Three major chemical companies said Friday they would pay more than $1 billion to settle the first in a wave of claims that they and other companies have contaminated drinking water across the country with so-called forever chemicals that have been linked to cancer and other diseases.
The companies – Chemours, DuPont and Corteva – said they had reached an agreement in principle to set up a $1.19 billion fund to help remove toxic perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, from public drinking water systems. PFAS have been linked to liver damage, weakened immune systems, and various cancers, among other harms, and are forever referred to as chemicals because they linger in the human body and the environment.
Bloomberg News also reported Friday that 3M had reached a tentative deal worth “at least $10 billion” with U.S. cities and towns to resolve related PFAS claims. Sean Lynch, a 3M spokesperson, declined to comment on the report, which quoted people familiar with the deal without naming them.
Hundreds of communities across the country have sued Chemours, 3M and other companies, alleging that their products – which are used in firefighting foams, nonstick coatings and a wide variety of other products – are polluting their soil and water. They have demanded billions of dollars in damages to deal with the health consequences and costs of cleaning up and monitoring contaminated sites.
A trial that begins next week in federal court in South Carolina was seen as a test case for those lawsuits. In that case, the city of Stuart, Fla., sued 3M and several other companies, alleging that fire-fighting foam containing PFAS — which had been used for decades in training exercises by the city’s fire department — had contaminated the local water supply.
The announced settlement is “an incredibly important next step in what has been decades of work to ensure that the cost of this massive PFAS ‘forever chemical’ contamination is borne not by the victims, but by the companies that caused the problem . said Rob Bilott, an environmental attorney advising plaintiffs in the cases.
Environmental groups, however, were cautious. Erik D. Olson, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the settlement, combined with money recently appropriated by Congress to help with contamination, would “take a bite out of the problem.” But, he added, “it won’t fix it completely.”
The tentative settlement with Chemours, DuPont and Corteva, all of whom declined to comment following the announcement, may not spell the end of costs for those companies either. The deal, which must be approved by a judge, would settle lawsuits involving water systems that already had detectable levels of PFAS contamination, as well as those that must be monitored for contamination by the Environmental Protection Agency.
But it excludes some other water systems, and it would not resolve lawsuits arising from claims of environmental damage or personal injury from individuals who have already been made ill by the chemicals. And state attorneys general have filed new lawsuits, some as late as this week, over the case.
3M’s liability could be even greater. In an online presentation in March, CreditSights, a financial research firm, estimated that PFAS litigation could ultimately cost $3 million more than $140 billion, though it said a lower figure was more likely. The company has said it plans to end all PFAS production by the end of 2025 and will work to end the use of PFAS in its products.
Shares of 3M rallied Friday after the Bloomberg report, as did shares of Chemours, DuPont and Corteva.
The synthetic chemicals are so ubiquitous that nearly all Americans, including newborns, carry PFAS in their bloodstream. As many as 200 million Americans are exposed to PFAS in their tap water, according to a 2020 peer-reviewed study.
PFAS cleanup efforts took on more urgency last year when the EPA determined that levels of the chemicals “much lower than previously believed” could cause harm and that almost no exposure level was safe. It recommended that drinking water contain no more than 0.004 parts per fluorooctanoic acid and 0.02 parts per fluorooctane sulfonic acid.
Previously, the agency had advised that drinking water contains no more than 70 parts per trillion of chemicals. The EPA said the government would require near-zero levels of the substances for the first time.
Some industry groups criticized the proposed ordinance, saying the Biden administration had created an impossible standard that would cost manufacturers and municipal water boards billions of dollars. Industries should stop releasing the chemicals into waterways, and water companies should test for and remove the PFAS chemicals. Communities with limited resources will be hit hardest by the new rule, they warned.
The EPA estimated that compliance would cost water companies $772 million annually. But many public utilities say they expect costs to be much higher.
PFAS-related lawsuits include more than 4,000 cases, filed in federal courts across the country, but largely consolidated before a federal judge in Charleston, SC, as so-called multidistrict lawsuits because the lawsuits contain a common set of facts and allegations. It is not uncommon for so-called mass tort cases to be grouped in this way in federal court, making it easier to make discoveries and make statements when so many plaintiffs and defendants are involved.
Elizabeth Burch, a University of Georgia professor who studies mass tort litigation, said: “Without the settlement documents being made public, it is difficult to say for sure what claims are covered by the purported deal.”
The list of cases against the companies continues to grow. Maryland filed two lawsuits this week against 3M, DuPont and others. Days earlier, in a similar case, the Rhode Island Attorney General accused the companies of violating “state environmental and consumer protection laws.”
“I think this is the tip of the iceberg,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food and Water Watch, a Washington-based nonprofit that focuses on issues related to clean water, food and climate. “This problem affects people across the country in so many communities.”
Ms. Hauter said she wanted to see stricter rules from the EPA
“We really need strong, enforceable regulation for the whole class of PFAS chemicals,” she said. “I’m not sure this settlement has as much of a deterrent effect as it needs to. So much damage has been done in northern Michigan. People’s lives have been seriously affected. Setting up a fund is a modest step.”
Lisa Friedman reporting contributed.
