The Australian government has initiated legal action against US manufacturing giant 3M, seeking AU$2 billion in damages over the alleged use of toxic ‘forever chemicals’ in firefighting foam. This legal claim is the largest ever brought by the government, Attorney-General Michelle Rowland said.

Claims of Withheld Information

The government alleges that 3M withheld and misrepresented details about the foam and its environmental impact, assuring users it was safe, despite knowing otherwise; the lawsuit seeks to recoup the ‘substantial costs’ associated with dealing with PFAS contamination at 28 locations.

According to Rowland. The government is committed to holding 3M and 3M Australia accountable for the economic and environmental harms linked to PFAS contamination. The legal action claims that 3M’s misconduct has led to substantial costs for defense and the Australian taxpayer, including over $1 billion to date for investigation, remediation, and mitigation of contamination at defense sites.

3M’s Response

In response to the lawsuit, 3M stated it has never manufactured PFAS in Australia and ceased selling the foam there 20 years ago — a spokesperson for the company said it would defend itself against these claims through the legal process.

The government’s case also alleges that 3M failed to fully disclose what it knew about the environmental risks of the aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), the company gave assurances about disposal and environmental safety that were inconsistent with what it knew at the time, according to the lawsuit.

Environmental and Health Concerns

PFAS, or per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, are known for their water-resistant and non-stick properties and can be found in various products, including firefighting foams, mobile phones, clothing, and non-stick cooking pans. These chemicals do not break down under normal environmental conditions and research has shown they are present in dangerous concentrations in water, soil, and food, and can linger in the body.

The Australian government claims that 3M misrepresented the effects of its AFFF, including the environmental risks. The company also failed to disclose the full extent of its knowledge about the foam’s risks and provided assurances about disposal and environmental safety that were inconsistent with its internal knowledge.

A 3M spokesperson also noted that the Department of Defence continued using PFAS-containing firefighting foams for two decades after 3M stopped selling the product in Australia.