Attorney Jessica Paluch-Hoerman, founder of TruLaw, has over 28 years of experience as a personal injury and mass tort attorney, and previously worked as an international tax attorney at Deloitte. Jessie collaborates with attorneys nationwide — enabling her to share reliable, up-to-date legal information with our readers.
This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy and clarity by the team of writers and legal experts at TruLaw and is as accurate as possible. This content should not be taken as legal advice from an attorney. If you would like to learn more about our owner and experienced injury lawyer, Jessie Paluch, you can do so here.
TruLaw does everything possible to make sure the information in this article is up to date and accurate. If you need specific legal advice about your case, contact us by using the chat on the bottom of this page. This article should not be taken as advice from an attorney.
Fort Benning (now Fort Moore) stands as one of America’s largest military training installations, hosting over 120,000 active-duty personnel, family members, and civilian employees.
Located on the Georgia-Alabama border, this massive Army post has served as a hub for military training since 1918.
The contamination stems from decades of military firefighting operations and training exercises that relied heavily on aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF).
On this page, we’ll provide an overview of the PFAS contamination at Fort Benning Military Base, who qualifies for a Fort Benning PFAS Lawsuit, compensation available in PFAS contamination cases, and much more.
The U.S. military began using AFFF containing these hazardous substances at Fort Benning in the 1970s as standard firefighting protocol.
For over 50 years, military personnel routinely used these foams during training exercises, fire suppression activities, and emergency responses.
The Old Fire Station (Building 2452) became a particular hotspot, where recent testing revealed extremely high PFAS concentrations – with PFOS levels reaching 13,000 parts per trillion, far exceeding EPA safety limits of just 4 parts per trillion.
The scope of contamination became clear when the environmental protection agency issued health advisories in 2016, triggering widespread testing across military installations.
Veterans, family members, and civilian workers were unknowingly exposed for decades through contaminated drinking water, with no warnings about potential health risks.
Recent water testing in November 2024 showed combined PFOA and PFOS levels at 9.2 parts per trillion in finished drinking water.
While this falls below current EPA advisory levels, scientists continue studying lower-level exposure risks in vulnerable populations including pregnant women and children.
If you or someone you love has lived or worked near one of these facilities, you may be eligible to seek compensation.
Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation that can determine if you qualify to join others in filing for the PFAS Water Contamination Lawsuit today.
Scientific research has established concerning links between PFAS exposure and serious health problems affecting multiple body systems.
These “forever chemicals” accumulate in human tissue over time, potentially causing both immediate and long-term adverse health effects that form the foundation for legal claims against responsible parties.
The National Cancer Institute has conducted extensive studies on PFAS health effects, finding evidence of increased cancer risks and other serious health consequences among exposed populations.
Additionally, the Environmental Working Group has documented widespread PFAS contamination across military installations.
Military personnel and families at Fort Benning face particular concern due to prolonged exposure through contaminated drinking water and environmental contact.
Multiple cancers have shown strong associations with PFAS exposure in scientific studies, including (but not limited to):
Beyond cancer risks, PFAS exposure affects multiple organ systems and bodily functions. Health conditions linked to PFAS contamination include (but are not limited to):
Pregnant women and children face heightened vulnerabilities to PFAS exposure due to developing organ systems and increased water consumption during pregnancy and lactation. PFAS chemicals readily cross the placental barrier, exposing developing fetuses to these toxic substances during important developmental windows.
Children experience particular risks, including (but not limited to):
PFAS concentrates in breast milk, creating ongoing exposure risks for nursing infants. Pregnant women consuming contaminated water at Fort Benning faced unknown risks for years – potentially affecting multiple generations. Early childhood exposure may influence lifelong health outcomes, making pediatric medical monitoring especially important for families with Fort Benning connections.
Determining eligibility for Fort Benning PFAS litigation requires meeting specific exposure and medical criteria established through legal precedent and scientific research.
Potential plaintiffs must demonstrate both meaningful exposure to contaminated water systems and documented health conditions linked to PFAS chemicals.
TruLaw gives immediate answers to individuals about their eligibility for each specific litigation based on the details they share.
Our evaluation process considers exposure duration, medical diagnoses, and timing factors that strengthen legal claims.
Minimum exposure requirements typically demand at least six to twelve months of residence or service at Fort Benning during periods of documented PFAS contamination.
The highest contamination levels occurred from the 1970s through the early 2000s, when AFFF use was most widespread and water treatment systems lacked PFAS removal capabilities.
Qualifying exposure includes, but is not limited to:
Military personnel stationed at firefighting training facilities, aircraft maintenance areas, and emergency response locations face presumptive exposure due to frequent AFFF contact.
Similar exposure patterns exist at Eielson air force base and other military installations nationwide.
Documentation requirements include, but are not limited to:
Specific location details matter greatly, as contamination levels varied across different areas of the installation.
Off-base residents served by contaminated municipal water systems may also qualify if they can establish connection to Fort Benning’s water supply.
Strong PFAS claims require medical diagnoses of conditions scientifically linked to PFAS exposure.
Priority conditions include, but are not limited to:
These conditions demonstrate serious health effects with the strongest correlations to PFAS exposure in peer-reviewed research.
Medical documentation must include, but are not limited to:
Blood testing for current PFAS levels can strengthen cases, though elevated levels aren’t required if exposure and diagnosis timing support causation arguments.
Military medical records through the Department of Veterans Affairs provide important baseline health information.
VA disability ratings for PFAS-related conditions offer additional support for legal claims – though they’re not required for civilian court proceedings.
Ongoing medical monitoring and treatment records demonstrate the continuing impact of PFAS exposure, supporting claims for future medical expenses and long-term health surveillance needs.
Georgia and Alabama statutes of limitations typically allow two to three years from diagnosis for filing PFAS claims, though discovery rules may extend deadlines for diseases with long latency periods.
The discovery rule begins the limitation period when plaintiffs knew or reasonably should have known about their injury and its connection to PFAS exposure.
Federal Tort Claims Act requirements impose stricter deadlines – demanding SF-95 administrative claims within two years of discovering the injury.
Tolling agreements can preserve claims while gathering evidence, but plaintiffs must act promptly once they understand the connection between their illness and Fort Benning exposure.
Minors enjoy extended protection, with statutes of limitations typically beginning when they reach age 18 or later.
This provision particularly benefits children who lived on base during contamination periods and later developed PFAS-related conditions.
The continuing exposure doctrine may also extend filing deadlines where ongoing contamination creates new exposure opportunities.
Recent court decisions in PFAS litigation have generally favored broad interpretation of discovery rules – recognizing that widespread knowledge about PFAS health risks developed only recently.
Fort Benning, Georgia represents one of the most documented military installations with PFAS contamination from decades of AFFF use in firefighting training and emergency response operations, making it a priority location for toxic exposure claims involving service members, civilian employees, and surrounding community members who developed cancer or other serious health conditions linked to “forever chemical” exposure.
The legal process for filing Fort Benning PFAS claims follows established procedures for military contamination cases while requiring specific documentation proving connection to the base, duration of exposure, and medical conditions recognized in scientific literature as associated with PFAS toxicity.
Legal teams experienced in military toxic exposure cases can guide Fort Benning victims through the claim filing process, evidence gathering requirements, and coordination with ongoing federal litigation to maximize compensation opportunities and achieve favorable outcomes.
Eligibility for Fort Benning PFAS toxic exposure claims requires demonstrating both documented presence at the installation during periods of known AFFF use and a qualifying medical diagnosis that scientific research links to PFAS exposure, with the strongest cases involving individuals who lived or worked on base for extended periods between the 1970s and early 2000s when contamination levels were highest.
Service members, civilian employees, contractors, and family members who resided in base housing or worked in areas where AFFF was routinely used during training exercises face the highest exposure risks and typically present the most viable legal claims.
Community members living near Fort Benning who relied on contaminated groundwater or agricultural products affected by PFAS migration from the base may also qualify for legal action, though these cases require additional environmental evidence linking contamination sources to off-base exposure pathways.
Key eligibility factors for Fort Benning PFAS claims include, but are not limited to:
The strength of Fort Benning PFAS claims often depends on the ability to demonstrate direct exposure through drinking water consumption, occupational contact with AFFF, or environmental contamination affecting residential areas and agricultural lands surrounding the installation.
Legal teams specializing in military toxic exposure cases can evaluate individual circumstances and determine the most effective approach for establishing liability and maximizing compensation potential.
Successful Fort Benning PFAS claims require comprehensive documentation establishing both the connection to the military installation and medical evidence linking PFAS exposure to subsequent health conditions, with military service records, employment documentation, and medical files serving as the foundation for proving causation and damages.
Base housing records, training logs, and environmental reports documenting PFAS contamination levels provide additional support for exposure claims, while expert medical testimony typically plays a decisive role in establishing the scientific connection between Fort Benning contamination and cancer development.
The quality and completeness of documentation often determines case value and settlement potential, making thorough evidence gathering an important component of successful Fort Benning PFAS litigation.
Documentation required for Fort Benning PFAS claims includes, but is not limited to:
Medical documentation must clearly establish the timeline of symptom development and cancer diagnosis to support causation arguments linking Fort Benning PFAS exposure to health conditions.
Expert witness testimony from oncologists, toxicologists, and environmental health specialists typically provides the scientific foundation needed to demonstrate how “forever chemical” contamination at Fort Benning caused or contributed to cancer development and other serious health consequences.
Fort Benning PFAS victims may recover substantial compensation through successful legal claims, with settlement amounts varying based on injury severity, exposure duration, and individual circumstances. Recent litigation trends show promising outcomes, with top-tier PFAS cases achieving settlements between $150,000 and $350,000, while second-tier cases typically settle in the $75,000 to $180,000 range.
Major PFAS settlements demonstrate the substantial financial exposure facing defendants. DuPont settled 3,550 Ohio lawsuits for $670.7 million, while Tyco Fire Products agreed to a $750 million settlement in April 2024.
More recently, 3M reached a $450 million settlement with New Jersey in May 2025 – just days before trial, indicating defendants’ willingness to pay substantial amounts to avoid litigation risks.
PFAS-related medical expenses represent a major component of damage awards, covering past treatment, ongoing care, and future medical needs. Cancer treatment costs can reach hundreds of thousands of dollars – including surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and specialized oncology care.
Cancer treatments that often require multiple procedures and long-term follow-up care include, but are not limited to:
Life care planners work with medical experts to calculate future medical expenses, considering disease progression, treatment advances, and individual patient needs. Medical monitoring programs become particularly important for PFAS victims, as these “forever chemicals” remain in the body for years and may cause additional health problems over time.
Insurance and lien considerations include, but are not limited to:
Experienced PFAS attorneys negotiate with insurers to minimize lien amounts and preserve maximum recovery for clients.
PFAS-related illnesses greatly impact military careers and civilian employment, generating substantial lost income claims. Military personnel facing medical discharge due to PFAS-related conditions lose decades of expected earnings, promotion opportunities, and retirement benefits. Cancer diagnoses often force early retirement or career changes – creating permanent income reductions.
Vocational experts evaluate work limitations and calculate lifetime earning losses, considering factors such as (but not limited to):
Military personnel enjoy well-documented pay scales and benefit structures, making income loss calculations more straightforward than in civilian cases. Disability retirement benefits through the military or VA system provide some income replacement – though typically at reduced levels compared to full career earnings.
Settlement negotiations must account for these benefits while ensuring adequate compensation for remaining income losses and reduced quality of life.
Pain and suffering damages address the physical and emotional impact of PFAS-related illnesses – including cancer diagnosis anxiety, treatment side effects, and ongoing health concerns. These damages recognize that PFAS exposure creates lifelong health risks and psychological stress, even after successful treatment.
Quality of life impacts extend beyond the diagnosed individual and may affect, but are not limited to:
Family members may require counseling and support services as they cope with diagnosis and treatment stresses. Emotional distress damages address the psychological impact of learning about PFAS exposure and potential future health risks.
Many Fort Benning families consumed contaminated water for years without knowledge of health dangers – creating ongoing anxiety about their children’s health and their own future medical needs. Punitive damages may be available against AFFF manufacturers who knew about serious health risks but failed to provide adequate warnings, though these damages face higher proof standards and potential constitutional limitations.
Fort Benning’s water remediation efforts involve multiple agencies working to address pfas contamination (which occurred for decades) through advanced treatment technologies and comprehensive monitoring programs.
The installation currently operates under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) – with ongoing remedial investigations to determine the full extent of contamination and appropriate cleanup measures.
The Army has initiated comprehensive cleanup actions following EPA guidelines and CERCLA requirements. Fort Benning currently sits in the Remedial Investigation phase, with environmental teams conducting extensive sampling to determine contamination extent and migration patterns.
The Department of Defense has completed preliminary assessments at 712 installations nationwide, with 581 installations (including Fort Benning) proceeding to the next CERCLA phase. Columbus Water Works has partnered with engineering firm Freese and Nichols to implement advanced PFAS treatment technologies.
The multi-phase pilot study evaluates six different technology types across nine process streams and 18 sampling locations. Treatment options under consideration include, but are not limited to:
The Army has transitioned to privatized drinking water supply – purchasing treated water rather than relying on on-base treatment systems. This approach provides immediate protection while long-term remediation efforts continue. Installation of membrane filtration plants and ongoing infrastructure improvements support the comprehensive cleanup strategy.
Current monitoring protocols include regular PFAS testing with results reported to military personnel and families. As of November 2024, finished drinking water tested at 9.2 parts per trillion for combined PFOA and PFOS levels – below EPA’s current Maximum Contaminant Levels of 4 parts per trillion for individual compounds.
The next scheduled testing event occurs in December 2027, following EPA-established monitoring frequencies. EPA’s new National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (finalized in April 2024) established the first legally enforceable drinking water safety standards for six PFAS chemicals. These standards provide clear cleanup targets and enable more aggressive remediation efforts where contamination exceeds safe levels.
PFAS persistence in groundwater and soil creates long-term environmental challenges requiring decades of monitoring and treatment. The contamination plume continues spreading through groundwater systems – potentially affecting off-base communities and requiring coordinated response efforts between military and civilian authorities.
Community health monitoring programs track exposed populations for PFAS-related health effects, establishing disease registries and supporting medical surveillance efforts. Property value impacts in surrounding communities remain under evaluation as contamination extent becomes clearer through ongoing investigations. Regular water quality reports help track remediation progress and inform affected communities about drinking water safety.
The Army’s cleanup efforts complement legal settlements and compensation programs – ensuring both environmental remediation and victim compensation proceed simultaneously. Long-term success requires sustained funding and technological advancement to address this persistent contamination challenge.
Our PFAS Contamination attorney at TruLaw is dedicated to supporting clients through the process of filing PFAS water contamination lawsuits.
With extensive experience in chemical exposure cases, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman and our legal team work with litigation leaders to prove how toxic PFAS chemicals in water supplies caused you harm.
TruLaw focuses on securing compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, property damage, lost income, and ongoing health monitoring resulting from your PFAS exposure.
We know the impacts that PFAS exposure has on human health and provide the personalized guidance you need when seeking justice.
Meet our lead PFAS Contamination attorney:
At TruLaw, we believe financial concerns should never stand in the way of justice.
That’s why we operate on a contingency fee basis—with this approach, you only pay legal fees after you’ve been awarded compensation for your injuries.
If you or a loved one experienced health complications from exposure to PFAS-contaminated water that include forms of cancer, immune disorders, liver damage, or thyroid disease, you may be eligible to seek compensation.
Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive a free consultation and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a PFAS Contamination Lawsuit today.
PFAS contamination lawsuits are being filed by individuals nationwide who experienced health problems from exposure to PFAS chemicals in drinking water. These chemicals, found in industrial and consumer products, have caused water pollution across numerous military installations and civilian communities.
TruLaw is currently accepting clients for the PFAS contamination lawsuit. Water contamination lawyers at our firm have extensive experience handling these cases and helping victims pursue legal action against responsible parties.
A few reasons to choose TruLaw for your PFAS contamination lawsuit include:
If you or a loved one suffered health problems related to PFAS-contaminated water, including exposure at Fort Benning’s drinking water systems, you may be eligible to seek compensation.
Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation that can determine if you qualify for the PFAS Contamination Lawsuit today.
Statutes of limitations vary by jurisdiction but typically include, but are not limited to:
Tolling agreements can preserve claims while gathering evidence. Act promptly once diagnosed to protect your legal rights.
Most PFAS attorneys work on contingency fees – typically 33-40% of recovery, with no upfront costs to clients.
Law firms advance all case expenses including expert witness fees, medical record retrieval, and environmental testing, which can exceed $100,000 per case.
If your case is unsuccessful, you owe nothing.
This structure ensures access to experienced legal representation regardless of financial circumstances while aligning attorney incentives with client success.
Filing a PFAS lawsuit generally does not impact:
These are separate legal proceedings with different standards and purposes.
Compensation from lawsuits typically doesn’t reduce VA benefits except in specific circumstances involving duplicate recovery for the same damages.
The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act provides protections for active-duty personnel during litigation – allowing cases to proceed even during deployment.
Compensation varies greatly based on illness severity, exposure duration, age, and economic losses.
Chemical manufacturers face increased risk of substantial settlements due to their role in creating and marketing PFAS-containing products.
Settlement ranges typically include, but are not limited to:
Individual circumstances determine final amounts, making specific predictions impossible without case evaluation.
Yes, spouses and children who lived in Fort Benning housing or consumed the base’s drinking water supply can file independent claims for PFAS-related injuries.
Family member claims aren’t subject to the Feres doctrine that sometimes limits active-duty military claims.
Other military installations including national guard facilities face similar contamination issues and legal exposure.
Additional exposure risks may include:
Proof of residency through housing records, dependent ID cards, and medical documentation of qualifying conditions establish claim eligibility.
Family members who received treatment at Fort Benning hospital may have additional medical records supporting their claims.
Children enjoy extended statute of limitations protection.
Managing Attorney & Owner
With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman is an Illinois lawyer, a CPA, and a mother of three. She spent the first decade of her career working as an international tax attorney at Deloitte.
In 2009, Jessie co-founded her own law firm with her husband – which has scaled to over 30 employees since its conception.
In 2016, Jessie founded TruLaw, which allows her to collaborate with attorneys and legal experts across the United States on a daily basis. This hypervaluable network of experts is what enables her to share the most reliable, accurate, and up-to-date legal information with our readers!
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TruLaw, we fiercely combat corporations that endanger individuals’ well-being. If you’ve suffered injuries and believe these well-funded entities should be held accountable, we’re here for you.
With TruLaw, you gain access to successful and seasoned lawyers who maximize your chances of success. Our lawyers invest in you—they do not receive a dime until your lawsuit reaches a successful resolution!
AFFF Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), commonly used in firefighting.
Claims allege that companies such as 3M, DuPont, and Tyco Fire Products failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of AFFF exposure — including increased risks of various cancers and diseases.
Depo Provera Lawsuit claims are being filed by individuals who allege they developed meningioma (a type of brain tumor) after receiving Depo-Provera birth control injections.
A 2024 study found that women using Depo-Provera for at least 1 year are five times more likely to develop meningioma brain tumors compared to those not using the drug.
Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit claims are being filed against Indivior, the manufacturer of Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid addiction.
Claims allege that Indivior failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of severe tooth decay and dental injuries associated with Suboxone’s sublingual film version.
Social Media Harm Lawsuits are being filed against social media companies for allegedly causing mental health issues in children and teens.
Claims allege that companies like Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap designed addictive platforms that led to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues without adequately warning users or parents.
Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits are being filed against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
Claims allege that companies like Ethicon, C.R. Bard, and Boston Scientific failed to adequately warn about potential dangers — including erosion, pain, and infection.
Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Lawsuits involve claims against 3M — alleging their surgical warming blankets caused severe infections and complications (particularly in hip and knee replacement surgeries).
Plaintiffs claim 3M failed to warn about potential risks — despite knowing about increased risk of deep joint infections since 2011.
Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of cow’s milk-based baby formula products.
Claims allege that companies like Abbott Laboratories (Similac) and Mead Johnson & Company (Enfamil) failed to warn about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants.
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?