About

Important information

• Pending Government Action:

  Government Action: BBB reports on known government actions involving business’ marketplace conduct:

  Attorney General Bonta Sues Manufacturers of Toxic Forever Chemicals
  

  
  

  
  

  hursday, November 10, 2022

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  

  Contact: (916) 210-6000, [email protected]

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  

  PFAS are estimated to be detectable in the bloodstream of 98% of Californians 

  
  

  SAN FRANCISCO – California Attorney General Rob Bonta
  today filed a lawsuit against the manufacturers of per- and
  polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly referred to as PFAS, for
  endangering public health, causing irreparable harm to the
  state's natural resources, and engaging in a widespread campaign
  to deceive the public. In the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta alleges
  that these manufacturers, including 3M and DuPont, knew or should have
  known that PFAS are toxic and harmful to human health and the
  environment, yet continued to produce them for mass use and concealed
  their harms from the public. As a result, these toxic "forever
  chemicals" are pervasive across California’s bays, lakes, streams, and
  rivers; in its fish, wildlife, and soil; and in the bloodstream of 98%
  of Californians.

  
  

  “PFAS are as ubiquitous in California as they are harmful,” said Attorney General Bonta. “As
  a result of a decades-long campaign of deception, PFAS are in our
  waters, our clothing, our houses, and even our bodies. The damage caused
  by 3M, DuPont, and other manufacturers of PFAS is nothing short of
  staggering, and without drastic action, California will be dealing with
  the harms of these toxic chemicals for generations. Today’s lawsuit is
  the result of a years-long investigation that found that the
  manufacturers of PFAS knowingly violated state consumer protection and
  environmental laws. We won't let them off the hook for the pernicious
  damage done to our state.”

  
  

  PFAS are a class of thousands of toxic chemicals. This lawsuit
  concerns seven common PFAS that have been detected in drinking water
  supplies, surface waters, and groundwater in California:
  perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA); perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS);
  perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS); perfluorohexanesulfonic acid
  (PFHxS); perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA); perfluoroheptanoic acid
  (PFHpA); and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA).

  
  

  PFAS are widely used in consumer products including food packaging,
  cookware, clothing, carpets, shoes, fabrics, polishes, waxes, paints,
  and cleaning products, as well as in firefighting foams designed to
  quickly smother liquid fuel fires. These so-called "forever chemicals"
  are stable in the environment, resistant to degradation, persistent in
  soil, and known to leach into groundwater. PFOS, a PFAS chemical
  exclusively made by 3M beginning in the 1940s, was a component in
  firefighting foams used by the military, airports, refineries, and fire
  departments for decades before it was phased out in the early 2000s.

  
  

  PFAS have been found in the blood of most Californians. Human
  exposure to PFAS can occur from contaminated air, water, soil, or food,
  and consumer products. Persons that work or live at or near military
  bases, airports, industrial facilities, and local fire departments,
  where firefighting foam was used, are particularly likely to have been
  exposed to dangerous levels of PFAS contaminants. PFAS can cause adverse
  health impacts including developmental defects, liver, kidney,
  testicular, breast, pancreas, and prostate cancer, adverse pregnancy
  outcomes, infertility, reduced bone density in children, and impacts on
  the thyroid and immune system. Exposure to PFOA and PFOS was also found
  to limit the effectiveness of common vaccines across multiple studies. 

  
  

  For decades, PFAS manufacturers were aware of these chemicals’
  toxicity, persistence, and prevalence in humans, but chose to
  deliberately mislead the government and the public. As early as the
  1950s, 3M and DuPont began testing the physiological and toxicological
  properties of PFAS. Based on these internal studies, the
  manufacturers knew that PFAS were toxic to humans and the
  environment. By the 1960s, the manufacturers had confirmed that PFAS
  were leaching into groundwater and contaminating the environment, and by
  the 1970s, they had confirmed that PFAS bioaccumulate in humans. 

  
  

  Yet even after 3M ceased manufacturing PFOS in response to pressure
  from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, it worked to control and
  distort the science on PFAS and to minimize their dangers to the
  environment and human health. As recently as November 2018, 3M publicly
  stated that “the vast body of scientific evidence does not show that
  PFOS or PFOA cause adverse health effects in humans at current exposure
  levels, or even at the historically higher levels found in blood.” 
  Similarly, notwithstanding a half-century of internal knowledge of
  PFOA’s health and environmental risks, DuPont publicly stated in 2003
  that “[w]e are confident that there are no health effects associated
  with [PFOA] exposure,” and that “[PFOA] is not a human health issue.”

  
  

  Today PFAS are pervasive in California. Data from the State Water
  Resources Control Board shows that PFAS are in drinking, ground, and
  surface waters, with especially high levels near airports, refineries,
  chrome plating facilities, military facilities, and landfills. PFAS have
  been detected in at least 146 public water systems serving 16 million
  Californians. These chemicals are also present in aquifers that provide
  millions of Californians with water through unregulated domestic wells.

  
  

  In the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta alleges that the manufacturers
  knew or should have known about the dangers of PFAS when they made
  and/or sold products containing them and that the manufacturers’ failed
  to warn about the dangers of PFAS and in many cases concealed them. The
  lawsuit seeks injunctive relief, damages, penalties, restitution, and
  abatement. Requested relief includes statewide treatment and destruction
  of PFAS, including, but not limited to, the treatment of drinking water
  by regulated water systems; water drawn from private wells and
  unregulated systems used for drinking water and irrigation; and water
  from other wastewater treatment plants and
  systems. The lawsuit also seeks payment of funds necessary to mitigate
  the impacts to human health and the environment through environmental
  testing, medical monitoring, public noticing, replacement water (for
  period between testing and installation of treatment), and safe disposal
  and destruction.

  
  

  A copy of the complaint is available here. 

  
  

  
  

  
  

  Click here for details