PFAS Press

On September 4, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (finally) published its Spring 2025 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (UA), a semiannual publication outlining federal agencies’ regulatory priorities and timelines for the upcoming year. The UA included a notice of its intent to rescind drinking water limits set by a Biden-era rule for three per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) substances and one PFAS mixture. EPA also published a notice of intent to retain limits on PFOA and PFOS, although with extended timelines for compliance.

On August 20, 2025, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden submitted an update to the proposal to restrict PFAS under the European Union’s REACH regulation that they originally submitted in January 2023. The revision reflects their comprehensive evaluation of more than 5,000 scientific and technical comments submitted by stakeholders, including industry representatives, researchers and civil society organizations.

On August 6, 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) became the latest governmental agency to confirm that fluoropolymers are both safe and necessary. After an independent safety review of fluoropolymers in medical devices showed no conclusive evidence of health issues, FDA concluded that fluoropolymers are “very unlikely to cause toxicity” because of molecular size and further that they are essential for medical devices to function. As a result, “FDA’s evaluation is that currently there is no reason to restrict their continued use in devices.”

Last month, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) announced that it would delay the January 1, 2026, reporting deadline for manufacturers of intentionally added PFAS-containing products. Though MPCA did not provide the new deadline at that time, it announced last week that the deadline has been extended six months to July 1, 2026. In its announcement, MPCA states that the six-month extension should give manufacturers more time to coordinate with suppliers to report on their behalf and become familiar with the reporting platform that MPCA expects to release for testing this fall. We will continue to monitor MPCA actions as it finalizes its rulemaking process through the fall.

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.

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 reporting exclusively as article importers of regulated products will shift to April 13, 2027.

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.

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.

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 allow a manufacturer to sell otherwise-banned, PFAS-containing consumer products so long as they participate in a statewide program to collect and dispose of those products. We will have to watch how that program develops if the bill passes, and whether other states copy the approach.