Read the full article by Rose Fowler Lapp, Jillian Marullo, Mark Plumer, Reza Zarghamee (JD Supra)

“In all, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington have placed or soon will be placing prohibitions on the distribution of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in food packaging containers, cookware and, in other cases, a wide range of products under the authority of consumer protection laws. Companies across the supply chain will be impacted by these regulations. Industry has criticized the state laws as overreaching, particularly considering the inability of certain state agencies to enforce these laws effectively.

Most of the laws passed to date regulate the activities of manufacturers and distributors, although some also impose obligations upon retailers.

The common denominator is that all 11states will regulate food packaging containing ‘intentionally added PFAS’ (more on this term below). The states’ definitions of food packaging are largely similar, with most covering materials composed of paper, such as takeout containers, disposable utensils, trays, wrappers and liners. Certain states (e.g., Connecticut, Minnesota, Rhode Island and Vermont) also define food packaging broadly enough to apply to plastic products. In California, the laws also extend to certain cookware. Maine is notable because its law is substantially broader and covers any product that contains PFAS.

Each state has adopted a broad definition of PFAS that applies to any fluorinated organic chemicals containing at least one fully fluorinated carbon atom. A definition this broad leaves little room for exceptions with respect to individual PFAS chemicals that, perhaps, do not present the same risks to human health and the environment as other chemicals in the class.”…