3M, DuPont, Other Makers Expected to Face New Drinking Water Rules on ‘Forever Chemicals’

Research has linked exposure to some forms of the chemicals with health problems including kidney and testicular cancers, thyroid disease and high cholesterol, according to the EPA. Drinking water containing the chemicals is one way people can potentially be exposed to them, the agency has said.

The federal government has been tightening regulation of the chemicals, and thousands of lawsuits alleging contamination and illness have been filed over the years against 3M, DuPont and other companies that used the chemicals, including paper mills and textile manufacturers.

On Tuesday, 3M said it would stop making PFAS and work to discontinue their use in the company’s products by the end of 2025. 3M Chief Executive

Mike Roman

said in an interview Tuesday that the decision to eliminate the chemicals was influenced by increasing regulation and a growing market for alternatives.

Most PFAS-related litigation has focused on two chemicals known as PFOA and PFOS that were widely used for decades in products from nonstick cookware to waterproof clothing to firefighting foam. 3M stopped making the two chemicals in the early 2000s, while DuPont and other companies phased them out by 2015 under a voluntary EPA program.

Lawsuits involving firefighting foam that contained those two PFAS chemicals represent a big chunk of the current estimated legal liability for 3M, DuPont and other companies that sold the foam. According to plaintiffs’ lawyers, the chemicals contaminated drinking water supplies near military sites, airports and training facilities where the foam was used for years.

3M said the firefighting foam helped save service members and civilian lives, and that it produced the foam to the military’s specifications, qualifying the company for legal protection from liability as a government contractor.

DuPont said in a written statement: “We believe these complaints are without merit, and we look forward to vigorously defending our record of safety, health and environmental stewardship.”

The number of lawsuits involving firefighting foam has grown to more than 3,000 from around 75 in 2018. More than 200 public water systems, 14 states and cities such as Philadelphia, Baltimore and San Diego have sued the companies over alleged contamination.

The cases are grouped together in federal district court in South Carolina and include claims by firefighters who alleged that repeated exposure to PFAS caused cancer and other illnesses.

The EPA’s planned drinking water standards, if completed, could require thousands of public water systems found containing the chemicals to install additional filtration systems to comply with the new limits, according to an analysis by the American Water Works Association. That is likely to expand the number of lawsuits against the manufacturers, said some legal experts.

“If you’ve been drinking levels of PFAS that are above the standard, that’s an obvious catalyst for litigation,” said

Gianna Kinsman,

a vice president for Capstone LLC, a Washington-based firm that advises investors and companies on regulatory issues. The company said it isn’t advising any PFAS manufacturers.

Delaware-based DuPont declined to comment on the possible effects of the EPA water regulation on PFAS litigation.

3M said that a very low threshold for contamination in water would place a heavy burden on communities and companies. “We have and continue to support federal regulations of PFAS based on the best available science,” a spokesman for 3M said.

The first bellwether trial in the firefighting-foam litigation, over a claim brought by the city of Stuart, Fla., against 3M, DuPont and other makers of firefighting foam, is scheduled to begin in June. Stuart, a city of roughly 20,000 on the Atlantic Coast, alleges that its municipal wells were contaminated with PFAS during fire-training exercises that took place over many years.

The lawsuits claim manufacturers knew that PFAS were harmful and accumulating in people and the environment, but didn’t alert the EPA for years.

The companies are contesting the claims. 3M said it has agreed to remediate PFOA and PFOS, two forms of PFAS that the company has discontinued, at certain locations where 3M manufactured or disposed of these materials.

The American Chemistry Council, a trade group representing chemical makers, has said it supports a drinking water standard for PFAS based on the best available science, but said the chemicals have diverse properties and shouldn’t be regulated as a class. The chemicals in use today are essential in products such as cellphones and semiconductors, the group said, and are thoroughly reviewed by regulators.

The group has disputed some of the EPA’s conclusions about the health effects of PFOA and PFOS, including a link between PFOA and kidney cancer.

3M’s liability from PFAS litigation could reach nearly $30 billion by the end of the decade, according to Capstone. The group estimates that more than half of that could be paid to cover claims over firefighting foam.

DuPont has an agreement to share PFAS liability costs with

Chemours Co.

and

Corteva Inc.,

two companies spun off from DuPont’s predecessor businesses during the past decade. The agreement is set to last until 2040 or up to $4 billion.

Chemours, which now operates DuPont’s legacy chemicals business, declined to comment, citing pending litigation.

The combined liability for DuPont, Chemours and Corteva is estimated at $14 billion, according to Capstone’s calculations.

The chemicals can be removed from drinking water with filtration systems, but lawyers for the plaintiffs said those systems will be expensive, and on a national basis are likely to surpass damages awarded in the litigation.

Matt Pawa,

a lawyer representing Vermont, one of the states suing over firefighting foam, said: “The public is going to have to bear the cost of this.”

Write to Kris Maher at Kris.Maher@wsj.com and Bob Tita at robert.tita@wsj.com