22 attorneys general urge federal court to reject 3M Co.'s $10.3 billion settlement offer for 'forever chemicals' pollution

Water sample testing for PFAS research at the EPA
(Photo by Joshua A. Bickel, Associated Press)

Twenty-two attorneys general argue that the proposed settlement 3M Co. has offered to resolve claims that it contaminated water systems with "forever chemicals" wouldn't be enough. The group "urged a federal court to reject a proposed $10.3 billion settlement . . . saying it lets manufacturer 3M off too easily," reports John Flesher of The Associated Press. They argue that the agreement needs to give water suppliers more time to compute what their portion of the settlement would be and compare it to "their costs of removing the compounds known collectively as PFAS, said the officials with 19 states, Washington, D.C., and two territories."

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, leader of the multi-state coalition, told Flesher, "While I appreciate the effort that went into it, the proposed settlement in its current form does not adequately account for the pernicious damage that 3M has done in so many of our communities." 3M spokesman Sean Lynch said, "It is not unusual for there to be objections regarding significant settlement agreements. We will continue to work cooperatively to address questions about the terms of the resolution."

3M's "forever chemicals" problems began with its use of "polyfluorinated substances — a broad class of chemicals used in nonstick, water- and grease-resistant products such as clothing and cookware, as well as some firefighting foams," Flesher reports. "PFAS have been linked to a variety of health problems, including liver and immune-system damage and some cancers." The American Chemical Society describes polyfluorinated chemicals as "toxic, extremely resistant to degradation, bioaccumulate in food chains, and can have long half-lives in humans."

Three hundred communities have sued 3M and other companies over water and soil pollution from their products. Flesher writes, "Although the company put its value at $10.3 billion, an attorney for the water providers said it could reach as high as $12.5 billion, depending on how many detect PFAS during testing the Environmental Protection Agency has ordered over the next three years."

The attorneys general disagreed with the deal's opt-out provision, which would "shift liability from 3M to water suppliers that don't opt out. That could enable the company to seek compensation from providers if sued over cancer or other illnesses in PFAS-affected communities," Flesher reports. "The attorneys-general filings said it would force nearly all public water providers nationwide to participate unless they withdraw individually — even those that haven't filed suits or tested for PFAS. 'Troublingly, they would have to make their opt-out decisions without knowing how much they would actually receive and, in many cases, before knowing the extent of contamination in their water supplies and the cost of remediating it, the officials said in a statement. . . . As such, the proposed settlement is worth far less than the advertised $10.5 billion to $12.5 billion."