How far does reducing PFAS contamination depend on shareholder democracy?

Owners voting their values can deliver most of this outcome.

PFAS contamination is made, sold and defended by companies whose shares are publicly traded, and the two things that decide how fast it ends are both on the proxy. The first is what the companies manufacture. 3M, which was a leading producer for decades, announced in December 2022 that it would leave PFAS manufacturing altogether by the end of 2025, which settles the question of whether this chemistry is a choice: one company chose otherwise while its competitors did not. The second is what the industry spends in Washington. Chemical industry advocates spent more than $110 million between 2019 and 2022 on lobbying that included opposing PFAS laws, and in the same period only four of more than 130 PFAS bills became law.

Six of the eight obstacles below move with a shareholder vote, and three of them are decided by one. Production, consumer products and lobbying are corporate conduct in the plainest sense: what a company makes, what it puts in a tampon or a food wrapper, and what it pays lobbyists to stop. The record shows owners already voting on exactly these questions, with one proposal carrying 94 percent of the shares voted at Jack in the Box in 2022 and a chemical footprint proposal drawing 436 million shares at TJX in 2020.

Two obstacles are not settled by owners alone. Removing PFAS that is already in drinking water needs treatment plants that public utilities build with public money, even after 3M's settlement of up to $10.3 billion. Clinical testing for exposed people is decided by clinicians, health agencies and insurers working to guidance from the National Academies, and nothing in the documents read makes corporate conduct the thing holding it back. Neither of those is a reason to lower the rating on the obstacles where the vote does reach, which is where this report says to use it.

What owners can do

• Vote for proposals asking 3M, DuPont, Chemours and Dow to report the full cost of PFAS production and the political spending that defends it, and vote alongside an organization that files them
• Vote for packaging and product chemistry proposals at consumer companies, which is where this record already shows a win: 94 percent of the shares voted at Jack in the Box in 2022
• Ask the asset manager holding your index fund how it voted on the 3M environmental costs proposal in 2022 and on the TJX chemical footprint proposal in 2020
• Follow As You Sow, Green Century and Trillium Asset Management, the three organizations with PFAS asks on the record, and vote alongside them

Where this sits on our maps

• UN SDG Target 3.9: Reduce deaths from hazardous chemicals and pollution · see it on the UNSDG map
• UN SDG Target 6.1: Safe and affordable drinking water for all · see it on the UNSDG map
• UN SDG Target 6.3: Reduce pollution, dumping, and hazardous chemical release · see it on the UNSDG map
• UN SDG Target 12.4: Sound management of chemicals and wastes · see it on the UNSDG map
• JUST Capital issue: Water
• JUST Capital issue: Health

Organizations to know

• As You Sow (shareholder advocacy on record) Files the PFAS disclosure resolutions at consumer goods companies☆ Follow
• Green Century Equity Fund (shareholder advocacy on record) Filed the packaging proposal that named PFAS and carried 94 percent of the shares voted at Jack in the Box
• Trillium Asset Management (shareholder advocacy on record) Led the TJX chemical footprint proposal with First Affirmative Financial Network☆ Follow
• The Shareholder Commons (shareholder advocacy on record) Argued the 3M proposals on environmental costs and political influence☆ Follow
• Food & Water Watch (shareholder advocacy on record) Published the lobbying analysis that names the companies, the committee and the bills
• Environmental Working Group (shareholder advocacy on record) Compiled the Defense Department data on PFAS discharges at military sites
• 3M Co (publicly listed) The producer that chose to leave PFAS manufacturing, and the defendant in the water suppliers settlement☆ Follow
• Chemours Co (publicly listed) A named PFAS manufacturer in the lobbying record
• DuPont de Nemours Inc (publicly listed) Historically made or used PFAS and is named in the lobbying record
• Dow Inc (publicly listed) Historically made or used PFAS and is named in the lobbying record☆ Follow

Sources

1. Key ingested per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and their health effects: landscape review (World Health Organization)
2. 3M to Exit PFAS Manufacturing by the End of 2025 (Form 8-K exhibit) (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission)
3. Notice of Exempt Solicitation: The Shareholder Commons on 3M environmental costs and political influence (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission)
4. 3M Company 8-K, Item 5.07, 2022 annual meeting voting results (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission)
5. PFAS industry spent over $110 million on recent lobbying, report finds (The New Lede)
6. The Devil they Knew: Chemical Documents Analysis of Industry Influence on PFAS Science (Annals of Global Health)
7. Notice of Exempt Solicitation: Green Century Equity Fund on Jack in the Box packaging (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission)
8. Jack in the Box Inc. 8-K, Item 5.07, 2022 annual meeting voting results (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission)
9. Notice of Exempt Solicitation: Trillium Asset Management on the TJX chemical footprint proposal (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission)
10. The TJX Companies, Inc. 8-K, Item 5.07, 2020 annual meeting voting results (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission)
11. 3M Settlement with Public Water Suppliers to Address PFAS in Drinking Water Receives Final Court Approval (3M Company)
12. EPA Advances Comprehensive PFAS Strategy with Legally Defensible, Practical, Scientifically Sound Drinking Water Protections (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
13. EPA's PFAS Drinking Water Regulation: Considerations for Congress (Congressional Research Service)
14. Interactive Map: Military Sites With Known or Suspected Discharges of PFAS (Environmental Working Group)
15. State of Oregon firefighting foam complaint (Oregon Department of Justice)
16. PFAS Fact Sheet (U.S. Air Force Civil Engineer Center)
17. Authorized Uses of PFAS in Food Contact Applications (U.S. Food and Drug Administration)
18. PFAS in Consumer Products (Washington State Department of Health)
19. Procter & Gamble Co: Disclosure of PFAS-Related Risk Management Practices (As You Sow)
20. Disclosure of PFAS use reduction practices at Johnson & Johnson (Principles for Responsible Investment)
21. Guidance on PFAS Exposure, Testing, and Clinical Follow-Up (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine)
22. Interim Guidance on the Destruction and Disposal of PFAS (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)

Build the MovementExplore what you care about