PFAS-related litigation continues to climb and to diversify as to claims and parties. See the attached graphics, updated through the third quarter of 2025. We will continue to update these graphics on a quarterly basis
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 public hearing, a Minnesota Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) last month identified procedural and substantive deficiencies with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) proposed rule
It has now been over a year since PFOA and PFOS – two types of PFAS – were designated as hazardous substances under CERCLA, the federal Superfund law. Among the consequences of these designations was that PFOA and PFOS became subject to the ASTM standard for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (“ESAs”), meaning environmental
On September 4, 2025, EPA released its Unified Agenda which includes plans for a number of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) regulatory actions. The PFAS regulatory agenda is consistent with Administrator Zeldin’s April 2025 announcement regarding combatting PFAS contamination but includes more details. (See our prior post regarding the announcement.) The PFAS regulatory agenda includes
As previously reported, the ongoing mini-trials related to PFAS at the Chambers Works facility in NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIROMENTAL PROTECTION, ET AL., VS. E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, 3M ET AL., Docket No. 19-cv-14766 (RMB/JBC) were abruptly put on hold on June 30, 2025. By August 4, 2025, the reason was
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted EPA’s motion to lift the stay in the litigation challenging the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for six PFAS chemicals (PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA commonly known as GenX, and PFBS). On August 1, the parties submitted a joint request to the Court seeking the following: 1)
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 deadline for its proposed reporting rules for products containing intentionally added PFAS. The MPCA announced on July 23, 2025, that the reporting deadline
PFAS-related litigation continues to climb and to diversify as to claims and parties. See the attached graphics, updated through the second quarter of 2025. We will continue to update these graphics on a quarterly basis.
DuPont/Chemours Trial. On June 30, 2025, the next bench trial phase or “mini-trial” commenced in NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIROMENTAL PROTECTION, ET AL., VS. E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, ET AL., Docket No. 19-cv-14766 (RMB/JBC) before the Honorable Renée Marie Bumb of the Federal District of New Jersey (Camden). However, this mini-trial on
After evaluating public comments on its proposed PFAS-in-products reporting rules (see our previous posts here and here), the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has agreed to exercise its authority under section 116.943 of the Minnesota Statutes (Amara’s Law) and extend the deadline for manufacturers (including importers) to comply with the statute’s reporting requirements