June 27, 2024, Covington Alert

Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—sometimes referred to as “forever chemicals”—have garnered significant attention in recent years, becoming a focus of government regulation and a deluge of civil litigation targeting a wide array of industries. As with any developing area of risk, it is critical that companies assess what insurance coverage they have for PFAS-related risks; allegations of PFAS exposure can trigger decades of potentially available insurance coverage. Policyholders across industries are taking steps to assess their exposure to PFAS liability and to evaluate the insurance coverage that may respond to any PFAS-related claims.

Recent Developments

The science concerning the human health and environmental effects of PFAS has progressed significantly over the last two decades. For example, in 2024, environmental and other regulators took significant action on PFAS:

  • In February, the Food and Drug Administration announced a voluntary ban on PFAS-containing food packaging, such as takeout containers, microwave popcorn bags, and fast-food wrappers, in the U.S.
  • In April, the Environmental Protection Agency set its first regulatory limits on six types of PFAS in drinking water. The EPA also designated two types of PFAS as CERCLA hazardous substances, paving the way for future contribution actions under environmental cost-recovery statutes.

This increased regulatory activity has coincided with an influx of civil lawsuits targeting both manufacturers and sellers of products that allegedly contain or degrade into PFAS, as well as the companies that manufacture or distribute PFAS. While those lawsuits have met mixed success, they continue to be filed at a rapid pace—to name just a few:

  • In January, kombucha manufacturer Health-Ade was sued in New York federal court by a consumer alleging that its drinks contain PFAS. See Morton v. Health-Ade, LLC, Cas. No. 7:24-cv-00173 (S.D.N.Y.).
  • In May, BIC was sued for failing to warn consumers that it allegedly uses PFAS in its disposable shaving razors. See Butler v. BIC USA INC., No. 24-cv-2955 (N.D. Cal.).
  • In June, natural toothpaste company RiseWell LLC was sued by a putative class of consumers, alleging that its toothpaste—advertised as “natural” and “safe to swallow”—contained PFAS. See Watkins et al. v. Illuminati Labs LLC et al., Case No. 5:24-cv-03529 (N.D. Cal.).

Dozens of similar lawsuits have been filed in recent years, alleging the presence of PFAS in fruit juice, cosmetics, hygiene products, school uniforms, and food packaging, among many other products. Because PFAS has been used in a wide variety of products and industries since the 1940s (including nonstick pans, stain-resistant clothes, carpeting, furniture, dental floss, and food packaging, to name only a few), companies in virtually every industry may have exposure to such lawsuits.

PFAS Insurance Implications

PFAS liability presents unique and sometimes novel issues for insurance coverage. While there are few judicial decisions applying key insurance concepts to this new and growing form of liability, there are insurance issues that policyholders can consider and prepare for even before a claim arises.

  • Assessing PFAS Exposure: PFAS claimants may allege exposure to PFAS over many decades, potentially from commercial activities or businesses that the policyholder exited long ago. Identifying PFAS used in the policyholder’s current and past commercial activities, by its suppliers or subsidiaries, and by any of other entities for which it might be responsible, is a key component of assessing the company’s overall PFAS exposure.
  • Preparing for Potential Insurance Claims: Coverage for PFAS-related liability may be provided by policies that are no longer easily accessible, either because they were issued to now defunct entities or by the sheer passage of time. Identifying historical policies, as well as insurance policies to which the policyholder may have been designated as an “additional insured” (such as those purchased by vendors or other contractual counterparties), can provide access to significant insurance. Reviewing potentially applicable policies before a claim arises also may help to ensure compliance with any potential notice and cooperation conditions, which may be necessary to preserve recovery.
  • Assessing Available Coverage and Pollution Exclusions: Many insurers have denied coverage for their policyholder’s PFAS liability on the ground that PFAS is a “pollutant” subject to their policies’ pollution exclusions. While the case law applying such exclusions to PFAS is still developing and varies by State, under most pollution exclusion language, policyholders may have strong arguments for coverage of their PFAS-related liability. For example, such exclusions may not apply where the policyholder’s PFAS liability arises from the intended use of its product, rather than waste emissions from industrial facilities.

Covington’s Insurance Practice

Whether your company is currently responding to PFAS claims or is considering how to assess and prepare for potential claims in the future, Covington’s award-winning insurance recovery team can help. Covington is the leading policyholder firm assisting clients with PFAS-related coverage and represents companies facing all manner of potential PFAS liabilities.

  • Covington represents Tyco Fire Products in PFAS coverage litigation. Although this litigation is ongoing, Covington has already negotiated a number of coverage settlements together totaling hundreds of millions of dollars and secured key rulings in favor of coverage for Tyco, including “all sums” allocation across client’s coverage and a ruling that the scope of a prior release did not apply to PFAS claims.
  • Covington has been selected as special insurance coverage counsel in connection with the bankruptcy of Kidde-Fenwal in an adversary proceeding seeking coverage for claims arising out of AFFF. 
  • Covington represents clients in several confidential PFAS matters seeking to secure insurance coverage without the need for litigation.

Although Covington’s multi-disciplinary team is uniquely prepared to litigate the largest and most complex coverage actions across the country, Covington also boasts a track record of obtaining significant recovery for those liabilities without costly and public litigation. Covington’s success in these and many other insurance disputes has led to its insurance practice group being ranked by Chambers and Partners as the only “Band 1” insurance practice group in the nation for 18 straight years, and to the group being recognized as Law360’s 2023 “Practice Group of the Year” and Business Insurance’s 2023 “Legal Team of the Year.”

If you have any questions concerning the material discussed in this client alert, please contact the members of our Insurance Recovery practice working on PFAS-related matters.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Benedict Lenhart Benedict Lenhart

Ben Lenhart is a partner practicing in the areas of insurance and litigation. He serves as co-chair for Covington’s preeminent Insurance Practice Group. For more than 20 years, he has helped his coverage clients successfully resolve their insurance disputes. Ben believes that his clients…

Ben Lenhart is a partner practicing in the areas of insurance and litigation. He serves as co-chair for Covington’s preeminent Insurance Practice Group. For more than 20 years, he has helped his coverage clients successfully resolve their insurance disputes. Ben believes that his clients are best served by knowing how and when to use all of the tools available to resolve coverage disputes including settlement negotiations, ADR, and litigation. Using this balanced approach, many of his coverage cases resolve successfully with little or no litigation. He has been named as a leading lawyer by numerous ranking firms including Chambers USA (Nationwide), Legal 500, Best Lawyers in America, International Who’s Who, Washington DC Super Lawyers and PLC Leading Lawyers, and he is one of only a dozen policyholder lawyers nationwide included in the Legal 500 Hall of Fame. He has been a featured speaker at many leading insurance conferences.

Ben is often asked by clients to take the lead role in structuring insurance recovery strategies and negotiating settlements. He has been involved in over 500 insurance settlements and judgments covering the spectrum of liabilities, with individual recoveries ranging in size from under $1m to more than $500m. He has represented many policyholders in negotiating multi-party coverage-in-place or cost sharing agreements. His substantive experience includes: environmental claims, product liability claims, directors and officers (D&O) and professional liability claims, asbestos, business interruption, employment-related claims including discrimination claims and employee theft, mass tort, silica, hearing loss, repetitive stress injury (RSI), “dirty air” and natural resource damage (NRD) claims, fiduciary claims, including 401(k) and ERISA claims, catastrophic loss, and not-for-profit liability claims.

He has particular experience with Resolute and the London Market (having reached more than 100 settlements with these entities). He is deeply involved in UK solvent schemes of arrangement on behalf of policyholders. He was counsel to the successful objecting policyholders in the BAIC, WFUM and Scottish Lion solvent schemes, the leading cases in the solvent scheme arena.

Ben also has an active pro bono practice, most recently assisting low-income persons with disability insurance matters, helping Superstorm Sandy victims secure coverage for homes lost during the storm, and helping a small store owner recover insurance for fire losses.

Ben has taught Constitution Law at Georgetown Law Center for more than 20 years.

Photo of Alexis N. Dyschkant Alexis N. Dyschkant

Alexis Dyschkant represents policyholders in complex insurance coverage disputes and civil litigation in federal and state courts involving a wide variety of underlying claims and losses, including environmental liabilities, mass tort claims, cyber claims, government investigations, shareholder claims, errors or omissions liabilities, breach…

Alexis Dyschkant represents policyholders in complex insurance coverage disputes and civil litigation in federal and state courts involving a wide variety of underlying claims and losses, including environmental liabilities, mass tort claims, cyber claims, government investigations, shareholder claims, errors or omissions liabilities, breach of privacy claims, first party property damage/business interruption, and event cancellation losses. Alexis is knowledgeable about domestic and foreign insurance policies including: commercial liability; malpractice liability; errors and omissions liability; directors and officers liability; cyber and privacy risk; owners’, landlords’, and tenants’ liability; aviation policies; first party property policies; and event cancellation policies. She is an experienced coverage litigator with oral advocacy experience in high stakes matters. Alexis is a zealous and committed advocate for her clients and assesses the unique needs of each matter in order to develop a goal-oriented strategy.

Photo of Ryan Buschell Ryan Buschell

Ryan Buschell’s practice covers a broad range of civil litigation and arbitration matters—from general commercial disputes to trade secret misappropriation and antitrust actions—with a focus on securing insurance coverage for policyholders. In insurance coverage matters, Ryan exclusively represents policyholders, and has been involved in…

Ryan Buschell’s practice covers a broad range of civil litigation and arbitration matters—from general commercial disputes to trade secret misappropriation and antitrust actions—with a focus on securing insurance coverage for policyholders. In insurance coverage matters, Ryan exclusively represents policyholders, and has been involved in the cumulative recovery of over one hundred million dollars arising from breach of fiduciary duty, bodily injury, trade secret misappropriation, property damage, and antitrust claims.

Ryan also serves on the Board of Editors of the Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal.