PFAS Update - What’s Changed Under the New Administration?

Led by Administrator Lee Zeldin, a prior member of the Congressional PFAS Task Force, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is continuing to focus on developing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) policy and strengthening PFAS science. While those scientific and regulatory efforts are underway, the EPA recently announced revisions to some existing regulations and forecast other policy developments.

1. Revisions to Drinking Water MCLs – In April 2024, the EPA announced its final rule setting Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for six PFAS (or combinations thereof) under the Safe Drinking Water Act. In May 2025, the EPA announced its intent to rescind and reconsider the MCLs for four of the six PFAS compounds (or combinations thereof), leaving in place the MCLs for two PFAS – perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS). Recognizing the challenges facing many water providers, the EPA extended the deadline for compliance with the MCLs for PFOA and PFOS from 2029 to 2031. As reported in our prior update, the EPA classified PFOA and PFOS as “hazardous substances” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) in April 2024. This designation currently remains in place but has been challenged in ongoing litigation where the EPA has requested a stay “to allow new leadership more time to evaluate the [CERCLA designation] within the broader context of EPA’s comprehensive strategy to address PFOA and PFOS.”
2. Revisions to TSCA Reporting Obligations – In May 2025, the EPA issued an interim final rule extending, for the second time, the deadlines for PFAS reporting under Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Under the new deadlines, most manufacturers will be required to report by October 26, 2026 (or by April 13, 2027 for small businesses reporting as article importers) information regarding the identity, use, production and hazards of PFAS-containing products manufactured or imported since 2011. Pending its ongoing review, the EPA announced its intent to further modify or possibly exempt PFAS reporting obligations for small businesses and article importers.
3. Other Potential Policy Developments – While its revisions above ease the challenges of compliance with current PFAS regulations, the EPA has noted its continued commitment to the “polluter pays” policy and addressing PFAS “at the source” to prevent PFAS contamination. In service to those goals, the EPA announced ongoing or upcoming regulatory efforts, including:
   1. ELGs – With a focus on PFAS manufacturers and metal finishers, the EPA will continue work to establish effluent limitations guidelines (ELGs) to reduce PFAS discharges from manufacturing sources.
   2. RCRA – In February 2024, the EPA proposed a rule designating 9 PFAS as hazardous constituents under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Without commenting on those designations, the EPA recently announced its intent to “[d]etermine how to better use RCRA authorities to address releases from manufacturing operations of both producers and users of PFAS.”  
   3. PFAS Destruction and Disposal Guidance – Given the rapidly evolving challenges, technologies, and science regarding PFAS disposal, the EPA intends to update its Interim Guidance on the Destruction and Disposal of PFAS and Materials Containing PFAS on an annual basis. The Guidance does not apply to consumer products in consumer settings, but provides helpful information for businesses whose operations include PFAS or PFAS-containing products.
   4. Scientific Study of PFAS – As described in our prior update, the term PFAS refers to a family of thousands of chemicals which differ greatly in structure, properties and beneficial uses. The EPA’s plan to “[a]chieve more effective outcomes by prioritizing risk-based review of new and existing PFAS chemicals” suggests an intent to study – and perhaps differentiate – PFAS chemicals based on their individual hazard characteristics and exposure pathways.  
   5. Possible pre-emption of state laws – Many states have enacted or proposed PFAS regulations which vary greatly and exceed the scope and pace of the EPA’s proposed regulations. Some have speculated that the EPA could exercise its rulemaking authority to preempt stricter PFAS regulation at the state level, but nothing has been proposed to date.

Practical Effects

With the exception of extended deadlines for TSCA reporting (and possible modification/exemption of reporting obligations for some businesses), the practical effects of PFAS regulation for most businesses remain as described in our prior update. PFAS is an important issue in business contracts, permitting and real estate transactions, and we are seeing an increase in PFAS-related consumer litigation.

Of course, potential impacts will depend on the specific circumstances of each business.