PFAS Press
Keeping you informed on the latest federal and state regulations on PFAS chemicals.
Filter by Category
Search Results
PFAS Press
On May 13, 2025, Ohio legislators, apparently inspired by New Mexico’s similar legislation, introduced HB 272 to phase in a ban on the sale of consumer
products with intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The bill would ban the sale of cookware, food packaging, dental floss and
juvenile products with intentionally added PFAS beginning 2027; carpets and rugs, cleaning products, cosmetics, fabric treatments, feminine hygiene
products, textiles and textile furnishings, ski wax and upholstered furniture beginning 2028; and all other products beginning 2032, unless the use of PFAS in a
product is deemed a currently unavoidable use (CUU) or the product falls within another categorical exemption provided in the bill. It would also establish a
reporting requirement for all such products beginning 2027. The bill adopts the same exemptions as New Mexico’s, including importantly an exemption for
fluoropolymers. Watch this space for updates on the progress of the bill, and others like it.
products with intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The bill would ban the sale of cookware, food packaging, dental floss and
juvenile products with intentionally added PFAS beginning 2027; carpets and rugs, cleaning products, cosmetics, fabric treatments, feminine hygiene
products, textiles and textile furnishings, ski wax and upholstered furniture beginning 2028; and all other products beginning 2032, unless the use of PFAS in a
product is deemed a currently unavoidable use (CUU) or the product falls within another categorical exemption provided in the bill. It would also establish a
reporting requirement for all such products beginning 2027. The bill adopts the same exemptions as New Mexico’s, including importantly an exemption for
fluoropolymers. Watch this space for updates on the progress of the bill, and others like it.
PFAS Press
On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an interim final rule to amend the reporting period under the per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) reporting rules issued in October 2023 under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA). The rules require entities
that manufactured or imported PFAS and/or PFAS-containing articles between January 2011 and December 2022 to report certain data. EPA first established
a reporting window of November 12, 2024, to May 8, 2025. The window was moved to July 2025 to January 2026 (or July 2026 for small manufacturers
exclusively importing regulated products) due to delays in development of the Central Data Exchange (CDX), EPA’s web-based reporting tool for information
submitted under the TSCA PFAS reporting rules. If finalized, EPA’s proposed rule will again change the data submission period to April 13, 2026, to October
13, 2026, to allow the Agency “more time to prepare the reporting application to collect this data.” Note that the end date for small manufacturers reportin...
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) reporting rules issued in October 2023 under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA). The rules require entities
that manufactured or imported PFAS and/or PFAS-containing articles between January 2011 and December 2022 to report certain data. EPA first established
a reporting window of November 12, 2024, to May 8, 2025. The window was moved to July 2025 to January 2026 (or July 2026 for small manufacturers
exclusively importing regulated products) due to delays in development of the Central Data Exchange (CDX), EPA’s web-based reporting tool for information
submitted under the TSCA PFAS reporting rules. If finalized, EPA’s proposed rule will again change the data submission period to April 13, 2026, to October
13, 2026, to allow the Agency “more time to prepare the reporting application to collect this data.” Note that the end date for small manufacturers reportin...
PFAS Press
After addressing a number of other programs over the first 100 days of the new administration, on April 28, 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
finally addressed PFAS. Administrator Lee Zeldin outlined a number of actions—old and new—aimed at manufacturers and importers of PFAS and
PFAS-containing products with an emphasis on “sound science” and the need for more robust data on PFAS toxicity.
finally addressed PFAS. Administrator Lee Zeldin outlined a number of actions—old and new—aimed at manufacturers and importers of PFAS and
PFAS-containing products with an emphasis on “sound science” and the need for more robust data on PFAS toxicity.
PFAS Press
Yesterday, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed the first state ban on products with intentionally added PFAS to exempt fluoropolymers. The
Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Protection Act (HB 212) bans certain categories of products that contain intentionally added PFAS, including
cookware and food packaging (beginning in 2027), cosmetics (2028) and all other products (2032). Importantly, the law exempts “fluoropolymers consisting
of polymeric substances for which the backbone of the polymer is either a per- or polyfluorinated carbon-only backbone or a perfluorinated polyether
backbone that is a solid at standard temperature and pressure.” In doing so, it protects critical uses of fluoropolymers for which there is no substitute,
including electric vehicles and batteries, among many others. Note that the final version of the bill omitted an exemption for manufacturers with stewardship
programs, a similarly first-in-kind provision that would have allowed sale of otherwise banned products where the manufacturer participated in a statewide ...
Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Protection Act (HB 212) bans certain categories of products that contain intentionally added PFAS, including
cookware and food packaging (beginning in 2027), cosmetics (2028) and all other products (2032). Importantly, the law exempts “fluoropolymers consisting
of polymeric substances for which the backbone of the polymer is either a per- or polyfluorinated carbon-only backbone or a perfluorinated polyether
backbone that is a solid at standard temperature and pressure.” In doing so, it protects critical uses of fluoropolymers for which there is no substitute,
including electric vehicles and batteries, among many others. Note that the final version of the bill omitted an exemption for manufacturers with stewardship
programs, a similarly first-in-kind provision that would have allowed sale of otherwise banned products where the manufacturer participated in a statewide ...
PFAS Press
In many ways, Maine and Minnesota had the first words on the regulation of PFAS in the U.S. Their broad definitions of the chemicals set the stage for similar
regulation across the continent. So when legislators in both states nearly simultaneously propose to shrink those definitions, it bears watching.
regulation across the continent. So when legislators in both states nearly simultaneously propose to shrink those definitions, it bears watching.
PFAS Press
On January 29, 2025, New Mexico threw its hat more fully into the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) legislation ring with the introduction of a bill that
adopts a broad “phase-out” ban to PFAS-containing products. HB 212, now before the House Judiciary Committee, would require manufacturers to remove
PFAS from their products over time or cease the sale thereof. A ban on cookware, food packaging, dental floss and juvenile products containing intentionally
added PFAS would kick in on January 1, 2027, while a ban on carpets and rugs, cleaning products, cosmetics, fabric treatments, feminine hygiene products,
textiles, textile furnishings, ski wax and upholstered furniture will start January 1, 2028. The bill would prohibit the sale of all remaining consumer products
containing intentionally added PFAS beginning January 1, 2029, unless the use of PFAS constituted a “currently unavoidable use,” a concept we have seen
employed elsewhere. What we have not seen employed elsewhere is the New Mexico bill’s “PFAS Stewardship Program,” which (once established) would all...
adopts a broad “phase-out” ban to PFAS-containing products. HB 212, now before the House Judiciary Committee, would require manufacturers to remove
PFAS from their products over time or cease the sale thereof. A ban on cookware, food packaging, dental floss and juvenile products containing intentionally
added PFAS would kick in on January 1, 2027, while a ban on carpets and rugs, cleaning products, cosmetics, fabric treatments, feminine hygiene products,
textiles, textile furnishings, ski wax and upholstered furniture will start January 1, 2028. The bill would prohibit the sale of all remaining consumer products
containing intentionally added PFAS beginning January 1, 2029, unless the use of PFAS constituted a “currently unavoidable use,” a concept we have seen
employed elsewhere. What we have not seen employed elsewhere is the New Mexico bill’s “PFAS Stewardship Program,” which (once established) would all...
PFAS Press
On February 3-5, the PLASTICS’ Fluoropolymers Conference gathered several professionals involved with fluoropolymers to discuss the latest challenges,
opportunities and technological shifts that are defining the fluoropolymer industry.
opportunities and technological shifts that are defining the fluoropolymer industry.
PFAS Press
As we turn to 2025 and a new administration, there are a few areas of PFAS law worth watching in the short term, including the regulation of the chemicals in
water and their treatment under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act.
water and their treatment under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act.
PFAS Press
While the results of consumer products litigation surrounding PFAS have been uneven (see prior blog posts), a new type of claimant may be emerging based
on a recent claim filed by a Georgia-based carpet manufacturer against three major upstream PFAS manufacturers. The complaint alleges that the PFAS
manufacturers concealed potential human health and environmental impacts of PFAS that were known to them, failed to inform the carpet manufacturers
that their fluoropolymer products could degrade to other PFAS and did not advise that disposal of PFAS-containing wastewater required the use of specialized
PFAS removal technologies. The lawsuit seeks costs for property damage and to recoup potential PFAS removal and remediation costs incurred as a result of
PFAS contamination lawsuits against the carpet manufacturer, as well as over $100 million in past costs.
on a recent claim filed by a Georgia-based carpet manufacturer against three major upstream PFAS manufacturers. The complaint alleges that the PFAS
manufacturers concealed potential human health and environmental impacts of PFAS that were known to them, failed to inform the carpet manufacturers
that their fluoropolymer products could degrade to other PFAS and did not advise that disposal of PFAS-containing wastewater required the use of specialized
PFAS removal technologies. The lawsuit seeks costs for property damage and to recoup potential PFAS removal and remediation costs incurred as a result of
PFAS contamination lawsuits against the carpet manufacturer, as well as over $100 million in past costs.