The Illinois Attorney General’s Offices has sued 3M and several other companies, joining other states initiating litigation in pursuit of potentially vast payments over alleged pollution linked to widely-used synthetic chemicals.
Attorney General Kwame Raoul filed the complaint Jan. 31, along with Matthew Dunn, the office’s chief of environmental enforcement and a member of its asbestos litigation division. Three private firms are working with the state on the case: DiCello Levitt, of Chicago; Keating Muething & Klelamp, of Cincinnati, and Fields, Han & Cunniff, of Washington, D.C.
The 10-count complaint “seeks to hold some of the largest chemical companies in the world accountable for their culpable conduct” and pursues unspecified compensatory damages, as well as an injunction forcing the defendants to implement public outreach programs and protective measures, while studying the effects of their operations on the environment.
The state’s lawsuit focuses on perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which it says are referred to as PFAS, a group of synthetic “forever” chemicals in use since the 1940s. It alleged companies such as 3M and DuPont “used PFAS to make household products that Americans used in their homes every day like Teflon and Scotch Guard,” knowing such chemicals are toxic but consistently issuing public denials of any harm to human life or the planet.
From late 2020 to 2021, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency conducted a study looking for evidence of 18 PFAS at 1,428 entry points representing 1,749 community water supplies, although the complaint said there may be more than 5,000 types of PFAS, all of which the lawsuit incorporates. One exception is PFAS substances found in aqueous film-forming foams, which the state asserted is separable from contamination caused by consumer and industrial sources.
“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has concluded that human epidemiology data identifies associations between certain PFAS exposure and high cholesterol, increased liver enzymes, decreased vaccination response, thyroid disorders, pregnancy-induced hypertension and preeclampsia and cancer (testicular and kidney),” the complaint alleged.
Other defendants include 3M subsidiary Dyneon, Arkema, AGA Chemicals Americas, BASF Corporation, Bayer, Clariant, Daikin, Chemours, DowDuPont, Corteva and Solvay Specialty Polymers.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a similar lawsuit in November, without the aid of private firms, additionally targeting 100 as-yet-unknown defendants that allegedly contributed to contamination. According to an analysis of the California suit by attorneys with the Phelps firm, of Louisiana and Texas, the legal theories advanced in the California suit are designed to be "easily transferable," meaning they can serve as a pattern for other states and jurisdictions to bring facsimile suits targeting the same companies on the same kinds of claims.
According to Raoul’s complaint, in addition to consumer products, PFAS synthetics have a variety of industrial applications because of their ability to reduce friction. The lawsuit said the chemicals can enter the environment through “releases to air, land, surface water and groundwater from industrial processes and facilities, from disposal by industrial processes and facilities, and from the normal use and/or disposal of consumer products that contain PFAS.”
Raoul’s complaint alleged 3M conducted studies as far back as the 1950s revealing the toxicity of PFAS substances in animals and confirmed those followings in subsequent decades. It further said independent doctors identified “PFAS in human blood banks across the country and contacted 3M to inform them that they thought 3M chemicals might be to blame.”
In addition to intentionally hiding such information, Raoul alleged, the “defendants actively engaged in a campaign to promote perfluorochemicals as safe to manufacture and use and to distort scientific evidence concerning potential harms associated with perfluorochemicals.”
Formal claims include negligence, trespass, public nuisance, strict products liability — concerning failure to warn and design defect — civil conspiracy, unjust enrichment and violations of fish and wildlife laws, the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act and the Illinois Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act.
The complaint seeks to force the companies to pay compensatory damages for harm to and loss-of-use of natural resources, as well as the cost of investigation, testing and monitoring, providing alternate water sources, installation and maintenance of drinking water treatment systems and early warning systems to detect PFAS contamination before it reaches public water intakes.
Further damages sought includes the cost of remediation and restoration of “groundwater, surface waters, wetlands, soils, sediments and other natural resources” and remedial action around community water supplies.
Among other injunctive relief, the state wants the court to order the companies to “complete the investigation, characterization and remediation of the PFAS released into the environment from its manufacturing processes and disposal practices, including potential releases via air deposition, identify pathways of exposure to natural resources, restore natural resources that have been damaged or impacted by PFAS and analyze the impact of such releases to drinking water wells, surface waters, stream biota, groundwater, soils, sediments, flora and fauna, including sportfish and other wildlife consumed by the public, subject to the approval of the state.”