Aqueous Film Forming Foam or AFFF has been an effective tool for extinguishing flammable liquid fires for decades now. First developed in the 1960s by the American Naval Research Laboratory and the chemical company 3M, AFFF was patented in 1966.
Back then, no one had an idea that the revolutionary fire extinguishing tool would become a huge public health and environmental hazard down the line. However, the harm it causes is evident today.
AFFF contains harmful chemicals that never break down and accumulate in ecosystems and human bodies for years, causing health issues like cancer. This is the reason why there are around 9,525 pending AFFF lawsuits in the U.S. These lawsuits allege that AFFF manufacturers were aware of the dangers and yet failed to warn users.
Here’s the list of the key defendants in AFFF lawsuits in the U.S. and the settlement amounts they offered to cover damages. Let’s take a look.
1. 3M
As one of the key players in developing AFFF containing PFAS and PFOS, it’s no wonder that 3M is the primary defendant in AFFF lawsuits in the U.S. With the growing concern around PFAS contamination globally with these chemicals seeping into groundwater and soil, 3M is facing a mountain of litigation. Individuals (firefighters, veterans, industrial workers, etc.), communities, and government entities have filed these lawsuits.
According to TruLaw, these lawsuits seek accountability and compensation from 3M for its negligence, failure to warn, and environmental damages. Thanks to the growing number of lawsuits against it, 3M has agreed to pony up billions of dollars to provide remediation efforts and address the contamination issue.
As things stand currently, the company has offered to pay between $10.5 billion and $12.5 billion to settle the PFAS claims of around 12,000 public water systems across the U.S. This settlement amount will help water utilities recoup their cost of cleaning up forever chemicals from water sources.
Additionally, 3M has stopped PFOS manufacturing back in 2000 and phased out PFOS-related chemicals globally in the next two years. The company has also officially announced that it will exit the PFAS manufacturing industry by the end of 2025.
2. DuPont
Like 3M, DuPont was also involved in developing, manufacturing, and marketing the harmful AFFF products containing PFOS. PFOS has been identified as a persistent organic pollutant, considering its persistence in nature and bioaccumulative properties.
Like 3M, DuPont is facing multiple lawsuits for negligence and harm. These legal battles have resulted in significant settlement amounts, with DuPont agreeing to pay substantially to address the PFOS contamination.
DuPont and its spin-offs Chemours and Corteva have agreed to pay $1.185 billion in compensation to settle liability claims from the public water system. In February 2024, the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina approved the settlement.
The court said a class action is the best way to settle the case, and the settlement is fair. However, it’s to be noted that personal injury lawsuits due to PFAS exposure are not included in this settlement.
Dupont officially announced in 2019 that it has eliminated the use of PFAS from its products and processes. The company also committed to providing $6 million to the National Science Foundation to fund research around PFAS remediation technologies.
3. Tyco Fire Products
Tyco Fire Products, a subsidiary of Johnson Controls, has also been involved in making and marketing firefighting foams containing PFAS and PFOS for decades. The company has found itself amidst surmounting legal battles with the same allegations as 3M and DuPont. Under pressure from the EPA and other governing bodies, Tyco has agreed to pay hefty settlement amounts.
In April 2024, Johnson Controls announced that Tyco Fire Products had agreed to pay $750 million in settlement to public water systems. The settlement, which is to be approved by a federal judge, will be used to remediate PFAS contamination in water bodies across the country. However, according to the report, the settlement does not constitute an admission of wrongdoing by Tyco.
The effectiveness of these settlements in addressing the PFAS contamination is a complex and ongoing process. While the settlement amount is crucial for remediation and R&D, several concerns exist, including identifying contaminated sites, health monitoring, and preventing future contaminations.
The future outlook involves persistent efforts to hold companies accountable and develop safer AFFF alternatives. It’s crucial to use the settlement funds to remediate, research, and prevent future contamination through stricter regulations and innovative solutions.
Leave a Reply