As we’ve discussed in a prior post, among states that have enacted statutory restrictions on sales of products containing intentionally added PFAS, New Mexico has been unique in crafting an exemption for fluoropolymers, which...more
3/31/2026
/ Environmental Policies ,
Exemptions ,
Government Agencies ,
Hazardous Substances ,
New Legislation ,
PFAS ,
Proposed Legislation ,
Public Health ,
Regulatory Oversight ,
Regulatory Reform ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
Reporting Requirements ,
State and Local Government ,
State Legislatures ,
Toxic Chemicals
On January 12, 2026, before leaving office, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed S.B. 1042, the “Protecting Against Forever Chemicals Act,” into law, thus adding the Garden State to the list of states that have enacted...more
3/2/2026
/ Environmental Policies ,
Funding ,
Government Agencies ,
Hazardous Substances ,
Labeling ,
New Jersey ,
New Legislation ,
PFAS ,
Product Packaging ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
Reporting Requirements ,
State and Local Government ,
State Legislatures ,
Toxic Chemicals
January 1, 2026 was the effective date for a number of state law provisions relating to intentionally added PFAS in certain categories of products. July 1, 2026 will be the effective date for several more. As we have...more
2/10/2026
/ Consumer Product Companies ,
Labeling ,
Manufacturers ,
New Legislation ,
New Regulations ,
Notification Requirements ,
PFAS ,
Product Packaging ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
Reporting Requirements ,
State and Local Government ,
Toxic Chemicals
Both Connecticut and New Mexico are moving forward with regulations to implement statutory labeling requirements for products in certain categories that contain intentionally added PFAS. Connecticut’s labeling requirement...more
12/19/2025
/ Connecticut ,
Environmental Policies ,
Hazardous Substances ,
Labeling ,
Manufacturers ,
New Regulations ,
PFAS ,
Product Labels ,
Proposed Rules ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
Reporting Requirements ,
State and Local Government ,
State Bans ,
Statutory Requirements ,
Toxic Chemicals
As foreshadowed in EPA’s most recent Unified Agenda, EPA has proposed to add four significant categories of exemptions to the TSCA PFAS Reporting Rule (Rule), citing burdensomeness of the existing Rule. Under the Proposed...more
11/26/2025
/ Comment Period ,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ,
Exemptions ,
PFAS ,
Proposed Rules ,
Regulatory Agenda ,
Regulatory Reform ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
Reporting Requirements ,
Rulemaking Process ,
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Updating our earlier post from March 2025, Maine has completed a regulatory process and has adopted updates to its PFAS in products rules to identify two approved Currently Unavoidable Use (CUU) exemptions from the state’s...more
10/29/2025
/ Department of Environmental Protection ,
Environmental Policies ,
Final Rules ,
Hazardous Substances ,
New Regulations ,
PFAS ,
Pollution Control ,
Regulatory Authority ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
Rulemaking Process ,
State Agencies ,
State and Local Government ,
Toxic Chemicals
We’ve been following Minnesota’s proposed PFAS-in-products reporting rules for the past several months. As part of the rulemaking process under the Minnesota Administrative Procedures Act, and following public comment and a...more
9/30/2025
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
Environmental Policies ,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ,
Government Agencies ,
PFAS ,
Proposed Rules ,
Public Comment ,
Reporting Requirements ,
Rulemaking Process ,
State and Local Government ,
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Updating our recent post, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has now clarified its recent statement, following significant public comment, that it would exercise its statutory authority to extend the compliance...more
After evaluating public comments on its proposed PFAS-in-products reporting rules, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has agreed to exercise its authority under section 116.943 of the Minnesota Statutes (Amara’s...more
7/21/2025
/ Disclosure Requirements ,
Environmental Policies ,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ,
Government Agencies ,
Manufacturers ,
PFAS ,
Regulatory Agencies ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
Reporting Requirements ,
State and Local Government ,
Toxic Chemicals ,
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Minnesota’s Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) held a public hearing on May 22, 2025 concerning its proposed rules that would implement PFAS-in-products reporting requirements and associated fees on entities covered by Amara’s...more
In early April 2025, New Mexico enacted a statute restricting intentionally added PFAS in products, similar in scope to Maine’s and Minnesota’s existing laws. The New Mexico statute imposes a ban on sales and distribution...more
Maine recently published proposed rules (PDF link) aimed at implementation of its existing statute (which we’ve discussed here, here and here) limiting the sale and distribution within the state of products containing...more
Following up on the rulemaking process presaged by Minnesota’s comprehensive statute (Amara’s Law) requiring phase outs of PFAS intentionally added to products, which we’ve previously discussed here and here, the Minnesota...more
In late June 2024, Rhode Island joined the growing list of states that have enacted phased bans on the manufacture, sale, and distribution of various types of products containing PFAS. Rhode Island’s statute, entitled the...more
Maine has once again amended and clarified its statutory restrictions on the sale of numerous categories of PFAS-containing products. The net effect of the legislation, enacted on April 16, 2024, is to 1) limit the scope and...more
By statutory enactment, Maine intends to ban the sale, marketing, and distribution of products or product components containing intentionally added PFAS, effective January 1, 2030. 38 M.R.S. § 1614. This follows Maine’s...more
In September, NJDEP’s Contaminated Site Remediation and Redevelopment program (CSRR) issued new guidance (the Administrative Guidance for Green, Sustainable, and Resilient Remediation) encouraging the use of green and...more
On May 24, 2023, Minnesota’s Governor signed into law a sweeping set of statutory provisions concerning the handling and sale of PFAS-containing products within Minnesota. Among other things, the statute sets a ban on various...more
We reported previously on Maine’s 2021 law barring the sale of new products containing intentionally added PFAS and the reporting requirements that the law imposed upon manufacturers. Under the law, both the first phase of...more
On November 15, 2022, in response to a challenge by 3M, the Michigan Court of Claims invalidated the drinking water MCLs and attendant groundwater standards for several PFAS substances, including PFOA (8 parts per trillion,...more
More and more states are passing statutes to restrict and/or monitor sales of products containing PFAS. Recent news out of Maine suggests some practical downsides to a more aggressive legislative scheme; last month...more
Almost two years ago, we posted on the civil settlement of a dispute between the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) over a state-level enforcement action against Cannon Air Force...more
Our ESG podcast series features short episodes covering core ESG concepts. Each podcast explores important issues for businesses that are concerned with developing and deploying an ESG profile, responding to increased...more
Alongside USEPA’s recent issuance of new Health Advisory Levels, or HALs, for certain PFAS chemicals (namely, PFOA, PFOS, PFBS, and GenX), the Agency also announced that, as part of the Biden Administration’s...more
Our ESG podcast series features short episodes covering core ESG concepts. Each podcast explores important issues for businesses that are concerned with developing and deploying an ESG profile, responding to increased...more