PFAS Regulation, Compliance and Litigation

With the shift to a new administration, the regulatory landscape surrounding PFAS is poised for significant change. From the expansive PFAS Roadmap built under the Biden administration, to the conservative recommendations outlined in Project 2025, the future of PFAS policy will have far-reaching implications for environmental regulation, corporate compliance, and litigation.

This panel will explore the trajectory of PFAS regulation and enforcement, the potential rollback or intensification of key policies, and the consequences for stakeholders navigating these uncertainties.

• Analyzing the Biden administration’s PFAS agenda legacy
• Understanding the impact of the PFAS Roadmap on regulations under major environmental laws like CERCLA, TSCA, and the Safe Drinking Water Act
• Evaluating enforcement priorities under the Biden EPA and their influence on PFAS compliance
• Anticipating the Trump Administration’s key environmental priorities and how they will impact PFAS
• Assessing the possibility of reversing CERCLA PFAS designations and federal rollbacks on other PFAS rules, as per Project 2025 recommendations
• Predicting potential changes under a new EPA leadership and their impact on TSCA reporting deadlines and requirements

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is foundational in shaping how federal agencies regulate and enforce PFAS policies. This panel will explore the APA’s critical role in driving PFAS regulatory frameworks and how a rollback of Chevron deference could open the door to challenges to perceived overly broad or ambiguous EPA regulations.

• Evaluating the potential consequences of Loper Bright v. Raimondo on EPA rulemaking and regulatory oversight involving PFAS
• Understanding how the Loper Bright fallout may impact federal APA cases, including those in Michigan and the D.C. Circuit
• Examining the administrative landscape under a new administration:
• Assessing how the new administration’s first five months may reshape PFAS regulatory approaches
• Comparing strategies of Trump 2.0 to those of prior administrations and the implications for industry and enforcement

To allow manufacturers and affected entities more time to comply with the final reporting requirements, EPA moved the reporting deadline from May 2025 to July 2026 with an effective date of January 2026.

• Understanding EPA’s use of TSCA authority for PFAS testing and enforcement
• Assessing the implications for manufacturers
• Addressing PFAS reporting under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, including the evolving TRI (Toxic Release Inventory) reporting thresholds and additional PFAS listings
• What strategies can facilities employ to ensure compliance with these evolving regulations?
• How are industries adapting to the expanded TRI reporting requirements for PFAS?
• Reviewing EPA’s newly imposed MCLs (Maximum Contaminant Levels) under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
• Exploration of the implications for water utilities and public health protection
• Highlighting ‘New Use Rule’ developments that target future uses of PFAS

EPA’s recent developments in CERCLA designations, federal-state dynamics, and strategies for managing contamination and liability risks all set the stage for the overall PFAS Roadmap. Join our panelists as they look at potential changes under the current administration, and the challenges you could face in complying with these new designations.

• How does CERCLA liability impact industries, property owners, and municipalities?
• Analyzing the potential for litigation as parties navigate liability for remediation and natural resource damages
• Understanding how CERCLA listings enable EPA to mandate cleanup and cost recovery
• What do CERCLA designations mean for ongoing and future remediation efforts?
• Reviewing potential liabilities for manufacturers with detectable PFAS discharges during product use or production
• What are the implications of federal CERCLA designations or other PFAS rules being rolled back under a new administration?
• Reviewing how expanding PFAS definitions and lists influence site investigations and remediation strategies

Imagine this: you’re manufacturing, distributing, or selling products today, but tomorrow, you’re in violation of a state’s PFAS law you didn’t see coming.

Many states have enacted or are in the process of enacting PFAS legislation. Additionally, there are various states rules and regulations with varying deadlines, and economic implications. If you operate in multiple jurisdictions or rely on products sold across state lines, you must be aware of this patchwork of state laws and requirement—or your bottom line will pay the price.

This session will provide an in-depth survey and analysis of PFAS legislation and developments in the following states to help you develop a compliance plan of attack.

• California’s (AB 1817)
• Prohibiting the manufacture, distribution, or sale of textiles with intentionally added PFAS starting January 1, 2025
• Washington’s (Safer Products for Washington Act)
• Restricting PFAS in consumer products, particularly textiles, to be implemented by 2025
• Maine’s (LD 1503)
• Requiring reporting of PFAS in products and phases out intentionally added PFAS in all products by January 1, 2030, unless deemed unavoidable
• Colorado’s (HB 22-1345)
• Ban on PFAS in consumer products such as carpets, furniture, and cosmetics starting January 1, 2025
• Oregon (Toxics-Free Kids Act)
• Anticipating PFAS restrictions aligned with Washington and California, emphasizing children’s products and environmental safety measures
• New York’s (S 8817A/A 4739C)
• Ban on PFAS in apparel and textiles effective January 1, 2025
• New Jersey’s
• Expanding stringent PFAS monitoring and adopting of drinking water standards under existing legislation

Gain practical insights into navigating PFAS challenges in complex transactions, including deal structuring and liability transfer. This panel will explore the latest trends in environmental due diligence, the impact of evolving PFAS regulations on the transactional process, and effective strategies for securing PFAS insurance coverage or risk mitigation when insurance isn’t an option.

• Explore how PFAS concerns are impacting mergers, acquisitions, and financing, particularly for cross-border and large-scale transactions
• The importance of environmental due diligence and assessing compliance liabilities, contaminated properties, and the potential costs of cleanup
• The emergence of PFAS-specific insurance policies: What’s available, and what steps companies must take to secure coverage
• Managing liability when insurance options are limited or unavailable
• Exploring alternative strategies to mitigate PFAS risks in the absence of adequate insurance coverage
• Taking the right steps to enhance insurability and reduce exposure to PFAS-related liabilities before closing a deal
• Understanding the critical role of ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) standards in guiding industries through regulatory compliance in environmental assessments

PFAS use in consumer products—such as food packaging, textiles, cosmetics, and children’s goods—continues to present significant compliance and litigation challenges for companies. This session will explore the wide-ranging implications of PFAS in these goods, focusing on evolving regulations, enforcement actions, and emerging trends.

• Addressing PFAS contamination in food packaging- a sector under scrutiny
• Reviewing FDA efforts to restrict its use in food contact materials
• Navigating stricter state-level restrictions on PFAS in consumer products and the impact on compliance strategies
• How does PFAS complicate compliance with EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility) frameworks?
• Particularly for products like food packaging and textiles that may unintentionally contain PFAS
• Considering global supply chain considerations and the challenges of managing PFAS in products manufactured abroad
• How can companies address gaps in their knowledge about PFAS presence in packaging or textiles?
• Managing variations in state PFAS testing standards, compliance deadlines, and enforcement penalties

This session will provide a comprehensive update on key trends in PFAS-related litigation, including groundbreaking cases, the expanding scope of liability, and new legal challenges tied to regulatory developments. Join our panelists, as they review this high-stakes environment and explain the broader implications for risk management and compliance.

• Overview of ongoing PFAS consumer class actions and product liability cases (non- AFFF)
• Identifying key outcomes from landmark PFAS cases and their implications for downstream users of PFAS
• What’s coming down the pike in PFAS litigation and how are these cases reshaping industry obligations?
• Biosolids and air emissions
• Medical monitoring claims
• Lawsuits targeting non-users for environmental contamination
• Reviewing third-party testing from a litigation perspective  
• Examining successful defenses and whether preemption played a role

Join us for a case study on the evolving multidistrict litigation (MDL) landscape surrounding PFAS contamination and firefighting foam (AFFF). This session will explore settlement trends and the far-reaching impacts on various industries, from economic damage suits to complex personal injury claims.

• Updates on the AFFF MDL, including recent settlements and pending claims
• The progression from water utility cases to personal injury claims and the complexities of proving personal injury related to PFAS exposure
• Litigation in local jurisdictions and efforts to move cases into MDL
• Analyzing the strategic use of MDL by defense lawyers and its impact on the timeline and outcomes of litigation
• Examining the growing trend of economic damage cases as a precursor to more complex personal injury claims

In the ever-evolving regulatory landscape surrounding PFAS, companies are grappling with the complexities of managing a patchwork of state reporting requirements, prohibitions, and enforcement actions—often in the absence of cohesive federal guidelines. This panel brings together industry representatives to share practical insights, pain points, and strategies for navigating these competing regulatory demands.

• Federal vs. state dichotomy
• How are companies balancing state-specific mandates with federal regulatory frameworks?
• Highlighting strategies for managing reporting requirements, prohibitions, and water-related concerns while maintaining operational efficiency
• How do you weigh all competing interests, as a company and strive to make good business decisions?

With PFAS regulations advancing across the globe, understanding the latest developments in key jurisdictions is essential. This panel will provide an in-depth look at how Canada and the EU are shaping their approaches to reporting, restrictions, and enforcement. We’ll also explore emerging trends in Australia and New Zealand, shedding light on their initiatives and the potential implications for global compliance.

• A review of Canada’s approach to reporting requirements for PFAS substances
• Exploring the unique features of Canada’s regulatory framework, including its focus on 2023 data, finite substance lists, and obligations covering manufacturing, import, and use
• Is compliance more straightforward than in other regions?
• How are Canadian authorities handling exemption requests or extension requests, and how do the penalties compare to U.S?
• Updates on the EU’s progress toward banning PFAS substances as per ECHA (European Chemicals Agency)’s proposal, regulatory timelines, and how these efforts align with global initiatives
• Insights into emerging PFAS regulations in the Asia-Pacific (particularly Australia and New Zealand) region and their implications for international supply chains
• Highlighting the challenges and opportunities in aligning regulatory frameworks and industry compliance efforts across jurisdictions