Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Chemical pollution · United States · 1981–2026

DuPont PFOA (C8) at Washington Works, Parkersburg, and the Tennant farm

Nature's voice · report
In the early 1980s a family sold 66 acres beside me to DuPont. The land became the Dry Run Landfill, and my creek, Dry Run, ran from it into the family's pasture.
Did nature suffer? Yes. Harm is on record. Disputed
Recorded
  • The farmer said he lost 153 animals on that land. In a passage from his lawyer's book, at least 100 calves and more than 50 cows died in two years, and tumours were seen in the organs of deer. Science Friday
  • Six veterinarians, three chosen by DuPont and three by the EPA, put the deaths down to poor care. When the lawyer documented that PFOA had been dumped in the landfill, the case settled. Wikipedia
  • In 1984 DuPont measured a high level of C8 in the drinking water of Little Hocking, Ohio, across the river from the plant. The company told the regulator in 2002. Wikipedia
  • The action level for PFOA in the water near the plant was lowered from 150 ppb in 2002 to 0.5 in 2006, 0.4 in 2009 and 70 ppt in 2016 or 2017.
What the record lacks: 10 none on record · 4 insufficient · 4 disputed · 2 unclear See the gaps
Accounts of the harm differ
What killed the livestock on the Tennant land?
  • Government and regulators Joint review of six veterinarians (three chosen by DuPont, three by the EPA): The report attributed the deaths to poor care. Wikipedia
  • Communities and civil society Rob Bilott, the family's lawyer: Documented that PFOA had been dumped in the landfill; the case then settled. Wikipedia
How many animals were lost?
  • Communities and civil society The family's farmer: 153 animals.
  • Communities and civil society Rob Bilott's book: At least 100 calves and more than 50 cows died in two years; tumours were seen in the organs of deer. Science Friday
  • Press and investigations A film review: A figure of 190 cattle, which does not match the farmer's own account.

DuPont used PFOA to make Teflon at its West Virginia plant for more than 50 years, and drinking water in six districts was contaminated. Penalties and settlements followed from 2004 to 2025, including a 2005 US EPA penalty for failing to report risk information.

≈ 1.8 days estimate2005 EPA penalty vs DuPont's 2005 net income
$10.25m against about $5.6m of net income per day. Estimate.

Status As of August 2026: the 2005 penalty stands with no reduction found; the personal-injury suits were settled in 2017; public-water-system, Ohio and New Jersey settlements were agreed in 2023 and 2025 (final approval of the New Jersey settlement not confirmed); federal limits on PFOA in drinking water are being revised with no final rule found.

What?
For more than 50 years DuPont used PFOA (C8) to make Teflon at its Washington Works plant near Parkersburg, West Virginia, and drinking water in six water districts in West Virginia and Ohio was contaminated. It was a continuing activity, not an accident; penalties and settlements followed from 2004 to 2025. DuPont / SEC EDGAR
Where?
Washington Works plant near Parkersburg, West Virginia; six water districts in West Virginia and Ohio, including Little Hocking, Ohio; the Dry Run landfill. Later settlements cover New Jersey, Ohio and US public water systems.
When?
Birth-defect information in 1981; C8 measured in Little Hocking water in 1984 and reported in 2002; class settlement 2004; EPA penalty 14 December 2005; phase-out commitment February 2007, effective by 2015. Personal-injury settlement 13 February 2017; water-systems fund 2 June 2023; New Jersey settlement August 2025.
Who?
Gained
  • DuPont — Products representing about US$1bn of revenue a year that could be affected by PFOA regulation, 2005–2010 (10-K wording; revenue, not profit) DuPont / SEC EDGAR
  • DuPont — In 1984 its executives estimated that dropping PFOA would put US$100–200m in annual profits at risk (internal estimate cited from court documents) Chicago Booth Review
  • Chemours — About US$23m received from one insurer under a US$45m settlement (2024), and US$150m for PFAS insurance rights assigned under the 2025 New Jersey settlement Chemours / SEC EDGAR
Lost
  • DuPont — US$10.25m civil penalty plus US$6.25m in environmental projects to the EPA (2005), without admission of liability US EPA (archive)
  • DuPont — US$19.7m awarded in three jury verdicts, 2015–2017 Douglas & London
  • DuPont and Chemours — US$670.7m to settle about 3,550 personal-injury cases (2017), split 50/50, without admission of liability CHEManager
  • Chemours, DuPont and Corteva — US$1.185bn fund for US public water systems (2023): Chemours about US$592m, DuPont about US$400m, Corteva about US$193m DuPont
  • DuPont, Chemours and Corteva — US$110m to the State of Ohio (2023), of which DuPont about US$39m
  • Chemours, DuPont and Corteva — US$875m to New Jersey over 25 years (present value about US$500m), plus up to US$1.2bn of remediation funding and a US$475m reserve (2025) Chemours / SEC EDGAR
Harmed
  • About 80,000 residents of six water districts in West Virginia and Ohio — Drank water with PFOA at or above 0.05 ppb for at least a year (2004 class) Wikipedia
  • 69,030 residents screened by the C8 Health Project — The C8 Science Panel reported 'probable links' to six diseases: high cholesterol, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, testicular cancer, kidney cancer and pregnancy-induced hypertension
  • Children of women on the Teflon line — In 1981 two of eight women working on the line had children with birth defects; DuPont did not report this to the government for 22 years Medical News Today
  • Three plaintiffs with kidney or testicular cancer — Juries awarded US$1.6m, US$5.6m and US$12.5m, 2015–2017, finding negligence and malice Douglas & London
  • Tennant family's cattle — Cattle deaths near the Dry Run landfill led to a 1999 lawsuit, settled after PFOA disposal at the landfill was documented Wikipedia
Why?
DuPont used PFOA as a processing aid for Teflon fluoropolymers; in 1984 its executives estimated that dropping it would put US$100–200m in annual profits at risk, according to court documents cited by Chicago Booth Review. The EPA penalised DuPont for failing to report substantial-risk information it held from 1981 to 2004, without admission of liability, and juries in 2015–2017 found negligence and malice. US EPA (archive)
How?
PFOA from the plant reached drinking water in nearby districts over decades; DuPont measured it in Little Hocking's water in 1984 and reported it to regulators in 2002. Liabilities were later shared with its 2015 spin-off Chemours and with Corteva, and Chemours has pursued insurers for PFAS costs while standard policies now exclude PFAS. DuPont / SEC EDGAR
In proportion The 2005 civil penalty of US$10.25m equalled about 1.8 days of DuPont's 2005 net income of US$2,053m (estimate). DuPont / SEC EDGAR
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

DuPont used PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid, known inside the company as C8) as a processing aid for Teflon fluoropolymers at its Washington Works plant near Parkersburg, West Virginia. DuPont's annual report on Form 10-K said it had bought PFOA from a third party for more than 50 years and began making it itself in 2002. In February 2007 it committed to stop making, using or buying PFOA by 2015. In 2019 the plant had 608 full-time employees and 432 contract workers. This was a continuing activity, not an accident.

According to the record, in 1981 two of the eight women working on the plant's Teflon line had children with birth defects, and DuPont did not report this to the government for 22 years; it argued that the defects could not be linked to C8 and did not run a monitoring study among its workers. In 1984 DuPont measured C8 in the drinking water of Little Hocking, Ohio, across the river from the plant, in a test that was not made public; it reported the result to regulators in 2002. The Tennant family sold 66 acres to DuPont in the early 1980s; the land became the Dry Run Landfill and its creek ran into the family's pasture. The family's farmer said he lost 153 animals; a passage from the book of the family's lawyer, Rob Bilott, says at least 100 calves and more than 50 cows died in two years and that tumours were seen in the organs of deer. Bilott sued in 1999. A joint review panel of six veterinarians, three chosen by DuPont and three by the EPA, attributed the deaths to poor care. After Bilott documented that PFOA had been dumped in the landfill, the case was settled; the date and amount were not found.

A class action filed in 2001 settled in 2004, covering about 80,000 residents who had drunk water with PFOA at or above 0.05 ppb for at least a year (another record says about 70,000 people). The settlement created an independent C8 Science Panel. The C8 Health Project screened 69,030 residents of six contaminated water districts in 2005–06, and the panel reported "probable links" to six diseases, including kidney and testicular cancer (the others: high cholesterol, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease and pregnancy-induced hypertension). Juries in 2015–2017 found negligence in one case and malice in two; in 2017 DuPont and Chemours settled about 3,550 cases for $670.7m (one source gives $671.7m).

On 14 December 2005 the US EPA announced a settlement with DuPont: a $10.25m civil penalty plus $6.25m in Supplemental Environmental Projects, $16.5m in total, for failing to report substantial-risk information obtained between 1981 and 2004, without admission of liability. Seven of the eight counts were under section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act; the eighth was under the waste law (RCRA). For 2005–2010 DuPont's annual reports said products representing about $1bn of revenue a year could be affected by PFOA regulation; its net income over those years totalled about $15bn. Drinking-water action levels for the area fell from 150 ppb in 2002 to 0.5 in 2006, 0.4 in 2009 and 70 ppt in 2016 or 2017.

In 2023 Chemours, DuPont and Corteva agreed a $1.185bn fund for US public water systems, and Ohio settled for $110m; in 2025 New Jersey settled for $875m over 25 years plus remediation funding. In April 2024 the EPA set binding limits of 4 ppt each for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water; in May 2025 it announced that it would extend the compliance date for these two from 2029 to 2031 and rescind four other limits, and it published the proposals on 20 May 2026. No final rule was found.

  1. 1981Birth defects in two of eight children of Teflon-line workers; not reported for 22 years
  2. 1984DuPont measures C8 in Little Hocking drinking water; reported in 2002
  3. 1999Tennant family sues over cattle deaths near the Dry Run landfill
  4. 2001Leach class action filed for about 70,000–80,000 residents
  5. 2002DuPont begins making PFOA itself; EPA drinking-water action level 150 ppb
  6. 2003April: the consultancy Weinberg Group writes to DuPont about PFOA, proposing expert panels and reports on so-called junk science (as summarised in the Wikipedia entry on the firm)
  7. 2004Leach settlement; EPA complaints filed (Jul, Dec)
  8. 2005EPA settlement: $10.25m penalty plus $6.25m in projects (14 Dec)
  9. 2006Action level cut to 0.5 ppb
  10. 2007DuPont commits to stop using PFOA by 2015 (Feb)
  11. 2009Action level 0.4 ppb
  12. 2012C8 Science Panel reports probable links between PFOA and six diseases (one record dates the findings to 2012; another to 2005–2013)
  13. 201313 December: consent order redirects $1.5m of a $5m biodegradation project to university PFOA research
  14. 2015Bartlett verdict: negligence, $1.6m (7 Oct). The plant and most of the burden pass to Chemours
  15. 2016Freeman verdict: $5.1m plus $0.5m punitive, malice found (Jul); Vigneron $2m (Dec)
  16. 2017Vigneron $10.5m punitive (Jan); about 3,550 cases settled for $670.7m (13 Feb); action level 70 ppt
  17. 2021DuPont, Corteva and Chemours agree to share pre-2015 PFAS costs up to $4bn (22 Jan)
  18. 20225 December: Sixth Circuit affirms a $40m verdict (Abbott)
  19. 2023$1.185bn fund for US public water systems (2 Jun); Ohio settlement of $110m
  20. 2024Chemours settles with one insurer for $45m (Jul). 10 April: EPA sets binding 4 ppt limits for PFOA and PFOS
  21. 2025New Jersey settlement: $875m over 25 years (Aug); Chemours assigns PFAS insurance rights for $150m. May: EPA announces it will extend the PFOA/PFOS compliance date from 2029 to 2031 and rescind four other limits
  22. 202620 May: EPA publishes the proposals; no final rule found

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

“EPA Settles PFOA Case Against DuPont for Largest Environmental Administrative Penalty in Agency History.”

“This is the largest civil administrative penalty EPA has ever obtained under any environmental statute.”

“Products currently manufactured by the company representing approximately $1 billion of [year] revenues could be affected”

“$100 million to $200 million in annual profits at risk.”

DuPont executives' 1984 internal estimate of dropping PFOA, as cited from court documents by Chicago Booth Review · 1984 · Chicago Booth Review

“EPA Fines DuPont $16.5M for Teflon Cover-Up”

HealthDay, headline · 15 December 2005 · HealthDay

“DuPont settles lawsuits over Teflon-making chemical leak”

Reuters wire via The Edge Malaysia, headline · 13 February 2017 · The Edge Malaysia

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

Did DuPont withhold risk information from regulators?
Government and regulators
US EPA

Fined DuPont for failing to report, between 1981 and 2004, information on substantial risk of injury to human health or the environment (seven of eight counts under TSCA 8(e)).

US EPA (archive)
Company or project
DuPont

Did not admit liability. In the case of the 1981 birth defects it argued they could not be linked to C8.

US EPA (archive)
Communities and civil society
Environmental Working Group

Described the EPA action as a finding that DuPont was guilty of withholding studies on Teflon-related blood and water pollution.

Environmental Working Group
What killed the livestock on the Tennant land?
Government and regulators
Joint review of six veterinarians (three chosen by DuPont, three by the EPA)

The report attributed the deaths to poor care.

Wikipedia
Communities and civil society
Rob Bilott, the family's lawyer

Documented that PFOA had been dumped in the landfill; the case then settled.

Wikipedia
How many animals were lost?
Communities and civil society
The family's farmer

153 animals.

Communities and civil society
Rob Bilott's book

At least 100 calves and more than 50 cows died in two years; tumours were seen in the organs of deer.

Science Friday
Press and investigations
A film review

A figure of 190 cattle, which does not match the farmer's own account.

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

  • "Largest Environmental Administrative Penalty in Agency History"
    US EPA, press release, 14 December 2005 · US EPA (archive)
  • "EPA Fines DuPont $16.5M for Teflon Cover-Up"
    HealthDay, headline, 15 December 2005 · HealthDay
  • "Largest environmental settlement" for a single state (New Jersey, 2025)
    No speaker named in the source · WHYY
  • Settlements were made without admission of liability (2005, 2017); the companies denied the allegations (2023).
    DuPont, Chemours and Corteva · DuPont
  • In February 2007 DuPont committed to stop making, using or buying PFOA by 2015.
    DuPont, annual report on Form 10-K

Recorded

  • The $10.25m penalty equalled about 1% of one year's PFOA-related revenue and about 1.8 days of 2005 net income (estimate).
    DuPont / SEC EDGAR
  • EPA 2005: the penalty was for failing to report information on substantial risk of injury to human health or the environment that DuPont obtained between 1981 and 2004, not for negligence; DuPont did not admit liability.
    US EPA (archive)
  • The Environmental Working Group said existing rules allowed fines of up to $313m.
    Environmental Working Group
  • "About $1bn a year" is revenue that could be affected by PFOA regulation, not profit. DuPont net income was $2,053m in 2005, $3,031m in 2010 and $3,474m in 2011; the 2005–2010 total was $14,985m.
    DuPont / SEC EDGAR
  • No reduction of the $10.25m penalty was found. A consent order of 13 December 2013 redirected $1.5m of a $5m biodegradation project to university PFOA research.
    US EPA
  • Drinking-water action levels fell from 150 ppb (2002) to 70 ppt (2016 or 2017).
  • In April 2003 the consultancy Weinberg Group wrote to DuPont about PFOA, proposing expert panels and reports on so-called junk science (as summarised in the Wikipedia entry on the firm).
    Wikipedia
  • Jury verdicts in the individual cases: negligence, $1.6m (2015); malice, $5.6m (2016); a further $12.5m (2016–2017).
    Douglas & London
  • No source documents the tax treatment of any payment.

Who gained

Money that reached nature, beside money that stayed elsewhere.

Reached nature or the ground

Not published
Supplemental Environmental Projects (2005 EPA settlement)$6.25m
Window: 2005
USD 1.5m of the $5m biodegradation project was redirected to university PFOA research in 2013. The $10.25m civil penalty is a payment for the reporting failures, not for environmental work.
Fund for US public water systems (Chemours, DuPont, Corteva)$1.2bn
Window: 2023
Shares: Chemours about $592m, DuPont about $400m, Corteva about $193m.
New Jersey settlement, cash commitment$875m
Window: 2025–2050
Paid over 25 years; present value about $500m. Plus up to $1.2bn remediation funding and a $475m reserve fund.

Gained elsewhere

Not totalled
Revenue from products that could be affected by PFOA regulation, 2005–2010 estimate≈ $6bn
Window: 2005–2010
6 years × about $1bn (10-K wording). Revenue, not profit; no figures before 2005.
DuPont net income, 2005–2010$15bn
Window: 2005–2010
Annual profit at risk from dropping PFOA (1984 internal estimate)$200m
Window: per year
$100–200m a year, per court documents cited by Chicago Booth Review.
The 2005 civil penalty ($10.25m) equalled about 1.8 days of DuPont's 2005 net income ($2,053m) and about 1% of one year's revenue of the products DuPont said PFOA rules could affect (about $1bn). estimate
Currency: USD · Window: Mixed — see each line. Figures cover different periods and are not compared as a ratio. * Estimate built from cited figures.

Responses on record

  • DuPont (December 2005): Did not admit liability in the December 2005 EPA settlement. · US EPA (archive)
  • DuPont (2005–2010): Said in its annual reports for 2005 to 2010 that products representing approximately $1 billion of revenues could be affected by PFOA regulation. · DuPont / SEC EDGAR
  • DuPont (February 2007): Committed in February 2007 to stop making, using or buying PFOA by 2015.
  • DuPont (1981 onward): Argued that the 1981 birth defects could not be linked to C8 and did not run a monitoring study among its workers (as recorded).
  • DuPont and Chemours (2017-02-13): Settled the personal-injury cases in 2017 without admission of liability; DuPont had said it would appeal the verdicts. · CHEManager
  • Chemours, DuPont and Corteva (2023-06-02): Agreed the $1.185bn public-water-systems settlement and denied the allegations. · DuPont

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

  1. 1999–Settled
    Tennant v. DuPont
    US court (West Virginia; court not named in the sources reviewed) · Civil · Tennant family (farmers) → DuPont

    Filed by Rob Bilott over cattle deaths near the Dry Run Landfill. A joint panel of three DuPont-chosen and three EPA-chosen veterinarians attributed the deaths to poor care; after Bilott documented that PFOA had been dumped in the landfill, the case settled. Date and amount were not found. Wikipedia

  2. 2001–2004Settled$70m settlement (cash)
    Leach v. DuPont (class action)
    US court (West Virginia) · Class action · About 70,000–80,000 residents of six water districts → DuPont

    Settled in 2004 for residents who drank water with PFOA at or above 0.05 ppb for a year; DuPont's 10-K describes $85m of expenditures plus $23m in fees including a $70m cash payment, and the settlement created the C8 Science Panel. The C8 Health Project screened 69,030 residents in 2005–06 and the panel reported probable links between PFOA and six diseases. Wikipedia

  3. 2004–2005Settled$16.5m fine
    EPA v. DuPont (TSCA 8(e) and RCRA)
    US EPA; Environmental Appeals Board · Administrative · US Environmental Protection Agency → DuPont

    Complaints filed July and December 2004; eight counts, seven for failing to report substantial-risk information (human health, environmental contamination and animal toxicity studies) obtained 1981–2004 under TSCA section 8(e), and one under RCRA. Settled on 14 December 2005 for a $10.25m civil penalty plus $6.25m in Supplemental Environmental Projects without admission of liability. No reduction of the penalty was found; a supplemental project was amended in 2013. US EPA (archive)

  4. 2015Claimant won$1.6m awarded
    Bartlett v. DuPont (C8 MDL 2433)
    US District Court, Southern District of Ohio · Civil · Bartlett (kidney cancer) → DuPont

    On 7 October 2015 the jury found DuPont liable for negligence ($1.1m plus $0.5m for emotional distress); actual malice was not proven, so no punitive damages. Douglas & London

  5. 2016Claimant won$5.6m awarded
    Freeman v. DuPont (C8 MDL 2433)
    US District Court, Southern District of Ohio · Civil · Freeman (testicular cancer) → DuPont

    $5.1m compensatory on 6 July 2016; the jury found malice and added $0.5m in punitive damages on 8 July. Douglas & London

  6. 2017Claimant won$12.5m awarded
    Vigneron v. DuPont (C8 MDL 2433)
    US District Court, Southern District of Ohio · Civil · Vigneron (testicular cancer) → DuPont

    On 13 February 2017 the companies settled all claims, decided and pending, split 50/50, without admission of liability; DuPont had said it would appeal the verdicts. One source gives the sum as $671.7m and the number of suits as more than 3,500. The Marietta Times

  7. 2017Settled$670.7m settlement
    C8 MDL 2433 global settlement
    US District Court, Southern District of Ohio · Class action · About 3,550 personal-injury plaintiffs → DuPont and Chemours

    On 13 February 2017 the companies settled all claims, decided and pending, split 50/50, without admission of liability; DuPont had said it would appeal the verdicts. CHEManager

  8. 2022Claimant won$40m awarded
    Abbott v. DuPont
    US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Appeal · Abbott → DuPont

    A $40m verdict of 2020 was affirmed on 5 December 2022.

  9. 2023Settled$1.19bn settlement
    US public water systems PFAS settlement
    US federal court · Class action · US public water systems → Chemours, DuPont, Corteva

    Agreed on 2 June 2023: Chemours about $592m, DuPont about $400m, Corteva about $193m; the companies deny the allegations. DuPont

  10. 2023Settled$110m settlement
    State of Ohio PFAS settlement
    Ohio · Civil · State of Ohio → DuPont, Chemours, Corteva

    Settled in November/December 2023 for $110m, of which DuPont about $39m.

  11. 2025Settled$875m settlement
    State of New Jersey PFAS settlement
    New Jersey · Civil · State of New Jersey → Chemours, DuPont, Corteva

    Agreed in August 2025: $875m over 25 years (present value about $500m), remediation funding of up to $1.2bn and a $475m reserve; shares 50% Chemours, 35.5% DuPont, 14.5% Corteva; final approval not confirmed. Chemours / SEC EDGAR

Insurers

  1. 2017No policy found
    None disclosed → DuPont and Chemours

    The companies' 10-Ks mention no insurance for the $670.7m settlement.

  2. 2024Partly paid$23m received of a $45m settlement
    One insurance carrier (not named) → Chemours

    Chemours reported a $45m settlement agreement with one carrier in July 2024, received about $23m and booked a $23m gain. Chemours / SEC EDGAR

  3. 2025In litigation$750m policy limits not yet paid
    Additional noticed PFAS insurance carriers → Chemours

    Since April 2025 Chemours has sent four demands for arbitration to carriers whose unpaid noticed policies have limits totalling $750m. Chemours / SEC EDGAR

  4. 2025No policy found$150m consideration for assigned rights
    PFAS insurance rights assigned under the New Jersey settlement → Chemours

    Under an August 2025 PFAS insurance MOU tied to the New Jersey settlement, Chemours assigned certain PFAS insurance rights for $150m of consideration. Chemours / SEC EDGAR

  5. 2023Cover declined
    US liability insurers (ISO PFAS exclusion endorsements) → PFAS users, industry-wide
    Stated reason: PFAS exclusion endorsements CG 40 32, CG 34 95 and CG 34 96 (05-23 edition)

    Since 2023 standard policies carry PFAS exclusions, and most insurers require them at renewal. PropertyCasualty360

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

People in the 2004 class
about 80,000
Drank water with PFOA ≥ 0.05 ppb for a year
Probable disease links
6
C8 Science Panel, 69,030 residents
Penalty vs 2005 net income
≈ 1.8 days
Estimate; $10.25m
Livestock lost near the Dry Run Landfill
153 animals
The family's farmer's account; a passage from his lawyer's book cites at least 100 calves and over 50 cows in two years
Drinking-water action level for the area
150 ppb to 70 ppt
2002 to 2016/2017, lowered in steps

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
Court ruling existsKey earnings undisclosed

Nature

  • Disputed What killed the livestock on the Tennant land?
  • Disputed How many animals were lost?

Insurers

  • Unclear None disclosed: no decision on record.
  • Unclear PFAS insurance rights assigned under the New Jersey settlement: no decision on record.

Figures

  • Insufficient Pfoa released lb: Reported but not independently verified: 632,468 lb to the river, 394,486 to unlined landfills, 686,233 to air; from a DuPont-commissioned study as described secondhand.

Accounts

  • Disputed Did DuPont withhold risk information from regulators?

Record

  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: that the plant released more than 1.7 million pounds of PFOA over 1951–2003 (632,468 to the river, 394,486 to unlined landfills, 686,233 to air), from a study commissioned by DuPont as described secondhand; and that Ohio's 2018 complaint alleges at least 500,000 pounds were released into the Ohio River between 1951 and 2013.
  • None on record Production volumes of PFOA and Teflon: not found.
  • Disputed Records of the 2004 Leach settlement differ: about 70,000 people and $70m cash plus up to $235m of medical monitoring in one; about 80,000 residents who drank water at or above 0.05 ppb for at least a year, and $85m of expenditures plus $23m of attorneys' fees including a $70m cash payment, in DuPont's FY2004 10-K.
  • None on record The 2017 settlement is given as $670.7m in most sources and as $671.7m in one; the number of cases is given as about 3,550 and as more than 3,500.
  • None on record The loss at the farm is given as 153 animals by the farmer, at least 100 calves and more than 50 cows in a passage from his lawyer's book (107 calves and 56 cows in another entry), and 190 cattle in a film review.
  • None on record The year of the 70 ppt drinking-water level is given as 2016 in one record and 2017 in another.
  • None on record The date and amount of the settlement of the Tennant family's suit are not in the sources reviewed.
  • Insufficient Chemours' 2019 claim that the 2015 spin-off gave it 19% of the business but two-thirds of environmental liabilities, and paid DuPont about $3.9–4bn in dividends: reported, not verified; the dispute went to arbitration.
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: a 1961 internal DuPont memo on liver effects in rats, a 1970 classification of C8 as highly toxic, and a 1981 internal note saying no birth defect caused by C8 was known.
  • None on record Final court approval of the 2025 New Jersey settlement and of the insurance MOU.
  • None on record Identity of the insurer in Chemours' $45m settlement; outcome of four arbitration demands since April 2025.
  • None on record Final status of the EPA proposals to extend the PFOA/PFOS compliance date and rescind four other limits: no final rule found.
  • None on record No record was found of DuPont executives being tried personally, or of an outcome in the case brought by the family of a child born in January 1981 with birth defects.
  • None on record Tax treatment of the penalty and settlements.

Did the harm stop?

DuPont committed in February 2007 to stop making, using or buying PFOA by 2015. The 2005 penalty concerned information it held from 1981 to 2004. The record does not show an independent check that releases ended, and the plant and most of the burden passed to Chemours in 2015.

Who paid?

Residents of six water districts in West Virginia and Ohio, about 80,000 of whom were in the 2004 class, and the Tennant family carried the health and livestock losses until the 2004 and 2017 settlements; water systems that must treat PFAS. Payments were shared with Chemours and Corteva. The 2005 EPA penalty equalled about 1.8 days of DuPont's 2005 net income (estimate).

Sources

Voices on record: ✓ Company or project✓ Government and regulators— Courts✓ Press and investigations✓ Communities and civil society✓ Researchers

Company or project

  1. DuPont Form 10-K, FY2005
    DuPont / SEC EDGAR · 2006
  3. Chemours Form 10-K, FY2025
    Chemours / SEC EDGAR · 2026
  4. Chemours Form 8-K on the New Jersey settlement
    Chemours / SEC EDGAR · 2025-08-04

Government and regulators

Press and investigations

  4. DuPont loses $5 million Teflon verdict
    Douglas & London · 2016-07
  5. Vincent man wins $10.5M in C8 case
    The Marietta Times · 2017-01
  7. Robert Bilott
    Wikipedia · —
  9. Washington Works
    Wikipedia · —
  15. Weinberg Group
    Wikipedia ·

Communities and civil society

Researchers

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
Terms used on this page

Science and environment

PFOA (C8) and PFAS
PFAS are a large family of human-made chemicals that persist in the environment and the body; PFOA, also called C8, is one of them and was used to make Teflon.

Institutions

EPA
The US Environmental Protection Agency.
SEC
The US Securities and Exchange Commission, which regulates securities markets and what companies tell investors.

Law and courts

Arbitration
A private dispute process in which an appointed arbitrator, instead of a court, decides the case.
Class action
A single lawsuit brought on behalf of a large group of people with similar claims.
Negligence and gross negligence
Negligence is a failure to take reasonable care. Gross negligence is a serious, reckless failure; under US oil-spill law a finding of gross negligence raises the maximum penalty.
Punitive damages
Money a court orders a defendant to pay to punish especially reckless conduct, on top of compensation for losses. Mainly used in US courts.
Similar cases
Liability shifting (spin-offs, bankruptcy, closure bonds) · Chemical pollution · Water use · United States · 2017–2021
Duke Energy coal ash cleanup cost recovery (North Carolina)
Same type: Chemical pollution, Water useSame countryCourt: won by claimant, settled
Chemical pollution · Water use · United States · 1959–2010
Phosphate detergents and Lake Erie eutrophication; phosphate bans
Same type: Chemical pollution, Water useSame country
Oil, gas and coal operations · Water use · Chemical pollution · United States · 2010–2025
Permian produced water discharge and North Dakota brine spills
Same type: Water use, Chemical pollutionSame country