More Than 10,000 AFFF Exposure Lawsuits Now Pending in Federal MDL

The number of new filings over cancers and other injuries caused by toxic firefighting foam chemicals continues to climb, as lawyers work to prepare a small group of AFFF lawsuits for early bellwether trials.

Nearly seven years after the first lawsuits over aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) were filed, a large number of new claims continue to be brought every month, involving allegations that former firefighters and individuals residing in areas where drinking water was contaminated by toxic chemicals in the firefighting foam developed various different cancers and other injuries.

According to the June 2025 docket report (PDF) released by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) last week, 3M Company, Chemguard and other chemical manufacturers now face more than 10,000 AFFF exposure lawsuits in the federal court system, up from 9,342 claims that were pending on the May 2025 report (PDF), marking an increase of nearly 1,000 filings in just one month. 

PFAS Exposure From Firefighting Foam Use

Aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) has been widely used since the 1960s to suppress high-intensity fuel fires, particularly at military bases, airports and industrial sites. The foam contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are a group of synthetic chemicals known for their resistance to heat, water and oil. However, PFAS do not break down naturally and can accumulate in soil, water and the human body over time.

As a result of their persistence and bioaccumulation in the blood of firefighters and local water supplies, PFAS exposure has been linked to a range of serious health conditions, including testicular cancer, kidney cancer, liver cancer, thyroid cancer, thyroid disease and ulcerative colitis. Scientific studies have shown that even low levels of AFFF exposure may pose long-term health risks, particularly for those repeatedly exposed through occupational contact or contaminated water supplies.

As awareness of the long-term health risks linked to PFAS contamination has grown, thousands of individuals and municipalities have filed AFFF lawsuits against the chemical manufacturers and other companies responsible for the widespread distribution of the firefighting foam.

The litigation includes claims from both military and civilian firefighters who suffered direct chemical exposure during training exercises and emergency response, as well as water contamination lawsuits brought by individuals exposed to the chemicals after they leached into local water supplies, particularly around military bases, airports and firefighting training sites.

To manage a rapidly growing number of lawsuits being filed throughout the federal court system, the JPML established a federal AFFF multidistrict litigation (MDL) in December 2018, centralizing the claims before Judge Richard M. Gergel in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. However, the litigation has continued to steadily increase in size, surpassing 10,000 claims as of early June 2025.

AFFF Exposure Litigation Status

As part of the coordinated management of the pretrial proceedings, a small group of representative AFFF exposure cases are being prepared for bellwether trials in the MDL, to help evaluate how juries may respond to evidence presented in the litigation.

The first bellwether trial is currently scheduled to begin on October 20, 2025, and is expected to focus on individuals who developed kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease or ulcerative colitis following exposure to PFAS-contaminated water near military bases and training facilities.

While both sides have submitted trial preferences, plaintiffs have asked the court to consolidate five claims, three involving kidney cancer and two involving testicular cancer, into a single multi-plaintiff trial, since all five plaintiffs consumed drinking water from the same contaminated source in Pennsylvania.

If the request is denied, the plaintiffs’ committee has recommended that the court proceed with three individual cancer lawsuits, beginning with a case filed by Brock Donnelly, followed by claims from Clinton Speers and Kevin Voelker, each of whom developed kidney cancer with minimal alternative risk factors.

While the outcome of these early bellwether trials will not have any binding impact on other claims, it is expected that the amount of any AFFF exposure lawsuit payout awarded by juries may influence future cancer settlement negotiations to resolve the litigation.