fbpx

3M Combat Arms Earplugs

Between 2003 and 2015, it is believed that the U.S. military purchased at least one pair of “Combat Arms” earplugs for every serviceman and servicewoman sent abroad for foreign deployment.  Manufactured by a subsidiary of one of the world’s largest corporations, the 3M Company of Minnetonka, Minnesota, these earplugs were furnished to this nation’s fighting men and women for the ostensible purpose of protecting their hearing from the loud and often concussive sounds experienced during combat and training.  However, veterans who were equipped with these devices now report that they experience a multitude of hearing issues which they believe stem from the defective design of the 3M Combat Arms earplugs.   

What Made the 3M Combat Arms Earplugs Unique?

Originally designed by Aearo Technologies, which was later acquired by 3M in 2008 for $1.8 billion, the Combat Arms earplugs were the focus of what government purchasing specialists refer to as an “Indefinite Quantity Contract” or “ICQ” which made 3M the exclusive supplier for these types of earplugs for the U.S. military between 2003 and 2012.  What makes the Combat Arms earplugs unique or special from other types of “selective attenuation” devices goes to the heart of why so many were purchased for service members.

The 3M Combat Arms earplugs were designed to provide soldiers with two different options for reducing excessive noise depending upon how they are worn.  Each set of plugs came from the manufacturer with an “olive” and a “yellow” end.  If the plugs were worn with the olive end in the ear (also referred to as the “closed” or “blocked” position), the earplugs were supposed to function as a traditional earplug and block as much sound as possible.  If the earplugs were worn with the yellow end in the ear (the “open” or “unblocked” position), they were supposed to reduce loud impulse sounds, such as battlefield explosions and artillery fire, while allowing the wearer to hear quieter noises such as commands spoken by fellow soldiers and approaching enemy combatants.

What Are Veterans Claiming About 3M and its Combat Arms Earplugs?

Defective Design

In pleadings submitted to courts across the United States, veterans who were issued 3M Combat Arms earplugs give a consistent narrative concerning their own experiences with hearing loss and suffering with tinnitus.  They believe a design defect is to blame.  In particular, they claim that if the earplugs are inserted in accordance with the 3M company’s own standard fitting instructions, that the flange on the non-inserted side of the device will revert to its original shape and loosen the seal in the ear canal – thereby causing the wearer to experience less protection.  Furthermore, because the design is symmetrical – they claim that the reduction in noise suppression will occur no matter which side is inserted into the ear.

Aearo and 3M Knew the Combat Arms Earplugs Were Defective

Veterans’ claims about Combat Arms earplugs do not stop at the water’s edge of a manufacturer producing a defective device.  In fact, veterans claim that both Aearo and 3M knew that the earplugs they were sending along with our fighting men and women into combat were defective and actively withheld this information.  

Specifically, allegations in court claim that employees from 3M/Aearo began testing the Combat Arms earplugs in January 2000 at the company’s own laboratory (as opposed to outside and impartial laboratory).  They assert that 3M/Aearo employees knew from their own testing about the flange insertion issues and that because of them the earplugs would never meet the protection standards required and proffered by the company.  When 3M/Aearo went back and re-tested the earplugs using a “modified” fitting procedure that required servicemen and women to fold back the flanges on the open end prior to insertion, they found that the earplugs functioned nominally.  However, veterans assert that 3M/Aearo never properly warned either the military or service members that the only way to get the earplugs to function was to engage in the modified fitting process.

Injuries – Hearing Loss and Tinnitus 

Hearing damage is a serious issue for U.S. military veterans.  More than 1.7 million veterans receive compensation for tinnitus and more than 1.1 million get it for hearing loss.  According to the U.S. Department of Defense, combat veterans are sometimes exposed to sounds from rocket-propelled weapons, firearms, and explosions which can top 150 decibels – well above the 86 decibel threshold for hearing loss.  As a consequence, veterans are 30% more likely than those who have never served to suffer severe hearing impairment – in particular those who served after September 11, 2001.

Regrettably, it comes as no surprise then that veterans who were equipped with the 3M Combat Arms earplugs now complain of substantial hearing loss and tinnitus.  For some veterans, incessant ringing in the ears requires noise-canceling equipment that deadens their ability to hear conversations.  Other veterans report that they are unable to sleep are tormented by sounds as common as that of a crying baby.

Were You Issued 3M Combat Arms Earplugs and Now Suffer Tinnitus and/or Hearing Loss?

Holding 3M Accountable

Whistleblower Lawsuit and Settlement with U.S. Government

In July 2018, 3M agreed to settle a whistleblower claim brought under the False Claims Act by a competitor in U.S. ex rel. Moldex-Metric, Inc. vs. 3M Co.  The allegations in that suit focused on the false statements 3M and Aearon made to the U.S. Government concerning the defective nature of the earplugs.  However, as part of the settlement, 3M made no admission as to its liability or wrongdoing.

Multi-District Litigation

In April 2019, lawsuits filed by suffering veterans from across the country were consolidated into a process known as “Multi-District Litigation” or MDL.  Because these cases share a common basis in claims and allegations, litigation will be managed by Judge M. Casey Rogers in a single courtroom in the Northern federal district of Florida.  

The first three trials involving 3M’s Combat Arms earplugs under the consolidated MDL took place in Pensacola.  They resulted in at least two jury verdicts in favor of injured veterans with damages totaling $8.8 million.  One of the three resulted in a jury verdict in favor of 3M.  The most recent bellwether case (the fourth) returned a jury verdict in favor of the injured veteran for $8.2 million.  

The federal judge overseeing the 3M Combat Arms MDL has authorized an additional four bellwether trials to take place through the beginning of 2022.

Sources Cited (14)

1) “Hundreds of vets are suing over these defective combat earplugs” https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/02/14/hundreds-of-vets-are-suing-over-these-defective-combat-earplugs/

2) “Vets Tormented by Hearing Loss Face 3M in Earplug Mass Lawsuit” https://about.bgov.com/news/vets-tormented-by-hearing-loss-face-3m-in-earplug-mass-lawsuit/

3) “‘Standard issue’ military earplugs deemed faulty” http://www.southeastsun.com/daleville/article_3111f9b0-7670-11e9-9ce8-43678a9a58e3.html

4) “Judge rules against key 3M defense in earplug lawsuit” https://www.startribune.com/judge-rules-against-key-3m-defense-in-earplug-lawsuit/571921552/?refresh=true

5) “3M: $9m fine for allegedly selling faulty ear plugs to the military” https://connectingvets.radio.com/articles/3m-company-resolves-allegations-supplying-military-defective-dual-ended-combat-arms

6) “V.A. Research on Hearing Loss” https://www.research.va.gov/topics/hearing.cfm

7) “Fighting the War on Hearing Loss” https://www.hearingloss.org/wp-content/uploads/Schible-ND17-final.pdf

8) “Hearing loss in veterans and the need for hearing loss prevention programs” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19265249/

9) “Lawsuits against 3M regarding combat earplugs head to federal court” https://www.startribune.com/veterans-lawsuits-against-3m-regarding-combat-ear-plugs-head-to-federal-court/566822022/?refresh=true

10) “Department of Defense – Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs: Hearing Restoration” https://cdmrp.army.mil/hrrp/default

11) “Company to pay $9 million after allegedly selling defective combat earplugs to US military” https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/07/26/company-to-pay-9-million-after-allegedly-selling-defective-combat-earplugs-to-us-military/

12) “3M loses bid to dodge thousands of lawsuits over military earplugs” https://www.reuters.com/article/products-3m/3m-loses-bid-to-dodge-thousands-of-lawsuits-over-military-earplugs-idUSL2N2EY1V6

13) “Competitor Blows Whistle on Defective Combat Gear” https://www.foodmanufacturing.com/home/video/21017086/competitor-blows-whistle-on-defective-combat-gear

14) “Robin Kennedy v. 3M Company, et al.” https://ecf.jpml.uscourts.gov/doc1/85011006761

 

Tracy Everhart is the Editor for Drug Law Journal. A highly-trained and certified medical professional, Tracy is also an accomplished medical writer. After spending years on the front lines of the medical profession, Tracy now devotes her expertise and skills to researching and reporting on new drugs and devices that enter the market, as well as their side-effects and the real-life stories involved. Prior to joining Drug Law Journal, Tracy wrote for benchmark online healthcare resources focused on families and, in particular, women’s health issues. Tracy holds post-graduate degrees from both the American College of Healthcare Sciences and the Yale School of Nursing. She is also a graduate of both Hampshire College, where she studied microbiology and the University of South Carolina school of nursing.

Had an issue with a drug or device?

Describe what happened and our expert legal team will review your situation and get in touch with you.

Share your Story
Drug Law Journal Legal Sponsorship

Drug Law Journal's publishing and research are sponsored by the DDP Injury Law Group in Washington, D.C. Their legal team is focused on protecting the rights of injury victims.
Furthermore, they understand and appreciate the importance of a trusted attorney-client relationship.
The DDP Injury Law Group uses their years of experience with litigation to ensure their clients can fight for the compensation they deserve.

Always seek the advice of a medical professional when making personal health choices.

The Offices of DrugLawJournal.com are located at:

1800 North Orange Avenue, Suite C
Orlando, Florida 32804

DrugLawJournal.com is sponsored by the DDP Injury Law Group, and therefore may be considered attorney advertising. The information contained on DrugLawJournal.com is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any subject matter. No viewers of this site should discontinue taking a prescribed medication on the basis of any information on this site and should always first consult with a doctor concerning any medication. Viewers should understand that if they refrain from taking prescribed medication without appropriate medical advice they can suffer injury or death.

No viewers of content from this site, clients or otherwise, should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in the site without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from an attorney licensed in the viewer’s state. Viewing information from DrugLawJournal.com does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and DDP Injury Law Group or DrugLawJournal.com nor is it intended to do so.The content of DrugLawJournal.com may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. Prior results do not predict a similar outcome. For more information, please visit our web site’s disclaimer.

©2024 DrugLawJournal.com | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive peroidic updates from our expert team of researchers, highlighting defective drugs, devices, and legal issues related to your health.

Email Catcher
Free Drug and Medical Device Case Review

Free Drug and Medical Device Case Review

Share your story with us and we will reach out to you about your case.

First
Last
Described what happened to you, we will review and reach out to you about your situation.

It is important for those who have suffered injury from dangerous drugs and medical devices to know that they have may have options.

Consumers have the ability to seek legal remedies for their injuries resulting from the negligence of drug and device manufacturers. The first step toward justice and recovery is sharing your story with effective legal counsel. An attorney will help you to better understand the issues and discuss the possibility of compensation for your suffering.

Once you complete the information request above, Drug Law Journal will send the information to a specialist at our legal sponsor’s firm, the DDP Injury Law Group, in Washington, D.C. That specialist will follow-up with you directly to gather further specific information about your case and make an evaluation. If the firm is able to move forward on your case, they will also discuss next steps. Remember – the entire consult and evaluation is free to you. You only need to take the first step to fill out the contact form or call: (800) 597-1870 for immediate assistance.