AGC in Its Own Words

This page collects what AGC has said about the Hillhouse site at Thornton-Cleveleys, in its own words: to Parliament, to the Environment Agency, to its shareholders and investors, to the press and to us.

Two companies are quoted. AGC Chemicals Europe, Ltd. (AGCCE) runs the plant. In its written evidence to Parliament it describes itself this way: “AGCCE is the European subsidiary of AGC Inc., whose HQ is in Japan.” AGC Inc., in Tokyo, is the parent. Where we quote AGC Inc. we say so.

How the quotations are sourced. Every quotation is copied from the document named beside it, which is dated and linked. Each quotation set apart on its own is a separate extract from the same document; where we leave words out inside a quotation we mark the gap with “…”. Footnote markers in the originals are left out. Where a document is in Japanese we give AGC’s original words, then our own translation, marked as ours. Where an answer is easier to follow beside the question it was given to, we print the question first. Apart from short notes, which are ours, we have added nothing else. The documents disclosed to us by the Environment Agency are public on WhatDoTheyKnow, and the link is given with each one.

The only private correspondence quoted is AGC’s replies to us of 22 July and 4 August 2026. AGC told us it had no objection to their publication. What they say about the fire is published on the fire article, and what they say about the accounts on the accounts article, where one omission in the 4 August reply is marked.

On terms. PFOA is one chemical. PFAS is the class of several thousand chemicals it belongs to. Where AGC speaks about one, we do not report it as speaking about the other.

PFOA: what AGC says about its use and phase-out

1 March 2006. Asahi Glass Co., Ltd., now AGC Inc., letter to the Administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency joining the 2010/15 PFOA Stewardship Program. (epa.gov)

“AGC has three Fluoropolymer manufacturing plants: Chiba, Japan, Hillhouse, United Kingdom and Bayonne, New Jersey. AGC commits to the goal of achieving a 95 % reduction in its global PFOA emissions from these plants, by 2010. The base year for this program is 2000.”

“Progress toward the goal will be measured on a global basis, i.e., in each reporting cycle, the emissions into all environmental media from each plant will be totaled; total global emissions will be calculated; the total will then be compared with the base year total.”

“AGC is also committing to the goal of achieving the practical elimination of APFO in both emissions and PTFE product content, by the year 2015. We caution, however, that achieving this goal is dependent on the development, demonstration and availability to AGC of new technology, as well as market acceptance of products utilizing new technology.”

(APFO is the ammonium salt of PFOA.)

August 2023. AGC Inc., main questions and answers from its results briefing for the second quarter of 2023. (agc.com, PDF, in Japanese)

「米国では訴訟も起きているが、当社はPFOSを製造も販売もしていない。もう1つの規制物質であるPFOAは乳化剤などだが、世代交代があり、当社は規制に先駆けて全廃にしている。」

Our translation: “Lawsuits have also arisen in the United States, but we neither manufacture nor sell PFOS. PFOA, the other regulated substance, is [used as] an emulsifier and the like, but there has been a generational change, and we have phased it out entirely ahead of regulation.”

28 March 2024. AGC Inc., annual securities report for the year to 31 December 2023, filed in Japan, page 27. (agc.com, PDF, in Japanese)

「当社グループは、条約で規制対象となっているPFASのうち、PFOSやPFHxSについては製造を行っておらず、PFOAの製造・販売は、条約による規制に先立ち、2015年に終了しています。」

Our translation: “Of the PFAS regulated by treaty, our Group does not manufacture PFOS or PFHxS, and the manufacture and sale of PFOA ended in 2015, ahead of regulation by treaty.”

28 March 2025. AGC Inc., annual securities report for the year to 31 December 2024, filed in Japan, page 28. (agc.com, PDF, in Japanese)

「当社グループは、条約で規制対象となっているPFASのうち、PFOSやPFHxSについてはこれまで製造・販売をしておりません。また、PFOAの製造・販売は、条約による規制に先立ち、終了しています。」

Our translation: “Of the PFAS regulated by treaty, our Group has never manufactured or sold PFOS or PFHxS. In addition, the manufacture and sale of PFOA ended ahead of regulation by treaty.”

May 2025. AGC Chemicals Europe, written evidence PFAS0059 to the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee. (parliament.uk)

“China has only recently banned the import, export, manufacture, processing, and use of PFOA and PFOS. This is an example of poor regulation of PFAS of concern that UK manufacturers already phased out over a decade ago and results in, from UK perspective, in outsourcing of pollution and difficulty to compete.”

10 September 2025. Stuart Ede, Head of Sustainability at AGC Chemicals Europe, giving evidence for the company to the Environmental Audit Committee. (parliament.uk, oral evidence, HC 852)

At Q107 the Chair asked whether PFAS chemicals are “a necessary evil” or “relatively benign”. The answer began:

“I think we must consider both aspects. The fluoropolymers we manufacture are benign, inert, so do not pose a hazard. There is a key factor of PFAS that some other PFAS, particularly when we talk about PFOA and PFOS, do have hazards, as do other chemicals.”

At Q110 the Chair asked: “In terms of those risks that you have balanced and identified, what are the risks to human health and to the environment?” The answer began:

“We voluntarily phased out PFOA back in 2012. We replaced that with an alternative surfactant that we use in our polarisation process.”

(“polarisation” is as printed in the official transcript.)

15 September 2025. An AGC Chemicals Europe spokesperson, quoted by ENDS Report. (ENDS Report)

The spokesperson told ENDS that the company “does not manufacture or use PFOA” and that it “voluntarily phased out the use of this substance in 2012”.

8 September 2025 (filed). AGC Chemicals Europe, annual report and financial statements for 2024, note 24, “Contingent liabilities”. (Companies House, company 03825057)

“AGC Chemicals Europe Ltd has never manufactured or sold PFOS or PFHxS. Additionally, we voluntarily discontinued the manufacture and sale of PFOA prior to its inclusion in international regulatory frameworks.”

21 February 2026. AGC Chemicals Europe, as reported by BBC News. (BBC News)

The BBC reported that AGC Chemicals Europe “said it stopped using PFOA in 2012, and that 40 years of monitoring showed ’no significant impact’ from emissions. It said it ‘has never used or manufactured PFOS’.” The words in single quotation marks are the ones the BBC attributed to AGC directly.

4 March 2026 (last modified). AGC Chemicals Europe, “What are PFAS?” page. (agcce.com)

“Voluntary phase out of the use of PFOA as an additive to the manufacturing process under a global US EPA Stewardship Agreement in 2012, before its inclusion in the Stockholm Convention.”

9 July 2026 (last modified). AGC Chemicals Europe, “Site Investigation” page. (agcce.com)

“While a long period has passed since PFOA was voluntarily phased out as a polymerisation aid from our operations…”

Emissions now

10 September 2025. Stuart Ede for AGC, Environmental Audit Committee. (parliament.uk)

At Q110, continuing the answer above:

“We invested in an abatement plant when we first launched the new surfactant. We invested heavily last year in further abatement technology to try to reduce those risks. A lot of the risks are uncertain and unknown, and that is why we have taken that precautionary approach of how to avoid this becoming a problem.”

At Q133 Anna Gelderd MP asked: “Mr Ede, is PFOA currently emitted from your Thornton-Cleveleys site, and has your company taken any steps to address the findings of that contamination around the site of PFOA?” The answer began:

“I think that those are two separate questions, and I will try to answer them both. Currently, there are some legacy emissions of PFOA from the site, which the council and the Environment Agency are evaluating. Our treatment plant that we installed last year has been put in place to try to minimise that. We have seen a more than 90% reduction in the trace amounts of PFOA in our effluent from that process.”

Later in the same answer:

“Also, where there are legacy emissions still ongoing, how can we reduce those? How can we eliminate them using the right techniques and technology?”

At Q136 Anna Gelderd asked: “How do you feel that the incentive structure is working at the moment, Mr Ede? Do you have anything further to say about the enforcement or incentive for dealing with these risks?” Part of the answer:

“We are currently looking at over 25 PFAS in our effluent and trying to characterise that. We are working with the Environment Agency on that data and pulling that data for the Environment Agency. There is a huge cost to that.”

“…particularly for some of our chemicals, we can only find one laboratory in the UK that can do the testing.”

May 2025. AGC Chemicals Europe, written evidence PFAS0059. (parliament.uk)

“As science and technology has developed, AGCCE are constantly improving manufacturing processes in line with our sustainability goals, a range of abatement technologies are utilised in the AGCCE manufacturing process. This included additional abatement installed in 2024 to reduce our emissions even further, as part of the FPG Manufacturing Program.”

15 September 2025. An AGC Chemicals Europe spokesperson, quoted by ENDS Report. (ENDS Report)

“very limited amount of PFOA is inadvertently generated during the lubricant grade manufacturing process as a trace contaminant and a trace amount of impurity remains within the lubricant product.”

“strongly reject the suggestion that we have not been fully transparent with the authorities or conducted our operations in a way that is not compliant”

4 March 2026 (last modified). AGC Chemicals Europe, “What are PFAS?” page. (agcce.com)

“During production of our fluoropolymers some impurities are generated, and these include a small quantity of non-polymeric PFAS. Both these PFAS impurities and the non-polymeric PFAS we use in our manufacturing processes are removed from the final product to meet our high quality requirements. The PFAS impurities and the non-polymeric PFAS are removed using recovery/treatment and/or capture processes. The use of PFAS in our manufacturing and emissions are in accordance with our Responsible Manufacturing approach and in full compliance with UK and EU regulations.”

On the industry’s voluntary targets, the same page says:

“We are pleased to announce that within the framework of the industry’s voluntary Manufacturing Programme, Fluoropolymer Product Group (FPG) members, including AGC Chemicals Europe, Ltd., have successfully met the first reduction target for non-polymeric PFAS residues from polymerisation aid technology. Specifically, members of the Programme have: For Air, achieved a reduction of these emissions in their 2024 annual average emission factors below their target of 0.009%;”

“For Water, while not all European fluoropolymers manufacturers have met the 2024 annual average emission factor for the emissions target of 0.001%, they all met that ambitious target at the end of 2024, therefore guaranteeing these emissions below 0.001% for 2025.”

The page also states:

“Continuation of Ecological Monitoring of the River Wyre Estuary, providing a dataset which currently spans over 40 years . This concludes the Hillhouse industrial complex’s effluent discharge is not having a significant effect on the SPA (Special Protection Area), MCZ (Marine Conservation Zone), SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest) or other protected habitats or species within the Wyre estuary.”

What is in the ground

20 December 2023. AGC Chemicals Europe, letter to the Environment Agency, “Regulation 61 Notice - Part 6 - Historic information related to releases of Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) from the site”. (ToxicDocs)

“The approximate total mass release of PFOA to air, land, water and in products has been provided from first production (ICI period) on site to 03/10/2023.”

“This information submitted as part of the Regulation 61 Notice supersedes previously shared information on PFOA mass release emissions from the Hillhouse site.”

May 2025. AGC Chemicals Europe, written evidence PFAS0059. (parliament.uk)

“There are also uncertainties about legacy emissions from historic production facilities in the UK which also contribute to levels of PFOA in the environment.”

10 September 2025. Stuart Ede for AGC, Environmental Audit Committee. (parliament.uk)

At Q125 Sammy Wilson MP asked: “Dr Joel and Mr Ede, how do you monitor around your own plants for the accumulation of any pollution that there may be from the products that you produce, and find out or try to measure the degree of contamination?” The answer ended:

“We have recently just started looking with the Environment Agency and our local council at what is in the soil local to the site.”

At Q126:

“As a verification, we are looking at legacy issues. We are looking at what is in the soil from legacy issues, to understand both sides of legacy.”

At Q133, continuing the answer quoted above:

“As I explained before, we are working with the Environment Agency and the local council on a programme of investigation of legacy issues. The site itself has a history dating back to the 1890s. AGC became involved in the site in 1999.”

At Q134 Anna Gelderd asked: “Would it be fair to say that at the moment you do not know how much residual PFOA is in the site? You are currently working on that?” The answer, in full:

“We are currently working on that, yes.”

9 July 2026 (last modified). AGC Chemicals Europe, “Site Investigation” page. (agcce.com)

“…AGCCE is, in addition to providing support to the multi-agency investigation, delivering on a voluntary commitment made to conduct an intrusive investigation within the boundaries of land owned by AGCCE (“on-site”) which is now underway, to sample and test soil, groundwater and surface water.”

“The first of several stages (Stage 1) of the on-site investigation has been completed and we are discussing the findings with the Multi-Agency Investigation Team.”

“To ensure continued progress of the onsite investigation, in June 2026, we commenced Stage 2 of the onsite investigation with further sampling of soils, groundwater and surface water. We are committed to sharing the findings with the Environment Agency to support the ongoing multi-agency investigation.”

Limits and the permit

10 September 2025. Stuart Ede for AGC, Environmental Audit Committee. (parliament.uk)

At Q125 (the question is quoted in the section above):

“The first step for us is reviewing our emissions and monitoring what is emitted in the first place. Under our environmental permit, we have looked at the environment around the chemicals we are using. We have put voluntary measures in place to decide what we are going to put as our own limits, and where we have said that we need to be below this level, based on independent studies or third-party studies around the levels that are there.”

At Q126 Sammy Wilson asked: “Ms Metzger made the point earlier that sometimes there may be regulations regarding certain contents of the chemicals that you are using, but there is no limit on the amount that you can dispose of…” The answer began:

“What we are assessing is the impact of those emissions. Quite correctly, the permit does not state a limit. The permit requires us to follow best practice to provide environmental protection.”

“We submit those reports to the Environment Agency to demonstrate why we believe what we are doing does not have that significant environmental impact.”

“When we substituted PFOA, it was a key factor. We spent a lot of time working with the agency and explaining to it how we were going to reduce our emissions regardless of what the limits said—there were not any in the Environment Agency—and working with the Environment Agency to understand what would be an acceptable emission to protect the environment and protect people.”

May 2025. AGC Chemicals Europe, written evidence PFAS0059. (parliament.uk)

“UK REACH regulation and existing site operating permits under the Environmental Permitting Regulations are working well to regulate use of chemicals in manufacturing, including PFAS.”

“Companies are already acting through voluntary agreements and working with the appropriate environment regulator to minimise emissions.”

The October 2024 fire

20 October 2024. AGC Chemicals Europe, Schedule 5 Part A notification to the Environment Agency, “to be submitted within 24 hours of the incident”. (WhatDoTheyKnow, EIR2026/37608)

Description of where any release into the environment took place: “Smoke emitted and process gas release from AGCCE Steam Pyrolysis section.”

Substance(s) potentially released: “Smoke, AGCCE process gas (TFE, Hexafluoropropene, Chlorodifluoromethane)”

Best estimate of the quantity or rate of release of substance(s): “TBC”

Description of the failure or accident: “19/10/24 at around 16.30 a fire occurred with lagging on the Steam Pyrolysis section of our plant. Email sent to EA Inspector.”

November 2024. AGC Chemicals Europe, investigation report headed “Abnormal Event Report - Stage 2”, investigation period 19/10/24 to 13/11/24, incident reference 1274, provided to the Environment Agency. (WhatDoTheyKnow, EIR2026/37608, “Part B detailed”)

“Around 16:15 on the 19th of October 2024 a fire started within lagging of SP1. The fire was noticed by operators at around 16:30 due to the smoke that was generated being visible from operational areas.”

“During the incident approximately 275 m3 of process gas was released of which a significant portion was combusted. The fire did not result in injuries but due to damage caused to common equipment during the fire, production at AGCCE ceased with an estimated downtime of 6-8 weeks.”

Under “Event Main Causes”:

“Repair undertaken on SP1 high temperature lagging was not undertaken in accordance with specification (incorrect material used)”

Under “No independent inspection of the lagging utilised by the contractor.”:

“Due to the specialist nature of the activity, whilst a visual review of the final condition of the repaired work area was completed. There was no formal inspection of the progress of works or confirmation materials utilised were in accordance with the specification.”

“Therefore, there was not the opportunity to identify the deviation from specification prior to bringing the units online.”

Under “Failure of 8” gas main":

“As the process gas is not flammable, there remained residual uncombusted process gases which were detected by the AGCCE GC based leak detection system before rapidly dispersing due to natural ventilation.”

“Note: process gas with a TFE concentration of between 60 and 65% as stored in the gas holder at the time of the incident is not flammable at atmospheric pressure and ambient temperature. However, it is combustible and when released into an ongoing fire / hot atmosphere it will burn.”

Under “Recommendations Identified”:

“Implement a remotely operated isolation valve on the gasholder to minimise the release of process gas in the event of failure of the 8” main."

8 September 2025 (filed). AGC Chemicals Europe, annual report and financial statements for 2024. (Companies House, company 03825057)

Note 2.5, “Going concern”:

“The business experienced a fire in October 2024 within the Steam Pyrolysis section of the plant. This caused an outage of 3 months, however, with support from the parent company and due to a healthy finished goods stock position, built for the planned annual outage, the impact to customers was minimal. An insurance claim is ongoing to cover any losses.”

Note 25, “Contingent asset”:

“This is following an incident on 19 October 2024 where a fire occurred at the Company premises. On agreement with their insurance provider, the Company is subsequently measuring and claiming for damages in relation to any income lost directly attributable to this incident.”

22 July 2026. AGC Chemicals Europe, reply to Hillhouse Watch, attributed at its request to “an AGC Chemicals Europe, Ltd. spokesperson”. (published reply)

“On the fire, this was reported at the time, in line with regulatory obligations, we informed the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Environment Agency (EA) of the incident.”

“The fire was relatively short lived but the reason why work was suspended for three months was because the fire damaged equipment and pipework critical to the manufacturing process, and the replacement equipment had long delivery times. We also implemented a thorough investigation before restarting operations. No enforcement action was taken by the relevant authorities.”

4 August 2026. AGC Chemicals Europe, reply to Hillhouse Watch. (published reply) On 23 July we had put three of our questions to AGC again: “What burned, and what came off it? Was the surrounding air monitored during the fire and its aftermath?”; “Did the fire service issue any advice to nearby residents at the time?”; and “Why was the public not informed of a fire that shut a major-hazard chemical plant on a residential boundary for three months?” (our wording as put to AGC. The Health and Safety Executive’s public COMAH register, checked 14 October 2026, lists the site as a lower-tier establishment; we have asked the HSE for its status on the day of the fire.) The reply on the fire:

“Regarding the fire, there is little more that I can add. As you say, this is a matter of public record. Such incidents are taken extremely seriously by the relevant authorities such as the emergency services, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Environment Agency (EA) and we would not comment on their operational decisions, actions and assessments.”

What the Environment Agency’s own record says about the fire, and what the fire service recorded on the night, are set out on Open questions and in our article on the fire service’s record.

What AGC’s November 2024 return lists under “unauthorised emissions”

20 November 2024. AGC Chemicals Europe, Schedule 5 Part B return to the Environment Agency. (WhatDoTheyKnow, EIR2026/37608, “Part B SPs Fire”)

The form asks for “The dates of any unauthorised emissions from the installation in the preceding 24 months”. AGC’s entry, in full:

03/10/2023: Breach of annual CO limit (2023)
01/01/2024: Missed PAH A14 periodic monitoring Q4 2023
12/03/2024: TO Dust exceedance (1/2 hourly and daily limit)
31/03/2024: Missed PAH A14 periodic monitoring Q1 2024
02/05/2024: Missed effluent sample.
04/05/2024: Missed effluent sample.
11/05/2024: Suspended solids exceedance
06/06/2024: Missed effluent sample
01/07/2024: Missed suspended solids daily analysis
10/07/2024: Relief stream activation 2A still
22/07/2024: Thermal Oxidiser HF and Dust exceedances
08/08/2024: Thermal Oxidiser Dust exceedances
19/09/2024: Thermal Oxidiser Mercury exceedance
02/10/2024: Missed effluent sample 13th September
10/10/2024: Missed effluent sample 9th October
11/11/2024: Suspended Solids Limit Exceedance

None of the sixteen entries names PFOA or any other PFAS. The exceedances and breaches listed concern carbon monoxide, dust, hydrogen fluoride, mercury and suspended solids, and one entry records a relief stream activation. Eight of the sixteen entries record a missed sample, missed monitoring or a missed analysis.

(The form is headed “Part B Response to incident reported on: 23/07/2024”. Its other answers refer to an attached “Incident 1274 Part B.pdf”, and the investigation report quoted in the section above carries the incident reference 1274 and concerns the fire of 19 October 2024. The form was disclosed to us as part of the Environment Agency’s file on that fire.)

Remediation and responsibility

May 2025. AGC Chemicals Europe, written evidence PFAS0059, answering the inquiry’s question on abatement and remediation technologies. (parliament.uk)

“There are effective technologies to abate emissions and remediate PFAS.”

“The European Environmental Agency considers thermal-combustion treatment to be 100% effective in removing PFAS from soils and effective for eliminating PFAS-containing waste although other techniques are available.”

“Several technologies are technically effective to treat PFAS in drinking and wastewater when used independently or combined. They are widely used at commercial scales. Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) and Ion exchange are more cost effective.”

From the introduction to the same evidence:

“AGCCE takes its responsibilities towards people and the environment extremely seriously…”

10 September 2025. Stuart Ede for AGC, Environmental Audit Committee. (parliament.uk)

At Q128 Anna Gelderd asked the panel: “What role should PFAS manufacturers take in remediating legacy PFAS contamination?” At Q130 she asked: “Mr Ede, do you have a view on this?”

“Yes; one of the things that we do have in the UK, which can be used very effectively, is the part 2A regulations for contaminated land.”

“I think that the answer has to be that there cannot be a one-stop shop of: it is that one person. We have to look at how PFAS have been used as a society in the environment, by manufacturers, by consumers and by producers, and look at how we manage that. It has to be managed on a risk basis, case by case, looking at the risk that we are trying to remediate, why we are trying to remediate it and what the objective is. Part 2A, for me, could be a very effective way of doing that.”

At Q133, continuing the answer quoted above:

“We are working with the Environment Agency around legacy issues and what has happened, getting an understanding and using a part 2a approach around that voluntary risk assessment to ask: what is there? What is it doing? What is the potential harm—is there any harm? What are the risks? We are managing those emissions and that contamination in exactly that way. We are trying to look at what happened, how we can be responsible and how we can drive that forward.”

“We are also trying to look at history to say that, whether or not we caused that, it is a legacy around our area.”

23 September 2026. A spokesperson for AGC Chemicals Europe, statement to ITV News. (ITV News; archived copy, 24 September 2026)

“The Hillhouse site and surrounding area has been dedicated to industrial chemical manufacturing for well over a century – long before AGC Chemicals Europe, Ltd. was established - and a wide variety of historical users have operated on the site.

“Since the wider multi-agency investigation is still ongoing and no formal determination of land contamination has been made under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act, we cannot speculate on future outcomes or next steps.”

Closure and decommissioning

8 September 2025 (filed). AGC Chemicals Europe, annual report and financial statements for 2024, Strategic Report. (Companies House, company 03825057)

“The directors consider the principal risks and uncertainties to the business to be:-
i) Increase in PFAS regulations.
ii) Capital investment weighted towards satisfying HSE and Environmental requirements.
iii) Market volatility and increasing competitive threats.”

Note 2.5, “Going concern”:

“The parent company has provided a letter of support and will continue to provide the necessary financial support to the Company for at least 12 months from the date of signing these financial statements.”

Note 24, “Contingent liabilities”:

“While the final scope and content of PFAS regulations remain uncertain, there is a possibility that future regulatory developments could affect AGC Chemicals Europe Ltd’s business performance, depending on the nature and extent of such regulations.”

13 July 2026. AGC Chemicals Europe, announcement of the proposal to cease production. (agcce.com)

“This is a proposal only and no final decision has been made.”

“This proposal has been made because the site has experienced significant financial and operational challenges, generating a loss for the past four years. Despite continued investment from AGC Inc. and the hard work of Hillhouse employees, the situation is no longer sustainable in the context of a volatile and competitive market.”

“AGC Chemicals Europe, Ltd. takes its responsibilities to protect employees, the local community and the environment very seriously. If a decision is taken to cease manufacture, AGC Chemicals Europe, Ltd. remains committed to ensuring compliance with all regulatory obligations, including maintaining the necessary staff for environmental permit compliance and any environmental monitoring that may be required.”

22 July 2026. AGC Chemicals Europe, reply to Hillhouse Watch. (published reply)

“Regarding the proposal to cease manufacturing, as we said in our public statement, this stems from four years of losses, as well as ongoing market volatility and increasing competition. You are quite right that our Companies House accounts show a profit for some of these years; however this doesn’t reflect the full picture.”

4 August 2026. AGC Chemicals Europe, reply to Hillhouse Watch. (published reply, with one omission marked)

“The UK manufacturing business unit at the Hillhouse Site is a business unit that is making losses…”

“Whilst I understand that you would like a breakdown of the performance of these internal business units, we are unable to provide that to external stakeholders for reasons of commercial confidentiality. We have provided this information confidentially to unions and employee representatives as part of the consultation.”

14 September 2026. AGC Chemicals Europe, announcement that the closure is confirmed. (agcce.com)

“This decision was taken by AGCCE in consultation with unions and employee representatives. Looking ahead, production is expected to cease by 31 December 2026, when AGCCE will begin winding down the site.”

“Regrettably, AGCCE has concluded that there is no viable solution to keep the site operating in the context of a volatile and competitive market.”

“AGCCE will continue to work collaboratively with Wyre Council, the Environment Agency and other authorities regarding the future of the site. AGCCE remains committed to ensuring compliance with all regulatory obligations, including maintaining the necessary staff for plant decommissioning, environmental permit compliance and any environmental monitoring that may be required.”

The US PFAS litigation, as reported to investors

August 2023. AGC Inc., main questions and answers from its results briefing for the second quarter of 2023. (agc.com, PDF, in Japanese)

The question, as AGC Inc. recorded it:

「海外ではPFAS関連製品による環境汚染で訴訟などの話もあったが、AGCにとってそのリスクはないと考えてよいか。」

Our translation: “Overseas there has been talk of lawsuits and the like over environmental contamination from PFAS-related products. May we take it that AGC has no such risk?”

The answer:

「一番大きな問題となっているのは、PFOS関連。米国訴訟は広い網をかけており、フッ素を扱う多数の企業が被告として列挙されており、その中に弊社米国子会社名が含まれている。しかし、当社には訴状は届いておらず、訴訟の当事者にはなっていない。弁護士とも協議して対応をしている。なお、日本で訴訟は起きていない。」

Our translation: “The biggest issue is PFOS-related. The US litigation casts a wide net, and a large number of companies handling fluorine are listed as defendants, and the name of our US subsidiary is included among them. However, no complaint has reached us, and we are not a party to the litigation. We are consulting with lawyers and responding. Also, no litigation has arisen in Japan.”

28 March 2024. AGC Inc., annual securities report for the year to 31 December 2023, page 28. (agc.com, PDF, in Japanese)

「なお、米国において、フッ素系消火剤メーカーや当社グループを含むフッ素化学メーカー等に対し、PFASを使用した消火剤などの製品による環境や健康への影響を請求原因とする複数の訴訟が個人、地方政府等により提起されております。これらの訴訟の結果が当社グループにとって望ましくないものとなった場合、当社グループの業績及び財務状況に影響を及ぼす可能性がありますが、現時点でこれら訴訟の結果を予測することはできません。」

Our translation: “In the United States, multiple lawsuits have been brought by individuals, local governments and others against fluorochemical manufacturers and others, including manufacturers of fluorine-based firefighting agents and our Group, claiming environmental and health impacts from products such as firefighting agents using PFAS. If the outcome of these lawsuits is unfavourable to our Group, it could affect our Group’s results and financial position, but it is not possible at present to predict their outcome.”

28 March 2025. AGC Inc., annual securities report for the year to 31 December 2024, page 29. (agc.com, PDF, in Japanese)

「なお、米国において、フッ素系消火剤メーカーや当社グループを含むフッ素化学メーカー等に対し、PFASを使用した消火剤などの製品による環境や健康への影響を請求原因とする複数の訴訟が個人、地方政府等により提起されております。これらの訴訟の結果が当社グループにとって望ましくないものとなった場合、当社グループの業績及び財務状況に影響を及ぼす可能性があります。」

What AGC has declined to answer, or not yet answered

These are the questions we have put to AGC Chemicals Europe in writing, as worded on our Open questions page, where each one’s full status and date is kept up to date.

Declined

What burned in the October 2024 fire, what was released, and was the surrounding air monitored during the fire and its three-month aftermath?
Did the fire service issue any advice to residents at the time?
“Why was the public not informed of a fire that shut a major-hazard chemical plant on a residential boundary for three months?” (our wording as put to AGC. The Health and Safety Executive’s public COMAH register, checked 14 October 2026, lists the site as a lower-tier establishment; we have asked the HSE for its status on the day of the fire.)
Will AGC provide the turnover split between the Amsterdam resale business and the Hillhouse manufacturing site?
Will AGC confirm the name and capacity of its spokesperson?

Partly answered

How can the accounts show a single principal activity already including resale, if they consolidate two businesses?
Which legal entity carries on the Amsterdam resale business, and under what registration?

Awaiting a response (put in writing on 14 October 2026)

What burned in the October 2024 fire, what came off the site, and was the surrounding air monitored during it and its aftermath?
Why were residents not informed that the fire was at a major-hazard chemical site on their boundary? (Our wording. The Health and Safety Executive’s public COMAH register, checked 14 October 2026, lists the site as a lower-tier establishment; we have asked the HSE for its status on the day of the fire.)
Does AGC accept that the elevated PFOA levels identified through the Environment Agency’s investigation are attributable to the company?
What is AGC’s position on remediation?
What support does AGC intend to offer the local population in relation to the impacts of PFOA?
What does the decommissioning plan for the site involve, and what budget has been set aside for it?

We will add AGC’s answers here, in its own words, when they arrive.

Every quotation on this page was checked against its source on 14 October 2026. If AGC Chemicals Europe or AGC Inc. believes any quotation here is inaccurate, incomplete or out of context, tell us and we will correct the record and say so.