The 3M Settlement
In August 2023, 3M announced a settlement of up to $10.3 billion over 13 years to resolve PFAS contamination claims from US public water utilities. The settlement, one of the largest environmental contamination settlements in history, addressed PFAS contamination attributable to 3M’s manufacturing and sale of PFOS-based products including AFFF. The settlement established a fund for water system testing and treatment infrastructure while 3M denied liability.
DuPont and Chemours Settlements
DuPont, Chemours, and Corteva reached a $1.185 billion settlement with US public water systems in 2023, covering PFOA and related compounds from DuPont’s legacy operations. Separate ongoing litigation addresses contamination at specific sites, occupational exposure claims, and personal injury claims from residents in communities near DuPont’s manufacturing facilities. The landmark 2019 Parkersburg, West Virginia personal injury settlement, which revealed extensive internal corporate knowledge of PFAS health risks, set important precedents for subsequent cases.
State Attorney General Actions
Multiple state attorneys general have filed or obtained settlements requiring PFAS manufacturers to fund remediation, drinking water treatment infrastructure, and health monitoring programs. States including Michigan, New York, and California have pursued comprehensive PFAS litigation strategies targeting both manufacturers and end users of PFAS-containing products. These state-level actions supplement federal litigation and often move faster due to specific state environmental statutes.
Implications for Water System Funding
Settlement funds, combined with EPA funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law — which allocated $10 billion specifically for PFAS and emerging contaminants in drinking water — are providing meaningful resources for water system PFAS treatment upgrades. However, the American Water Works Association estimates that compliance with the 2024 EPA PFAS MCLs will cost water utilities $1.5 billion annually, suggesting that settlement and federal funds will cover only a portion of the total compliance cost burden.