Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are a group of man-made, toxic organic compounds that were used in industrial applications like electrical equipment and heat transfer fluids in the 20th century. It was only in the late 1970s that the US Government banned its production due to environmental and health concerns.
Persistent in the environment and the human body, PCBs and associated contamination continue to pose significant health risks like cancer and neurotoxicity today.
A Vermont high school had to shut down its operations after high levels of PCB were discovered in its building walls.
Litigation and liability questions around incidents of PCB contamination are the pressing issues of regulatory enforcement, public health research, and policy responses.
In this blog post, we will shed light on the different types of lawsuits that are doing the rounds in recent times. Moreover, we will also highlight the key issues that you might face while filing a PCB lawsuit for compensation.
Sources of PCB Contamination
Once a go-to chemical in countless products, from homes to offices and even infrastructure, PCBs were revealed as a serious threat to human and environmental health. Despite the ban decades ago, their presence persists, leaving a troubling legacy.
Certain PCBs are suspected human carcinogens, increasing the chances of cancer development. Besides, these chemicals interfere with endocrine organs, causing hormonal abnormalities. Moreover, on some occasions, they can result in reproductive and developmental defects.
These harmful chemicals aren’t added to products today. They sneak in as unexpected byproducts of manufacturing. Unfortunately, even these “inadvertent” PCBs still find their way into our bodies and surroundings.
This loophole means that we are still exposed and the environment continues to suffer contamination. Here is a list of common sources of this persistent organic pollutant.
Industrial Releases
During active production from the 1930s-70s, tonnage levels of PCBs were vented into the surrounding land, air, and water around manufacturing plants as routine process emissions.
One example is the Brio Refinery site in Texas which released massive amounts of toxic waste into a nearby creek. Continued leakage from retired industrial locations that held PCB oils, created hotspots. The responsibility for the remediation now rests with the current owners.
Spills
Transport spills have also seeded PCBs through the environment. Take the case of the 1996 power transformer fire in the Paoli Rail Yard site in Pennsylvania. Researchers analyzing the area found surface soil concentrations of PCBs at levels up to 2,500 parts per million – 500 times higher than industrial screening levels for remediation.
Hundreds of PCB Superfund sites from the remediation of massive spills exist today. Stringent handling protocols mandated by regulators now aim to mitigate such acute spill risks that can pollute sites for years following initial accidents.
Landfills
Landfills that received PCB-containing toxic wastes decades ago are now releasing contaminants into the environment. These toxins are released through seeps formed due to the lining materials degrading over time.
Several inadvertent landfill sites in North Carolina have complained of PCB contamination. For decades, groundwater from many of these landfills flowed into adjacent Tapiz Creek.
While unlined landfills of the past often leached chemicals locally, this exemplified how even newer contained dumps started releasing PCB holdings in their regions, over time.
Improper Disposal
In the 1900s, many hotspots came into existence due to poor disposal practices for PCB-laced consumer and industrial items such as transformers or electronics.
Before updated regulations, companies used to discharge oils loaded with PCBs directly into rivers or pour waste into unlined pits that seep and run off spread areas. According to Tru Lawsuit Info, the residents of Milwaukee are fighting against the monumental environmental damage caused by Monsanto, a company that produced 99 percent of the USA’s PCBs.
Cleanups or capping such sites seek to prevent further spread but the groundwater effects of surrounding areas may continue for years after a remediation.
In various regions, historical industrial activities have spread PCB contamination. Pin-pointing a single event or linking exposure to a specific source has proven challenging, even with detailed chemical analysis. Facilities engaged in PCB chemical compounding often operated simultaneously with other substances such as PAHs or heavy metals.
Types of PCB Litigation
The effects of PCB contamination often span decades or generations before manifesting harm and spurring accountability efforts. Analytical capabilities for detecting environmental contamination and tracing long-term impacts have improved. With them, a wave of litigation has arisen, seeking responsibility for pollution remediations or individual damages.
As a plaintiff, you can seek environmental liability through several legal actions against the companies that were involved in the questionable handling practices of PCB-related commodities.
Mentioned below are the different types of litigations that you can resort to, if you or someone you love has suffered from PCB-induced dangers.
Personal Injury Lawsuits
Individuals who have developed medical conditions linked to PCB exposure, like cancer or neurological damage, may have grounds to sue companies for negligence in contamination events.
Consider the case of Joyce Marquardt, a teacher in one of the schools, in Washington state, that got contaminated by PCBs. She fell ill and was among three teachers awarded a settlement from their district. The settlement was worth $185 million, paid by Monsanto, a leading PCB manufacturer.
You need to prove that sufficient toxin exposure from the defendant’s actions caused your health deterioration. Settlements, in these cases, may cover medical costs and lost wages.
Mass Tort Lawsuits
Here, groups of plaintiffs combine similar personal injury claims into mass torts to litigation against companies as aggregated cases. Mass actions pool resources and aim for larger settlements by showing widespread culpability patterns. Efficiencies also benefit courts over hearing repetitive claims.
Property Damage Lawsuits
Home or business owners may also litigate property value destruction and remediation costs due to contamination by resources around locations.
For example, fisheries can file for revenue losses if government norms limit their movements on waterways polluted by industrial dumping of PCB, nearby. Moreover, real estate developers encounter rising project costs when previously dormant dump sites require heavy cleanups before allowing new construction.
Environmental Lawsuits
Regulatory bodies like the EPA or state agencies tackle the most complex pollution cases with lawsuits against large entities viewed as negligent of release prevention.
In September 2023, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson filed a lawsuit against Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, for releasing PCB toxins into the city’s environment.
Key Legal Issues in PCB Litigation
Proving accountability or securing compensatory relief for PCB contamination presents multilayered legal complexities.
A plaintiff case must establish convincing causation links between specific entity actions or negligence to identify health or environmental damages claimed for compensation.
With PCBs prevalent from numerous industrial sources, for decades, isolating sole agents can prove difficult. Plaintiffs are now using medical biomarkers and forensic analysis to support and reinforce their arguments. These processes use blood serum residue levels to trace exposures back to local manufacturer-documented pollution records.
Threshold barriers around time limits for filing claims add further hurdles before even reaching challenging evidentiary burdens. Although these norms vary from one State to the other, in general, you have anywhere between one to six years to file your claim.
Compliance with conditions protecting the environmental law also makes it difficult to establish accountability. The production of PCBs and their use occurred much before the scientists discovered their persistent and severe consequences.
Many companies argue that the production and commercialization of PCB-related products met the minimum codes of conduct set during that time. According to them, evaluating actions taken at the beginning of the 1900s with the stricter laws today is not right.
To conclude, nothing can compensate for personal loss. The ball that was set rolling a century ago has still not stopped. The sad legacy of PCB usage has left indelible scars across environmental and human health, with the full fallout still emerging.
But, as new advancements come up to detect lingering impacts, the possibility for accountability proceeds as well. Sources of exposure have become more definable and culpability arguments have strengthened into precedent. And, so has the liability for corporations as well as agencies negligently permitting contamination.
