancer-causing substances in drinking water.

The EPA’s regulation of MCLs primarily targets a variety of hazardous contaminants, including pesticides, trihalomethanes (a byproduct of chlorine disinfection), and several chlorinated solvents. These solvents include vinyl chloride, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, dichloroethylene, and benzene. Such contaminants are central issues in high-profile environmental litigation, such as the Camp Lejeune toxic water lawsuit.

The MCLs are crucial tools in the EPA’s arsenal to combat water pollution and safeguard drinking water from chemical hazards, reflecting ongoing efforts to protect public health from the adverse effects of contaminated water supplies.

Current scientific research has determined that long-term exposure to high levels of PFAS can lead to cancer and other adverse health conditions. Scientific studies have conclusively found that exposure to PFAS at certain levels can lead to:

The development of cancer and other health conditions can occur years after individual exposure to PFAS.

In 2016, the National Toxicology Program of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“NTP”) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (“IARC”) both released extensive analyses of the expanding body of research regarding the adverse effects of PFAS. The NTP concluded that both PFOA and PFOS are “presumed “o be an immune hazard to humans” based on ”a “consistent pattern of findings” of adverse immune effects in human (epidemiology) studies and “high confidence” that PFO” and PFOS exposure was 28 associated with suppression of immune responses in animal (toxicology) studies.

IARC similarly concluded that there is “evidence “of “the ”acidogenicity of . . . PFOA” in human” and experimental animals, meaning that “[a] positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpretation is credible.”

PFAS water contamination has been discovered across the U.S. As of October 2021, 2,854 locations in the United States were confirmed as known PFAS water contamination sites. PFAS contamination has been found not only in groundwater sources but also in numerous municipal water supply systems. PFAS has contaminated municipal water systems in 33 states and groundwater in 38 states. An estimated 16 million people have been exposed to drinking water contaminated with PFAS.

The most common locations for PFAS water contamination are near military bases, industrial sites, and airports. Firefighting foam has been used in training exercises at U.S. military bases and commercial airports for decades. This foam eventually made its way into the water systems. A 2020 Department of Defense report identified 600 military sites and surrounding areas with PFAS water contamination.

As you can see from this image, there is no question that water contamination on and near military bases is a problem. Last week, the Department of Defense released a report detailing the results of a testing program to evaluate the quality of water supply at and near U.S. military bases in seven states (Florida, Pennsylvania, Montana, Washington, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Virginia). The testing was performed on drinking water samples for off-base locations adjacent to or “down gradient” from military bases or facilities.

The DOD water testing report reveals that the drinking water in many of these off-base locations is highly contaminated with PFAS. Testing near seven military installations found that the water supply had PFAS well over 70 parts per billion, the maximum safe level set by the EPA. The PFAS contamination at these locations is primarily the result of training operations using firefighting foam containing PFAS.

The seven specific military sites named in the DOD report as having water supply PFAS levels over 70 ppb included the Willow Grove Naval Air Station in Pennsylvania, the Camp Grayling Army Airfield in Michigan, and the Naval Air Station at Whidbey Island in Washington. PFAS have been found in the water supply at almost 400 military bases around the country, and environmental activist groups say that contamination is suspected, but not confirmed, at hundreds of additional sites.

Over the last several years, a growing number of lawsuits have been filed against the manufacturers of PFAS and products containing PFAS. These lawsuits have been filed both by local municipalities alleging that their water systems were polluted and by individuals who claim that they developed cancer or other health conditions from drinking contaminated water.

The defendants in these PFAS water contamination lawsuits include many large chemical manufacturers and other industrial companies. Some of the most prominent companies named primary defendants in the PFAS water contamination lawsuits include 3M & Co. and DuPont. 3M manufactured and sold AFFF firefighting foam containing PFAS from 1970 to 2012. DuPont and its corporate spin-offs have manufactured PFAS and supplied them to other companies, like 3M, since the 1940s.

In addition to the PFAS lawsuits being filed by municipalities, thousands of individuals have filed their own PFAS water contamination lawsuits. These lawsuits allege that the plaintiffs consumed drinking water contaminated by PFAS and developed cancer and other adverse health conditions as a result of this exposure to PFAS in their water supply.

Our la””ers are looking at PFAS lawsuits with the following injuries diagnosed after January 1, 2000

Our attorneys are also focused on specific geographic regions for a PFAS lawsuit:

The PFAS water contamination lawsuits will likely be resolved in a global settlement. In these settlements, the defendants pay a large sum of money to resolve all pending cases. The amount of settlement money that individual plaintiffs receive is based on a tiered system in which plaintiffs are ranked based on specific criteria (severity of injuries, the strength of claim, etc.).

In the PFAS water contamination lawsuits, plaintiffs in the top settlement tier will be those with long-term exposure and a diagnosis of severe, advanced-stage cancers that have been closely linked to PFAS. These would include kidney, prostate, and testicular cancer. Second-tier plaintiffs will be those with less severe health conditions.

Based on global settlements in previous mass tort cases involving similar claims, we estimate that top-tier PFAS water contamination lawsuits could have a settlement value of around $150,000 to $375,000. Second-tier cases may have a value range of $75,000 to $180,000.

Our law firm represents contaminated drinking water victims on a contingency fee basis. For you, there is no out-of-pocket cost or risk for you to hire a lawyer to fight for you. Our PFAS attorneys receive no fees or expenses unless a financial recovery is obtained.

Call our PFAS lawyers today at 800-553-8082 or get a no-obligation free consultation online.