Last updated: June 22, 2026
PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), also called forever chemicals, have contaminated drinking water supplies across Pennsylvania, particularly near military installations such as the Philadelphia Naval Air Station Willow Grove and Horsham Air Guard Station, as well as industrial facilities throughout the state.
Pennsylvania residents who were exposed to PFAS-contaminated drinking water or AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam) firefighting foam and subsequently developed qualifying health conditions may have claims consolidated under MDL 2873, In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation, in the District of South Carolina.
This page covers Pennsylvania's filing window, who qualifies, how exposure and health conditions are documented, the procedural path through federal court, and what the settlement framework looks like based on publicly available MDL information.
This is not legal advice. Talk to a licensed attorney in your state before taking any legal action. Deadlines vary by state and case type.
Current MDL Status: MDL 2873 is active in the District of South Carolina. Water utility settlement funds established through publicly announced settlements are in the distribution process. Personal injury claims for individuals remain in active litigation.
Pennsylvania's Filing Window for PFAS Claims
The filing window for PFAS claims involves Pennsylvania state law deadlines and federal MDL procedural rules. Both apply.
Pennsylvania's statute of limitations: Pennsylvania generally applies a 2-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims. The clock typically starts from the date of injury or - under the discovery rule - from the date you knew or reasonably should have known about the injury and its cause. For PFAS cases, the discovery rule is critical because PFAS contamination and its health effects are often latent.
The discovery rule in PFAS cases: Courts have generally held that the statute of limitations in PFAS cases begins when the plaintiff had reason to connect their health condition to PFAS exposure - not simply when they were diagnosed with a condition or when they were exposed. If you only recently learned that your water source was contaminated with PFAS, your filing window may still be open even if the exposure occurred years ago. The specific facts of your situation determine this. Consult a licensed attorney to assess your timeline.
Tolling. Various tolling doctrines can extend the filing window. Class action tolling, fraudulent concealment, and equitable tolling have all been raised in PFAS litigation. Whether they apply to your specific situation depends on facts specific to your case. Deadlines vary by state and circumstance.
MDL case management orders. MDL 2873 has issued case management orders that set filing deadlines for certain claim categories. These CMO deadlines are separate from, and may interact with, Pennsylvania's state law SOL. An attorney familiar with MDL 2873 can advise on current deadlines.
Critical point: If you believe you have a PFAS claim, do not wait to consult an attorney. Statute of limitations deadlines are hard cutoffs. Deadlines vary by state and by the specific nature of your claim.
Who Qualifies: PFAS Cohort Criteria
Not every instance of PFAS exposure gives rise to a viable claim. Courts and MDL bellwether cases have established general cohort criteria:
Exposure source. Claims center on two primary exposure routes:
- ·Consumption of PFAS-contaminated drinking water (from a municipal water supply, private well, or other source near a contamination site)
- ·Occupational or incidental exposure to AFFF firefighting foam (military personnel, firefighters, airport workers)
Duration of exposure. Most claims require documented exposure over a meaningful period - not a single incident. MDL cases have used varying exposure thresholds depending on the specific claim category and defendant.
Qualifying health conditions. PFAS litigation has focused on a specific set of conditions where the scientific and regulatory literature supports a link to PFAS exposure:
- ·Kidney cancer
- ·Testicular cancer
- ·Bladder cancer
- ·Non-Hodgkin lymphoma
- ·Thyroid disease (including thyroid cancer)
- ·Ulcerative colitis
- ·High cholesterol (hypercholesterolemia) with other qualifying factors
- ·Pregnancy-induced hypertension and preeclampsia
- ·Immune effects (reduced vaccine response in children)
The list of compensable conditions has evolved across MDL settlements and individual bellwether verdicts. The specific conditions recognized in any settlement or verdict depend on the terms of that particular resolution.
Pennsylvania-specific sites. Key contamination sites in Pennsylvania include Horsham Air Guard Station, Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Willow Grove (Horsham), and Warminster Township - all in Montgomery and Bucks Counties. Additional industrial contamination sites exist across the state. Proximity to a contaminated site supports but does not by itself establish a claim.
How Exposure and Health Conditions Are Documented
Documentation is central to PFAS claims. Courts look for:
Exposure documentation:
- ·Records showing you lived, worked, or regularly spent time near a confirmed PFAS contamination site during the relevant period
- ·Water testing results showing PFAS levels in your water supply
- ·EPA or state DEP monitoring data for your water system (Pennsylvania DEP has published PFAS monitoring results for many public water systems)
- ·Military service records showing assignment to a base with known AFFF use
- ·Employment records for firefighters, airport personnel, or industrial workers with documented AFFF exposure
Medical documentation:
- ·Medical records confirming diagnosis of a qualifying condition
- ·Treating physician records establishing the diagnosis date
- ·Blood serum PFAS testing results (not required in all claims, but can strengthen the exposure-health link)
- ·Records showing the timeline from potential exposure to diagnosis
Chain of custody matters. How you obtain and preserve this documentation affects its usefulness in litigation. An attorney who handles PFAS cases can advise on the specific documentation that matters for your claim category and exposure type.
Pennsylvania-Specific Procedural Notes: The Federal Court Path
Most PFAS personal injury claims are filed in federal court and transferred to MDL 2873 in the District of South Carolina.
Pennsylvania federal districts. Pennsylvania has three federal district courts:
- ·Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) - covers southeastern Pennsylvania
- ·Middle District of Pennsylvania (Scranton, Harrisburg) - covers central Pennsylvania
- ·Western District of Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh) - covers western Pennsylvania
A case initially filed in a Pennsylvania federal district court that meets MDL 2873's jurisdictional criteria will typically be transferred to the MDL for consolidated pretrial proceedings.
The MDL process. In MDL 2873, individual cases retain their identity but pretrial proceedings (discovery, expert witness challenges, dispositive motions) are handled collectively. Bellwether trials are used to test claims before the broader docket. Settlement negotiations also occur at the MDL level.
State court claims. Some PFAS claims may proceed in Pennsylvania state court rather than federal MDL if they involve Pennsylvania-specific causes of action or defendants not subject to federal jurisdiction. Your attorney will assess whether federal MDL or Pennsylvania state court is the appropriate venue for your specific claim.
What the Settlement Framework Looks Like
PFAS litigation has produced both water utility settlements and personal injury claim frameworks. Based on publicly available MDL information:
Water utility settlements. 3M Company announced a settlement of approximately $10.3 billion (announced June 2023) to resolve claims from public water utilities across the United States. DuPont, Chemours, and Corteva announced a settlement of approximately $1.185 billion for water utility claims. These settlements address the cost of filtration and remediation for public water systems - not individual personal injury claims.
Personal injury claims. Individual personal injury claims for PFAS-related health conditions are in a different track. No global personal injury settlement has been publicly announced as of the date of this page. Individual cases have been selected as bellwether trials. The framework for individual compensation will depend on the outcome of those proceedings and any subsequent settlement negotiations.
What this means for individual claimants. The existence of water utility settlements does not mean individual personal injury claims have been resolved. If you have a qualifying health condition linked to PFAS exposure, your claim is separate from the water utility settlement track. Settlement amounts for individual claims, if and when reached, will depend on factors including exposure duration, qualifying condition, severity, and the specific resolution terms - ranges from public cases vary widely.
Do not draw conclusions about your individual case value from published settlement ranges. Talk to a licensed attorney who handles PFAS personal injury claims.
Next Steps for Pennsylvania Claimants
If you believe you were exposed to PFAS in Pennsylvania and have been diagnosed with a qualifying health condition:
- Document your exposure. Gather records showing where you lived and worked during the potential exposure period. Pull your water utility's PFAS monitoring reports from the Pennsylvania DEP website. Collect military or employment records if applicable.
- Gather medical records. Obtain records confirming your diagnosis, the diagnosis date, and your treating physician's notes on the condition.
- Consult an attorney. PFAS litigation involves federal MDL procedures, state law SOL deadlines, and case-specific documentation requirements. A licensed attorney who handles mass tort claims can assess whether your facts support a claim and advise on timing. Deadlines vary by state and case type.
- Act promptly. Statute of limitations deadlines are hard cutoffs. The discovery rule may extend your window, but it does not eliminate it. Do not delay in speaking with an attorney.
Last10Legal connects Pennsylvania claimants with licensed attorneys who handle PFAS mass tort cases. The intake process takes a few minutes and routes your information to attorneys who can assess your specific situation.
For background on the broader PFAS litigation landscape, see the Mass Tort Leads resource for law firms.