© Claudio Divizia stock.adobe.com
Activewear brand Lululemon has reached a settlement with the Texas attorney general (AG) following an investigation into whether the company "misled consumers" over the alleged presence of PFAS in its products.
Lululemon said the state did not identify PFAS in its products or materials during the review, for which the company supplied documentation, including third-party laboratory testing reports.
The company said the settlement requires no changes to its products or existing practices. Nevertheless, the agreement commits it to maintaining and enforcing its chemical management policies.
Texas does not restrict the use of PFAS in apparel, but the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) protects consumers from practices that are false, deceptive or misleading.
The outcome highlights how scrutiny of companies’ PFAS claims and chemical management policies can lead to settlement obligations even where no PFAS-specific restriction applies to the product category.
Earlier this year, the Texas AG’s office issued Lululemon with a civil investigation demand (CID) over potential PFAS use. A CID is a tool used to obtain relevant information for an investigation.
Lululemon said at the time that it no longer used the persistent chemicals in its products, having phased them out by 2023.
AVC requirements
The Texas AG’s office secured the settlement in the form of an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance (AVC), a legal agreement resolving allegations of consumer protection violations. It requires Lululemon to maintain chemical safety standards and oversee the materials used in its products.
The requirements include:
- continuing to require vendors to comply with its restricted substances list (RSL) through independent testing or third-party certifications;
- verifying the validity of certifications and requiring additional testing when certifications expire; and
- taking "commercially reasonable" corrective measures to address vendor non-compliance.
The provisions place particular emphasis on supplier compliance and verification of chemical safety documentation, rather than changes to Lululemon’s products.
Lululemon added that the settlement includes no admission of wrongdoing or liability and no financial penalty. The obligations will remain in effect for three years.
PFAS scrutiny
The case comes amid growing legal and investor scrutiny of companies' use, or alleged use, of PFAS in consumer products. Several businesses have faced challenges over their use of the substances, while others, including Patagonia, have moved to eliminate intentionally added PFAS from their products.
Investors are also increasingly considering the potential systemic risks arising from companies’ exposure to PFAS-related litigation and regulatory action, leading some to adopt PFAS-exclusion policies for their portfolios.