The Australian government has launched legal action against American giant 3M over contamination from firefighting foam supplied by the company that contained PFAS, or “forever chemicals”, seeking more than 2 billion Australian dollars ($1.43 billion) in damages. The case which is the largest ever brought by Australia, the country has commenced legal action in the Federal Court of Australia against 3M Australia Pty Ltd and 3M Company for damages to recover costs relating to per- and poly-fluoroaklyl substances (PFAS) contamination at 28 Defence bases across Australia.The claim against the Minnesota-based chemicals maker and its local unit reportedly reflects the past and future environmental, economic and cultural costs of the contamination, the government said. This action will see the Commonwealth seek damages to recover significant costs taxpayers have carried for investigating, managing and remediating contamination resulting from 3M’s AFFF containing PFAS. “Make no mistake, this legal action against 3M is significant,” Attorney-General Michelle Rowland told reporters. She added, “The Government is committed to holding 3M to account for the economic and environmental harms associated with PFAS contamination. This misconduct has contributed to substantial costs for defence and the Australian taxpayer, including over $1bn to date to investigate, remediate and mitigate PFAS contamination at defence estate sites,” she said.
What is PFAS that Australia has sued 3M over
PFAS, also known as per- and poly-fluoroaklyl substances, are chemicals that are contained in legacy firefighting foams for many years, including on Defence sites. PFAS are known for their water-resistant and non-stick properties. They can be found in firefighting foams, mobile phones, clothing and non-stick cooking pans.
What is Australia’s case against 3M
The government, which used the firefighting foam at 28 defense bases across the country, alleged 3M gave assurances the substance was safe to dispose of, biodegradable and non-toxic. Here are the three allegations against 3M:* 3M withheld a range of information and misrepresented the effects of 3M’s aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF). This included what it knew about the environmental risks of AFFF;* 3M did not fully disclose what it knew about the environmental risks of AFFF; and* 3M gave assurances about disposal and environmental safety that were inconsistent with what the company knew at the time.
What 3M has to say on the charges
A spokesperson for 3M told news agency Reuters that it would “defend ourselves against these claims through the legal process”. The company further said that Australia’s Department of Defence kept using the PFAS-containing firefighting foams for 20 years after it stopped selling the product in Australia.
