Washington, Maryland and New Mexico are the latest states seeking to hold chemical manufacturers liable for soil and groundwater contamination caused by so-called “forever chemicals.”

The suits, filed in the states’ respective court systems, accuse 3M, DuPont and other makers of concealing longstanding information about the dangers associated with toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a group of more than 9,000 laboratory-produced chemicals used for a wide range of industrial, commercial and consumer product applications for more than 80 years. 

Washington’s lawsuit, filed in King County Superior Court, targets 20 manufacturers and claims that nearly 200 water sources in the state have tested positive for PFAS. According to State Attorney General Bob Ferguson, groundwater testing near the Yakima Training Center in 2021 showed PFAS contamination levels more than 1,300 times the limits proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) earlier this year. Groundwater contamination from PFAS-containing firefighting foam has rendered several Washington communities’ drinking water unusable, with others requiring significant treatment measures. 

Fifteen chemical manufacturers are named as defendants in Maryland’s lawsuit addressing contamination caused by PFAS present in aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), also known as “firefighting foam,” used by airports, industrial and military facilities and local fire departments.

Five of those companies are named in a separate lawsuit  by Maryland that focuses on PFAS contamination from other products that was introduced into the state’s environment through industrial facilities, product use and disposal, landfills receiving PFAS-containing waste and wastewater treatment facilities containing PFAS-contaminated waste streams.

By not informing the state and the public of risks associated with PFAS and by continuing to produce and market these products, the lawsuits allege, the manufacturers allowed the substances to contaminate the state’s environment through multiple pathways, putting residents’ health at risk.

In a statement, Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown said that the manufacturers “must pay to clean up the damage and be held accountable for the harms they have caused.”

Maryland’s lawsuit also alleges that the Firefighting Foam Coalition, a Virginia-based trade group made up of AFFF manufacturers, collaborated to conceal information about product toxicity and potential environmental impacts.

The organization did not respond to a request for comment.

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez also filed suit against 21 firms on June 1, contending they have contributed to environmental contamination in in the state and seeking an undisclosed monetary compensation, Associated Press reported.

While the most widely used PFAS substances—perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS)—are no longer produced in the U.S., their highly stable chemical properties make them resistant to degradation under normal conditions. PFOS and PFOA have also been shown to be toxic at very low concentrations, and are easily transported through soil and groundwater.

In March, EPA proposed establishing legally enforceable levels for PFOS, PFOA and four other PFAS known to occur in drinking water.

Over the past year, attorneys general in Wisconsin, California, North Carolina, Maine and Illinois have filed similar suits against PFAS manufacturers claiming environmental damage, risks to human health and misleading government regulators. As with Maryland’s litigation, they hope to hold the companies liable for the yet-to-be-determined costs of site clean-up and restoration—estimated to be billions of dollars. Most suits also seek punitive damages from the manufacturers.

North Carolina has also sued chemical manufacturers over PFAS and AFFF air, site and groundwater contamination that has been documented at locations across the state. In March, a state superior court judge rejected a motion by DuPont and Chemours to dismiss a state-brought lawsuit alleging PFAS discharges at Chemours Fayetteville production facility.

Industry Response

Although the manufacturers named in the lawsuits have not commented publicly on the litigation, several have announced efforts to reduce or eliminate their use of PFAS.  

3M announced last December that it would no longer manufacture PFAS, and would work to discontinue use of the substances across its product portfolio by the end of 2025. As part of the announcement, 3M chairman and CEO Mike Roman said that while PFAS can be safely made and used, “we also see an opportunity to lead in a rapidly evolving external regulatory and business landscape to make the greatest impact for those we serve.”

According to DuPont’s website, the company has completed its phase-out, begun in 2019, of longchain PFAS in processes and products. The company also claims to have “delivered on our commitment to partner with local, state and federal agencies related to ongoing remediation at those of our production sites with PFAS in soil and/or groundwater.”