PHOENIX – Joining a bipartisan coalition of 22 attorneys general, Attorney General Kris Mayes today announced her opposition to a proposed class action settlement that fails to adequately hold accountable the 3M Company (3M) for contaminating Americans’ drinking water supply.
Under the proposed settlement, water providers would withdraw the hundreds of lawsuits they have filed against 3M over its use of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — commonly referred to as “PFAS” or toxic “forever chemicals” — in a wide range of consumer products and firefighting foams. PFAS are stable in the environment, resistant to degradation, persistent in soil, and known to leach into groundwater. The proposed settlement is subject to court approval.
“The terms of this proposed settlement are inadequate and will not allow water providers to appropriately address the harms caused by PFAS chemicals,” said Attorney General Mayes. “Even worse, water providers may be forced to reimburse 3M for costs down the line. This unserious proposal should be rejected, and 3M should go back to the drawing board and propose a fair settlement that meets the needs of communities across the country.”
The proposed settlement would apply to nearly every public water provider in the United States, even those that have not sued and even those that have yet to test for the presence of PFAS in their water. In return for waiving their claims, 3M would allegedly pay out $10.5 to $12.5 billion to water providers, which is worth far less because of certain provisions that could ultimately force water providers to reimburse 3M for many costs.
In the brief filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, the coalition warns that:
- The proposed settlement would bind individual water providers unless they proactively opt out, whether or not they have sued 3M or already 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 proposed settlement contains an indemnification clause, which shifts liability from 3M to water suppliers bound by settlement because they decided not to proactively opt-out. For example, if a cancer cluster develops in a PFAS-impacted community and the victims sue 3M, 3M would likely be able to seek compensation from the community’s public water supplier for any amount it owed to the victims. As such, the proposed settlement is worth far less than the advertised $10.5 billion to $12.5 billion.
Joining Attorney General Mayes in opposing the proposed settlement are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin.