Twenty-two attorneys general, including Hawaii’s, have urged a federal court to reject a proposed $10.3 billion settlement regarding the contamination of U.S. public drinking water systems. The attorneys argue that the settlement lets manufacturer 3M Co. off too easily and doesn’t provide enough time for water suppliers to determine how much money they would receive or if it would cover their costs of removing the harmful chemicals known as PFAS.
The officials from 19 states, Washington D.C., and two territories express concern that the agreement could shift liability from 3M Co. to the providers, potentially leaving them vulnerable. The attorneys general from California, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, and other states have joined together to oppose the deal. Even Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, and the Northern Mariana Islands are against it.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who leads the multistate coalition, stated, “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 Co. spokesman Sean Lynch argues that the agreement would benefit public water systems nationwide without further litigation. He acknowledges that objections to significant settlement agreements are not unusual, and the company is willing to address any questions about the resolution.
3M Co., headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota, is known for manufacturing per- and polyfluorinated substances (PFAS), a class of chemicals used in various products such as clothing, cookware, and firefighting foams. These chemicals, also known as “forever chemicals,” do not naturally degrade in the environment and have been linked to health problems like liver damage, immune system damage, and cancers.
Around 300 communities, states, airports, firefighter training facilities, and private well owners have filed lawsuits against 3M Co. and other companies over water pollution caused by PFAS. These cases have been consolidated in U.S. District Court in Charleston, South Carolina, where the proposed settlement has been filed.
Despite 3M Co. valuing the settlement at $10.3 billion, attorneys for the water providers argue that it could reach up to $12.5 billion depending on the results of testing ordered by the Environmental Protection Agency. The attorneys also express concerns that the proposal would force all public water providers to participate, even those that have not filed suits or tested for PFAS. Additionally, a provision in the deal would shift liability to water suppliers that don’t opt out, potentially allowing 3M Co. to seek compensation from providers if they are sued over PFAS-related illnesses.
The attorneys general state that the proposed settlement is worth less than the advertised amount and do not take a position on a separate $1.18 billion deal involving DuPont de Nemours Inc. and its spinoffs Chemours Co. and Corteva Inc., which aims to resolve PFAS complaints.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
