Takeaways From ACI’s State Regulators Roundtable on PFAS Regulation, Compliance and Litigation

June 5, 2025

Reading Time : 1 min

By: David H. Quigley, Shivani Swami (International Law Advisor)

On May 29, 2025, David Quigley (head of Akin’s Environment & Natural Resources Section) led a discussion among Katrina Kessler (Commissioner, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency), Susanne Miller (Bureau Director, Maine Department of Environmental Protection), Amy Rousseau (PFAS Response Coordinator, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services) and Joaquin Esquivel (Board Chair, California State Water Resources Control Board) at a State Regulators Roundtable hosted by the American Conference Institute during its 2nd annual summit on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) regulation, compliance and litigation. Key takeaways from the discussion included the following:

  • Minnesota will not consider a fluoropolymer-based exemption from its all-product ban and reporting regulations. Ms. Kessler views her state’s legislation as applying to all PFAS unless their use is deemed currently unavoidable. With respect to Minnesota’s reporting rule, Ms. Kessler indicated that her agency will make changes to address industry concerns raised during the just-concluded comment period, but that in the end she expects many of the issues concerning number and cost of reports to be resolved by joint submissions. She confirmed that each manufacturer need only pay one annual fee to cover all reports.
  • In New Hampshire, Ms. Rousseau indicated that much of the current conversation focuses on funding PFAS work, as a number of legislators asked for her assistance in developing a fee collection proposal, potentially based on Minnesota’s model described above. All of the state officials expressed concerns around the funding piece and advocated for increased federal-state coordination to finance PFAS management, particularly in light of expected federal reductions.
  • On the federal front – Travis Voyles, Assistant Deputy Administrator at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (and interim lead for the cross-agency PFAS work group) noted at the summit that the Agency is still reviewing the designation of PFOA and PFOS as “hazardous substances” under Superfund and announced the administration’s intention to get away from a statute-by-statute approach in favor of a greater overarching policy. Mr. Voyles indicated that the Agency soon would appoint a new “PFAS leader” to succeed him in his interim role.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

PFAS Press

February 17, 2026

We have previously discussed here the somewhat groundbreaking approach (in the U.S. anyway) taken by New Mexico’s Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Protection Act, enacted in March 2025, which included a first of its kind exemption for fluoropolymers from the law’s sales bans on PFAS-containing products. Subsequent regulatory actions in the state proposed excluding certain federally-regulated (and fluoropolymer-containing) products, including U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulated medical devices, from the scope of labeling requirements. The New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board (EIB) currently is accepting public input on those proposed labeling rules, with public testimony scheduled to begin February 23 and written comments due by March 31. After recent legislative moves, it appears that participation in this comment period may be of the utmost importance to the regulated community. On February 5, 2026, the House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee recommended passage of House Joint Memorial 3, which alleges a “limited scientific literature” supporting the above moves to exempt fluoropolymers and requests that the New Mexico Environment Department prepare a report evaluating implementation of the PFAS Protection Act, including the effectiveness of EIB’s rules and assessing the health, environmental and economic implications of statutory and regulatory exemptions, and provide recommendations on whether exemptions such as the fluoropolymer carve out should be maintained, revised or eliminated. Manufacturers seeking to maintain the exemptions will want to use the comment period to support doing so.

...

Read More

PFAS Press

January 22, 2026

Akin environment & natural resources practice head David Quigley is quoted by Chemical Watch news & events by Enhesa in the third part of its 2026 Global Outlook series titled, “What’s next for state-level chemicals policy in the US in 2026?” discussing his expectations for state-level chemical policy trends in 2026 and the outlook for regulation and enforcement especially as it relates to PFAS.

...

Read More

PFAS Press

January 20, 2026

To ring in the new year, New Jersey became the latest state to enact legislation banning intentionally-added PFAS in certain consumer products. In the final days of his term, Governor Murphy signed into law the Protecting Against Forever Chemicals Act (S 1042), which prohibits the sale of cosmetics, carpets, fabric treatments and food packaging containing intentionally-added PFAS starting in January 2028. The law also requires manufacturers to label certain direct food contact consumer cookware that contains intentionally-added PFAS. Interestingly, the legislature stripped forward-looking provisions excluding fluoropolymers just prior to passage. Definitely an area to watch as additional states dip their feet in the PFAS pool in 2026.  

...

Read More

PFAS Press

December 15, 2025

On December 8, 2025, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) finalized its PFAS-in-Products program rules in response to an Administrative Law Judge order requiring the Agency to reduce fees, among other changes. Under the rule, manufacturers must submit PFAS information – including product descriptions, PFAS type, quantity, function and manufacturer details – to MPCA by July 2026, and pay a fee to support the program.

...

Read More

© 2026 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.