4~
`
`..
`i
`
`State of Alaska
`Treg R. Taylor, Attorney General
`Daryl A. Zakov
`Department of. Law.
`1031 W. Fourth Avenue, Suite 200
`Anchorage, AK 99501
`daryl.zakov@alaska.gov
`Telephone 907.269.5100
`Facsimile 907.276.3697
`
`Aaron D. Sperbeck
`Michael J. Schwarz
`Birch Horton Bittner & Cherot
`510 L Street, Suite 700
`Anchorage, AK 99501
`asperbeck@bhb.com
`mschwarz@bhb.com
`Telephone 907.276.1550
`Facsimile 907.276.3680
`
`Attorneys for the State of Alaska
`
`IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA
`
`FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT FAIRBANKS
`
`Case No. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`
`BARBARA GASTON,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`STATE OF ALASKA,
`
`Defendant.
`
`STATE OF ALASKA,
`
`Third-Party Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`3M COMPANY, E. I. DUPONT DE
`NEMOURS AND COMPANY, THE
`CHEMOURS COMPANY, THE CHEMOURS
`COMPANY FC, LLC, DUPONT DE
`NEMOURS, INC., CORTEVA, INC., TYCO
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ . 01076513. DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 1 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 1 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 1 of 25
`
`

`

`FIRE PRODUCTS LP, CHEMGUARD, INC.,
`JOHNSON CONTROLS INTERNATIONAL,
`PLC, CENTRAL SPRINKLER, LLC, FIRE
`PRODUCTS GP HOLDING, LLC, KIDDE-
`FENWAL, INC., KIDDE PLC, INC., CHUBB
`FIRE, LTD., UTC FIRE & SECURITY
`AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC.,
`RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES
`CORPORATION, CARRIER GLOBAL
`CORPORATION, NATIONAL FOAM, INC.,
`ANGUS INTERNATIONAL SAFETY GROUP,
`LTD, BUCKEYE FIRE.EQUIPMENT
`COMPANY, ARKEMA, INC., BASF
`CORPORATION, CHEMDESIGN
`PRODUCTS, INC., DYNAX CORPORATION,
`CLARIANT CORPORATION, CHEMICALS
`INCORPORATED, NATION FORD
`CHEMICAL COMPANY, AGC, INC., AGC
`CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.,
`DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.,
`ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC,
`ARCHROMA U.S., INC., and JOHN DOE
`DEFENDANTS 1-49,
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`Third-Party Defendants.
`
`Kv ~
`
`DEFENDANT'S THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
`FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`
`COMES Now the State of Alaska (the "State" or "Third-Party PlaintifP'), by and
`
`through its Attorney General, Treg R. Taylor, and pursuant to his constitutional, statutory,
`
`and common law authority, including the authority granted by AS 44.23.020, 09.17.080,
`
`and Alaska R. Civ. P. 14(c), hereby files its Third-Party Complaint for allocation of fault
`
`and equitable apportionment of damages against the named Third-Party Defendants,
`
`stating and alleging as follows:
`
`INTRODUCTION AND NATURE OF THE THIRD- PARTY ACTION
`
`1.
`
`The State brings
`
`this action against Third-Party Defendants for
`
`contamination of the natural resources, of the State; including but not limited to the lands,
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 2 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 2 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 2 of 25
`
`

`

`waters, biota, and wildlife, as a result of the release of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
`
`("PFAS") into the environment 'through .the handling, use, disposal, and storage of
`
`products containing PFAS.
`
`2.
`
`PFAS are a class of man-made chemicals that include perfluorooctane
`
`sulfonate ("PFOS").and perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA").
`
`3.
`
`In this Third-Party Complaint, references to PFOS and PFOA also include
`
`all of their salts and precursor chemicals.
`
`4.
`
`Third-Party Defendants designed, manufactured, marketed, sold and/or
`
`assumed or acquired liabilities for the manufacture and/or sale of PFOS, PFOA, and/or
`
`products containing PFOS or PFOA, including but no.t limited to aqueous film-forming
`
`foam ("AFFF") (collectively, "Fluorosurfactant Products").
`
`5.
`
`PFOS and PFOA present a significant threat to the State's natural
`
`resources, properties, and residents. PFOS and PFOA are highly mobile and persistent
`
`in the environment, and they are toxic at extremely low levels. Furthermore, they are
`
`bioaccumulative and biomagnify up the food chain.
`
`6.
`
`Third-Party Defendants designed, manufactured, formulated, distributed, .
`
`marketed, and/or sold Fluorosurfactant Products with the knowledge that these
`
`compounds were toxic and that they would be released into the environment even when
`
`used as directed and intended by Third-Party Defendants.
`
`7.
`
`Additionally, Third-Party Defendants failed to provide adequate warnings or
`
`instructions with their Fluorosurfactant Products, both before and after selling such
`
`Products. Third-Party Defendants failed to adequately advise their customers, the. public,
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 3 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 3 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 3 of 25
`
`

`

`or the State about the threats PFOS or PFOA pose to natural resources and human health
`
`if released into the environment.
`
`8.
`
`Third-Party Defendants;
`
` by their actions and/or inactions, bear ultimate
`
`responsibility for the release . of vast amounts of PFOS and PFOA into Alaska's
`
`environment, contaminating the State's water resources, soils, sediments, biota and
`
`wildlife, threatening the health, safety, and well-being of the State's residents.
`
`9:
`
`Third-Party Defendants' Fluorosurfactant Products have caused and will
`
`continue to cause injury to the State's environment, natural resources, pr.operties, and
`
`residents.
`
`10.
`
`Accordingly, the State, .through this action, seeks to equitably allocate fault
`
`to each responsible Third-Party Defendant, to make the State whole, and requiring them
`
`to pay all costs necessary to fully investigate and determine the various locations
`
`~ -~
`
`throughout Alaska where their Fluorosurfactant Products were used, stored, discharged,
`
`released, spilled, and/or disposed, as well as all areas affected by their Fluorosurfactant
`
`Products.
`
`11.
`
`Likewise, this action seeks to require Third-Party Defendants to pay all
`
`costs necessary to investigate, assess, remediate, monitor, filtrate and/or restore the sites
`
`in Alaska where their Fluorosurfactant Products were used, stored, discharged, spilled,
`
`and/or disposed, including but not limited to the sediment, soil, surface waters,
`
`groundwaters, drinking water or water systems located thereon as well as any off-site
`
`areas and natural resources that have been contaminated by their Fluorosurfactant
`
`Products.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 4 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 4 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 4 of 25
`
`

`

`,--
`o
`N
`~
`o..
`~
`o'
`~
`0
`rA
`
`0
`
`~
`E-~
`~
`~ Cd
`~
`X-,
`
`~
`• ~
`a~
`U
`~
`
`12.
`
`Additionally, this action seeks to require Third-Party Defendants.to pay all
`
`past and future costs incurred by. the. State in . investigating, monitoring, and otherwise
`
`responding to injuries and/or threats to public. health, as well .as damages for harm to the
`
`State's natural resources, caused by Third-Party Defendants' Fluorosurfactant Products.
`
`13.
`
`Further, Alaska governmental entities
`
`that purchased Third-Party
`
`Defendants' Fluorosurfactant Products are now forced to spend additional money to
`
`properly dispose of any remaining inventory. Such costs are rightfully borne by Third=
`
`Party Defendants and, as such, are also sought through this action. .
`
`14.
`
`Lastly, Third-Party Plaintiff seeks the full allocation of damages against
`
`Third-Party Defendants that Plaintiff may be entitled to recover including, but not limited
`
`to, property damages to personal and real property, economic and non-economic
`
`damages; punitive damages, and all other damages, fees, costs, and equitable relief to
`
`,
`which Plaintiff may be entitled.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`1.5.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction: based upon AS 22.10.020 and
`
`Alaska R. Civ. P. 14(c) which grants the State authority to file suit against Third-Party
`
`Defendants.
`
`16.
`
`The Court may properly exercise personal jurisdiction over these Third-
`
`Party Defendants because they regularly conduct business in Alaska and/or have the
`
`requisite minimum contacts with Alaska necessary to constitutionally perrriit the Court to
`
`exercise jurisdiction over them pursuant to Alaska's Long-Arm Statute, as codified at
`
`AS 09.05.015.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD=PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ . 01076513. DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 5 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 5 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 5 of 25
`
`

`

`17.
`
`Venue is proper in the Fourth Judicial District at Fairbanks pursuant to
`
`Alaska R. Civ. P. 3 in that many of Third-Party Defendants' unlawful acts and/or practices
`
`that give rise to this Third-Party Complaint were committed in this judicial district.
`
`PARTIES
`
`18.
`
`Third-Party Plaintiff is the State of Alaska, acting by and through its Attorney
`
`General, Treg R. Taylor, in its sovereign capacity in order to protect the interests of the
`
`State and its citizens. The Attorney General brings this action pursuant to his
`
`constitutional, statutory, and common law authority, including the authority granted in
`
`AS 44.23.020.
`
`19.
`
`Upon information and belief, the following Third-Party Defendants, at all
`
`times relevant to this action, designed, manufactured, formulated, marketed, distributed,
`
`sold, and/or assumed or acquired liabilities for the manufacture and/or sale of
`
`Fluorosurfactant Products that Third-Party Defendants knew or reasonably should have
`
`known would enter the State of Alaska and be released into the environment, or otherwise
`
`conducted business in the State.
`
`20.
`
`Third-Party Defendant 3M Company ("3M"), formerly known as Minnesota
`
`Mining and Manufacturing Company, is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
`
`business at 3M Center, St. Paul, Minnesota. 3M is the only company that manufactured
`
`AFFF containing PFOS and/or its precursor chemicals. 3M is authorized to conduct
`
`business in .Alaska.
`
`21.
`
`Third-Party Defendant E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company ("DuPont")
`
`is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at 974 Centre Road,
`
`Wilmington, Delaware. DuPont is registered to do business in Alaska.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 6 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 6 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 6 of 25
`
`

`

`,--
`o
`N ~
`~
`0 ~
`~
`0
`~
`0
`~
`U
`~
`E--~
`~
`~
`
`~
`
`x :
`b a~
`• ~
`a~
`U
`
`22.
`
`Third-Party Defendant The Chemours Company ("Chemours") is a
`
`Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at 1007 Market Street,
`
`Wilmington, Delaware. Chemours is registered to do business in Alaska.
`
`23.
`
`In 2015, DuPont spun off its "Performance Chemicals" business to
`
`Chemours, along with certain environmental liabilities. Upon information and belief, at the
`
`time of the transfer of its Performance Chemicals business to Chemours, DuPont had
`
`been sued, threatened with suit, and/or had knowledge of the likelihood of litigation to be
`
`filed regarding DuPont's liability for damages and injuries arising from the manufacture
`
`and sale of fluorosurfactants and the products that contain fluorosurfactants.
`
`24.
`
`Third-Party Defendant The Chemours Company FC, LLC ("Chemours FC")
`
`is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business located at 1007
`
`Market Street Wilmington, Delaware. Chemours FC operates as a subsidiary of
`
`Chemours. Upon information and belief, Chemours FC is the successor-in-interest to
`
`DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise. Chemours FC is registered to do business in
`
`Alaska.
`
`25.
`
`Third-Party Defendant DuPont De Nemours, Inc. ("New DuPont") is a
`
`Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at 974 Centre Road,
`
`Building 730, Wilmington, Delaware. Upon information and belief, DowDuPont, Inc. was
`
`formed in 2017 as a result of the merger of Dow Chemical and DuPont. DowDuPont, Inc.
`
`was subsequently divided into three publicly-traded companies and on June 1,. 2019,
`
`DowDuPont, Inc. changed its registered name to DuPont de Nemours, Inc. Upon
`
`information and belief, DowDuPont, Inc. and/or New DuPont have conducted business
`
`throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF.DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX.
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 7 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 7 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 7 of 25
`
`

`

`26.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Corteva, Inc. ("Corteva") is a Delaware corporation
`
`with its principal place of business located at 974 Centre Road, Building 730, Wilmington,
`
`Delaware: Upon information and belief, Corteva is one of the aforementioned spin-off
`
`companies from DowDuPont, Inc., and is believed to have assumed some of the PFAS
`
`liabilities of the former DuPont. Corteva is authorized to conduct business in Alaska.
`
`27.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Tyco Fire Products LP ("Tyco") is a Delaware limited
`
`partnership with principal offices located at 1400 Pennbrook Parkway, . Lansdale,
`
`Pennsylvania. Upon information and belief, Tyco is the su ccesso r-i n-inte rest to The Ansul
`
`Company ("AnsuP') and manufactures the Ansul brand of products. Tyco is an indirect
`
`subsidiary ultimately wholly-owned by Johnson Controls International, pic, an Irish public
`
`limited company. Tyco is registered to do business in Alaska.
`
`28.
`
`Third-Party . Defendant Chemguard, Inc. ("Chemguard") is a Texas
`
`corporation with its principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette,
`
`Wisconsin. On information and belief, Chemguard acquired WiIliams Fire and Hazard
`
`Control, Inc. ("WFHC") in 2010. On information and belief, on or around July 9, 2011,
`
`Tyco acquired Chemguard and its subsidiary, WFHC. Upon information and belief,
`
`Chemguard has conducted and/or availed itself of doing business throughout the United
`
`States, including in Alaska.
`
`29.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Johnson Controls International, pic ("JCI pic") is an
`
`Irish public limited company with its principal place of business located at One Alb.ert
`
`Quay, Cork, Ireland.
`
`30..
`
`Third-Party Defendant Central Sprinkler, LLC is a Delaware limited liability
`
`company with its principal .place of business located at 1400 Pennbrook Parkway,
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 8 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 8 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 8 of 25
`
`

`

`Lansdale, Pennsylvania. Upon information and belief, this Third-Party Defendant. is a
`
`limited partner of Tyco.- Upon information and belief, Chemguard is wholly-owned by
`
`Central Sprinkler, LLC.
`
`31.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Fire Products GP Holding, LLC is a Delaware limited
`
`liability company with its principal place of business located at 9 Roszel.Road, Princeton,
`
`New Jersey. Upon information and belief, this Third-Party Defendant is a general partner
`
`of Tyco.
`
`32.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. ("Kidde")
`
`is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business located at One Financial Plaza, HartFord,
`
`Connecticut. - Upon information and belief, Kidde was part of UTC Fire & Security
`
`Americas Corporation, Inc. Upon information and belief, Kidde is the successor-in-interest
`
`to Kidde Fire Fighting, Inc. Kidde is registered to do business in Alaska.
`
`33.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Kidde PLC, Inc. ("Kidde PLC") is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of- business located at 9 Farm Springs Road,
`
`Farmington, Connecticut. Upon information and belief, Kidde PLC was part of UTC Fire &
`
`Security Americas Corporation, Inc. Upon information and belief, Kidde PLC . has
`
`conducted and/or availed itself of doing business throughout the United States, including
`
`in Alaska.
`
`34.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Chubb Fire, Ltd. ("Chubb") is a foreign private limited '
`
`company, United Kingdom registration number 134210, with offices at Littleton Road,
`
`Ashford, Middlesex, United Kingdom. Upon information and belief, Chubb is or has been
`
`composed of different subsidiaries and/or divisions including, but not limited to,.Chubb
`
`Fire & Security Ltd., Chubb Security, PLC, Red Hawk Fire & Security, LLC, and/or Chubb
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA=19-02411 CI
`PAGE 9 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 9 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 9 of 25
`
`

`

`National. Foam, Inc. Upon information and belief, Chubb has conducted and/or availed
`
`itself of doing business throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`35.
`
`Third-Party Defendant UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc.
`
`("UTC Fire & Security") is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at
`
`13995 Pasteur Blvd., Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. Upon information and belief, UTC
`
`Fire & Security was a division of United Technologies Corporation. Upon information and
`
`belief, UTC Fire & Security has conducted and/or availed itself of doing business .
`
`throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`36.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Raytheon Technologies Corporation ("RTC") is a
`
`Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 10 Farm Springs Road,
`
`Farmington, Connecticut. Upon information and belief, RTC was formerly known as
`
`United Technologies Corporation ("UTC") until in or around April 2020 (collectively, "RTC
`
`f/k/a UTC"). Upon information and belief, RTC and/or UTC has conducted business
`
`throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`37.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Carrier Global Corporation is a Delaware corporation
`
`with its principal place of business located at 13995 Pasteur Boulevard, Palm Beach
`
`Gardens, Florida. On information and belief, on or around April 3, 2020, UTC completed
`
`the spin-off of one of its reportable segments into a separate publicly-traded company
`
`known as Carrier Global Corporation ("Carrier"). Carrier's operations are classified into
`
`three segments: HVAC, Refrigeration, and Fire & Security. Upon information and belief,
`
`Carrier's Fire & Security products and services are sold under brand names including
`
`Chubb and Kidde. Carrier is registered to do business in Alaska.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 10 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 10 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 10 of 25
`
`

`

`38.
`
`Third-Party Defendant National Foam, Inc. ("NF") is a Delaware corporation
`
`with its.principal place of business locafed at 141 Junny Road, Angier, North Carolina. -
`
`NF is a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary-o.f Angus International Safety Group, Ltd. Upon
`
`information and belief, NF inanufactures the Angus Fire brand of AFFF products. Upon
`
`information and belief, NF has conducted and/or availed itself of doing business,
`
`throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`39.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Angus International Safety Group, Ltd. ("AISG") is a
`
`foreign private limited company, United Kingdom registration number 8441763, with
`
`offices at Station Road, High Bentham, Near Lancaster, United Kingdom. Upon -
`
`information and belief, AISG is the parent company of National Foam, Inc. :
`
`40.
`
`Third-Party Defendant. Buckeye Fire Equipment Company ("Buckeye") is an
`
`Ohio .corporation with its principal piace of business at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North
`
`Carolina: Upon information and belief, Buckeye conducted and/or availed itsel.f of doing
`
`business throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`4:1.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Arkema,
`
`Inc. ("Arkema")
`
`is a Pennsylvania
`
`corporation with its .principal place of business at 900 1st Avenue, King of Prussia,
`
`Pennsylvania.- Upon information and belief, Arkema conducted and/or availed itself of
`
`doing business throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`42.
`
`Third-Party Defendant . BASF Corporation ("BASF".)
`
`is a. Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business at 100 Park Avenue, Florham Park, New
`
`Jersey. Upori information and belief, BASF acquired Ciba-Geigy Corporation and/or Ciba
`
`Specialty Chemicals. BASF is authorized to conduct business in Alaska:
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD=PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411.CI `
`PAGE 11 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 11 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 11 of 25
`
`

`

`~
`o
`N
`o
`~ d-
`~
`~
`0
`rA
`
`o
`U_
`i~
`.~
`E~
`~
`~
``d
`~
`-Isl'
`~
`;d
`a~
`~
`U
`~
`
`43.
`
`Third-Party Defendant ChemDesign Products, Inc. ("CDPI") is a Texas
`
`corporation with its principal place of business located at 2 Stanton Street, Marinette,
`
`Wisconsin. Upon information and belief, CDPI manufactured, formulated, and/or sold
`
`Fluorosurfactant Products to certain Third-Party Defendants for use in AFFF. Upon
`
`information and belief, CDPI conducted and/or availed itself of doing business throughout
`
`the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`44.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Dynax Corporation ("Dynax")
`
`is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business located at 103 Fairview Park Drive,
`
`Elmsford, New York. Upon information and belief, Dynax manufactured, formulated,
`
`and/or sold Fluorosurfactant Products to certain Third-Party Defendants for use in AFFF.
`
`Upon information and belief, Dynax has conducted and/or availed itself of doing business
`
`throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`45.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Clariant Corporation ("Clariant"), is a New York
`
`corporation with its principal place of business located at 4000 Monroe Road, Charlotte,
`
`North Carolina. Clariant is authorized to conduct business in Alaska.
`
`46.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Chemicals Incorporated ("Chem Inc.") is a Texas
`
`corporation with its principal place of business located at 12321 Hatcherville Road,
`
`Baytown, Texas. Upon information and belief, Chem Inc. manufactured,. formulated,
`
`and/or sold Fluorosurfactant Products to certain Third-Party Defendants for use in AFFF.
`
`Upon information and belief, Chem Inc. has conducted. and/or, availed itself of doing
`
`business throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`47.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Nation Ford Chemical Company ("Nation Ford") is a
`
`South Carolina corporation with its headquarters located at 2300 Banks Street, Fort Mill,
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ . 01076513. DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 12 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 12 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 12 of 25
`
`

`

`South Carolina. Upon information and belief, Nation Ford manufactured, formulated,
`
`and/or sold Fluorosurfactant Products to certain Third-Party Defendants for use in AFFF.
`
`Upon information and belief, Nation Ford has conducted and/or availed itself of doing
`
`business throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`48.
`
`Third-Party Defendant AGC, Inc. ("AGC"), formerly-known as Asahi Glass
`
`Co., Ltd. ("Asahi Glass"), is a Japanese corporation with its principal place of business
`
`located at 1-5-1, Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku,. Tokyo, Japan. Upon information and belief,
`
`Asahi Glass Co., Ltd. changed its name.to AGC, Inc. in 2018:
`
`49.
`
`Third=Party Defendant . AGC Chemicals, Americas, Inc. ("AGCCA") is a
``
`Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at 55 E. Uwchlan Ave.,
`
`Suite 201, Exton, Pennsylvania. Upon information and belief, AGCCA is a subsidiary of
`,
`AGC and/or Asahi Glass._ Upon information and belief, AGCCA has conducted and/or
`
`availed itself'of doing business throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`50.
`
`,
`
`Third-Party. Defendant Deepwater Chemicals Company ("Deepwater") is a
`
`Delaware corporation with its principal business ofFce at 196122 E County Road 40,
`
`Woodward, Oklahoma. Upon
`
`information and belief, Deepwater manufactured,
`
`formulated, and/or sold Fluorosurfactant Products to certain Third-Party Defendants for
`` -
`use in AFFF. Upon information and belief, Deepwater has conducted and/or availed itself
`,
`of doing business throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`51.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Archroma Management, LLC ("Archroma") is a
`
`foreign limited liability company registered in Switzerland, with a principal business
`
`address of Neuhofstrasse 11, 4153 Reinach, Basel-Land, Switzerland.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`.508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 13 OF 25
`
`a
`~
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 13 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 13 of 25
`
`

`

`52.
`
`Third-Party Defendant Archroma U.S., Inc. ("Archroma U.S.") is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business located at 5435 77 Center Dr., #10,
`
`Charlotte, North Carolina. Upon information and belief, Archroma U.S. is a subsidiary of
`
`Archroma. Upon information and belief, Archroma U.S. has conducted and/or availed
`
`itself of doing business throughout the United States, including in Alaska.
`
`53.
`
`Upon information and belief, Third-Party Defendants John Doe 1-49 were
`
`manufacturers and/or sellers of Fluorosurfactant Products that are responsible for the
`
`damages caused to Third-Party Plaintiff described herein. Although the identities of the
`
`John Doe Third-Party Defendants are currently unknown, it is expected that their names
`
`will be ascertained during discovery, at which time Third-Party Plaintiff will move for leave
`
`of this Court to add those individuals to the Third-Party Complaint as Third-Party
`
`Defendants.
`
`54.
`
`Any and all references to a Third-Party Defendant or Third-Party
`
`Defendants in this Third-Party Complaint include any predecessors, successors, parents,
`
`subsidiaries, affiliates, and divisions of the named Third-Party Defendant.
`
`55.
`
`When the term "Third-Party Defendants" is used alone, it refers to all Third-
`
`Party. Defendants named in this Third-Party Complaint jointly and severally. When
`
`reference is made to any act or omission of the Third-Party Defendants, it shall be
`
`deemed to mean that the officers, directors, agents, employees, or representatives of the
`
`Third-Party Defendants committed or authorized such act or omission, or failed to
`
`adequately supervise or properly control or direct their employees while engaged in the
`
`management, direction, operation, or control of the affairs of Third-Party Defendants, and
`
`did so while, acting within the scope of their employment or agency.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 14 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 14 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 14 of 25
`
`

`

`~
`o
`
`N 0
`
`~.
`
`o
`s~
`0
`~
`
`U
`~
`
`Cd
`
`~
`~
`
`~
`45
`
`•~
`'Z3
`a~
`.~
`a~
`U
`~
`
`A.
`
`THE CONTAMINANTS: PFOS AND PFOA
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`56.
`
`PFOS and PFOA are man-made chemicals within a class known as
`
`perfluoroalkyl acid ("PFAA"). PFAAs are part of the larger chemical family known as
`
`PFAS. PFAA is composed of a chain of carbon atoms in which all but one of the carbon
`
`atoms are bonded to fluonne atoms, and the last carbon atom is attached to a functional
`
`group. The carbon=fluorine bond is one of the strongest chemical bonds that occur in
`
`nature, which is a reason, why these molecules are so persistent. PFOS 'and PFOA
`
`contain eight carbon-fluorine bonds. For this reason, they are sometimes referred to
`
`as "C8."
`
`57.
`
`PFAAs are sometimes described as long-chain and short-chain, depending
`
`on the number of carbon atoms contained in the carbon chain. PFOS and PFOA are
`
`considered long-chain PFAAs because they contain eight carbon atoms in their chains;
`
`short-chain PFAAs have six or less carbon atoms in their chains.
`
`58.
`
`PFOS and PFOA are highly water soluble, which increases the rate at which
`
`they spread throughout the environment, contaminating soil, groundwater, and surface .
`
`water.. Their mobility is made .more dangerous by their persistence in the environment
`
`and resistance to biologic, environmental, or photochemical degradation.l
`
`59.
`
`PFOS and PFOA are readily absorbed in animal and human tissues after
`
`oral exposure and accumulate in the serum, kidney, and liver. They have been found
`
`EPA, Drinking Water Health Advisory for PerFluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA), EPA Doc.
`'
`Number: 822-R-16-005 (May 2016) at 16; Drinking Water Health Advisory for PerFluorooctane
`Sulfonate (PFOS), EPA Doc. Number: 822-R-16-004 (May 2016) at 16, available at
`https ://www. e p a. g ov/g ro u n d-wate r-a n d-d ri n ki n g-wate r/s u p p o rti n g-d o cu m e nts-d ri n k i n g-wate r-
`health=adv,isories-pfoa-and-pfos.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 15 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 15 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 15 of 25
`
`

`

`a
`
`globally in water, soil, and air, as well as in human food supplies, breast milk, umbilical
`
`cord blood, and human blood serum.2 .
`
`60. :
`
`PFOS and PFOA are persistent in the human body. A short-term exposure
`
`can result in a, body burden that persists for years and can increase with additional
`
`exposures.3 .
`
`61.
`
`Since they were first produced, information has emerged showing negative
`
`health effects caused by exposure to PFOS and PFOA.
`
`62:
`
`According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"),
`
`":..studies indicate that exposure to PFOA and PFOS over certain levels may result
`
`in...developmental efFects to fetuses during pregnancy or to breastfed infants (e.g:, low
`
`birth weight, accelerated puberty, skeletal variations), cancer (e.g., testicular, kidney),
`
`liver .effects .(e.g., tissue. damage), immune effects _(e.g.; antibody production and
`
`immunity), thyroid effects and other effects (e.g., cholesterol changes)."4
`
`63. . EPA has also warned that "there is suggestive evidence of carcinogenic
`
`potential for PFOS."5
`
`/
`
`EPA Doc. Number:.822-R-16-005 (May 2016) at 18-20, 25-27; and EPA Doc. Number:
`2
`822-R-16-004 (May 2016) at 19-21, 26 28.
`EPA Doc. Number: 822-R-16-005 (May 2016) at 55; and EPA Doc. Number: 822-R-16-
`3 .
`'004 (May 2016) at 55.
`"Fact Sheet PFOA & PFOS Drinking Water Health Advisories," EPA Doc. Number: 800-
`4
`available at https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/supporting-
`F-16-003.,
`docu ments-drin ki ng-water-health-advisories-pfoa-an.d-pfos.
`"Health Effects Support Document-.for. . Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS)" U.S.
`5
`Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water Health and Ecological,Criteria Division, EPA
`Doc. Number: 822-R-16-002, -available at https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-
`water/su pporting-documents-d ri n king-water-health-advisories-pfoa-and-pfos.
`
`GASTON V. STATE
`THIRD=PARTY COMPLAINT FOR APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES
`508412/2/ 01076513.DOCX
`
`CASE NO. 4FA-19-02411 CI
`PAGE 16 OF 25
`
`Case 4:21-cv-00019-JWS Document 1-1 Filed 08/16/21 Page 16 of 25
`
`Exhibit A
`Page 16 of 25
`
`

`

`64.
`
`EPA has noted that drinking water can be an additional source of
`
`PFOA/PFOS in the body in communities where these chemicals have contaminated water
`
`supplies. In communities with contaminated water supplies, "such contamination is
`
`typically localized and associated with a specific facility, for example ... an airfield at which
`~
`[Fluorosurfactant Products] were used for firefighting."6,
`
`B.
`
`AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAM
`
`65.
`
`AFFF is a type of water-based foam that was first developed in the.1960's
`
`to extinguish flammable liquid fuel fires at airports and military bases, among other places.
`
`66.
`
`The AFFF designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, and/or sold by
`
`Third-Party Defendants contained PFOS and/or PFOA.
`
`67.
`
`PFOS and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS contained in 3M's AFFF
`
`were manufactured by 3M's patented process of electrochemical fluorination ("ECF"). 3M
`
`was the only manufacturer that used ECF; all other AFFF producers manufactured
`
`fluorosurFactants for use in AFFF through the process of telomerization, which produced
`
`fluorotelomers, including PFOA and/or the chemical