3M 2012 Annual Report Download - page 112
Download and view the complete annual report
Please find page 112 of the 2012 3M annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.106
2005, the judge in a second purported class action lawsuit (filed by three residents of Morgan County, Alabama, seeking
unstated compensatory and punitive damages involving alleged damage to their property from emissions of certain
perfluorochemical compounds from the Company’s Decatur, Alabama, manufacturing facility that formerly manufactured
those compounds) granted the Company’s motion to abate the case, effectively putting the case on hold pending the
resolution of class certification issues in the first action described above filed in the same court in 2002. Despite the stay,
plaintiffs filed an amended complaint seeking damages for alleged personal injuries and property damage on behalf of the
named plaintiffs and the members of a purported class. No further action in the case is expected unless and until the stay is
lifted.
In February 2009, a resident of Franklin County, Alabama, filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Circuit Court of
Franklin County seeking compensatory damages and injunctive relief based on the application by the Decatur utility’s
wastewater treatment plant of wastewater treatment sludge to farmland and grasslands in the state that allegedly contain
PFOA, PFOS and other perfluorochemicals. The named defendants in the case include 3M, its subsidiary Dyneon LLC,
Daikin America, Inc., Synagro-WWT, Inc., Synagro South, LLC and Biological Processors of America. The named plaintiff
seeks to represent a class of all persons within the State of Alabama who have had PFOA, PFOS and other
perfluorochemicals released or deposited on their property. In March 2010, the Alabama Supreme Court ordered the case
transferred from Franklin County to Morgan County. In May, 2010, consistent with its handling of the other matters, the
Morgan County Circuit Court abated this case, putting it on hold pending the resolution of the class certification issues in
the first case filed there.
In December 2010, the State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General Lori Swanson, acting in its capacity as trustee of the
natural resources of the State of Minnesota, filed a lawsuit in Hennepin County District Court against 3M to recover
damages (including unspecified assessment costs and reasonable attorney’s fees) for alleged injury to, destruction of,
and loss of use of certain of the State’s natural resources under the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act
(MERLA) and the Minnesota Water Pollution Control Act (MWPCA), as well as statutory nuisance and common law claims
of trespass, nuisance, and negligence with respect to the presence of PFCs in the groundwater, surface water, fish or
other aquatic life and sediments. The State also seeks declarations under MERLA that 3M is responsible for all damages
the State may suffer in the future for injuries to natural resources from releases of PFCs into the environment, and under
MWPCA that 3M is responsible for compensation for future loss or destruction of fish, aquatic life and other damages.
In January 2011, the City of Lake Elmo filed a motion to intervene in the State of Minnesota lawsuit and seeks damages in
excess of $50,000 and other legal and equitable relief, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, for alleged contamination of
city property, wells, groundwater and water contained in the wells with PFCs under several theories, including common
law and statutory nuisance, strict liability, trespass, negligence, and conversion. The court granted the City of Lake Elmo’s
motion to intervene in this lawsuit.
In November 2011, the Metropolitan Council filed a motion to intervene and a complaint in the State of Minnesota lawsuit
seeking damages in excess of $50,000 and other legal, declaratory and equitable relief, including reasonable attorneys'
fees, for costs and fees that the Metropolitan Council alleges it will be required to assess at some time in the future if the
MPCA imposes restrictions on Metropolitan Council's PFOS discharges to the Mississippi River. Metropolitan Council's
intervention motion was based on several theories, including common law negligence, and statutory claims under MERLA
for response costs and under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (MERA) for declaratory and equitable relief against
3M for PFOS and other PFC pollution of the waters and sediments of the Mississippi River. 3M did not object to the
motion to intervene. In January 2012, 3M answered the Metropolitan Council's complaint and filed a counterclaim alleging
that the Metropolitan Council discharges PFCs to the Mississippi River and discharges PFC-containing sludge and
biosolids from one or more of its wastewater treatment plants onto agricultural lands and local area landfills. Accordingly,
3M requested that if the Court finds that the State is entitled to any of the damages the State seeks, 3M seeks contribution
and apportionment from the Metropolitan Council, including attorneys' fees, under MERLA, and contribution from and
liability for the Metropolitan Council's proportional share of damages awarded to the State under the MWPCA, as well as
under statutory nuisance and common law theories of trespass, nuisance and negligence. 3M also seeks declaratory
relief under MERA.
In May 2012, 3M filed a motion to disqualify the State of Minnesota’s counsel, Covington & Burling, LLP (Covington). In
October 2012, the court granted 3M's motion to disqualify Covington as counsel to the State and stayed discovery in the
natural resources damages case for up to 180 days to give the State time to secure new counsel. In October 2012, the
State and Covington appealed the court’s disqualification to the Minnesota Court of Appeals.
In June 2009, the Company, along with more than 250 other companies, was served with a third-party complaint seeking
contribution towards the cost of cleaning up a 17-mile stretch of the Passaic River in New Jersey. After commencing an
enforcement action in 1990, the State of New Jersey filed suit against Maxus Energy, Tierra Solutions, Occidental
Chemical and two other companies seeking cleanup and removal costs and other damages associated with the presence
of dioxin and other hazardous substances in the sediment of the Passaic. The third-party complaint seeks to spread those
costs among the third-party defendants, including 3M. Allegations asserted against 3M relate to its use of two commercial