The California Senate recently passed a bill, SB 682, that would essentially eliminate the use of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “forever chemicals,” in food packaging within the state, as of January 1, 2028. Given the broad support in the Senate for this bill and the fact that the California Assembly and Governor Gavin Newsom have been strong proponents of similar legislation in the past, SB 682 will likely be signed into law by September 2025, when the current legislative session ends.
Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a class of fluorinated chemicals that have been used for over fifty years in a wide range of consumer, commercial, and industrial products, including in grease and water-resistant food packaging. PFAS are sometimes referred to as “forever chemicals,” due to the ability of some PFAS to persist in the environment and in the human body. While there is no scientific consensus on the types or magnitude of risk that PFAS may pose to human health or the environment, public concern and media focus on these chemicals have led to significant restrictions on PFAS usage over the past few years, both by regulatory agencies and state legislatures. California has been at the forefront of these efforts, with the state legislature passing a number of laws intended to reduce, phase out, or ban PFAS in consumer products.
SB 682, if enacted as law, would be one of the most sweeping of these laws enacted in California to date. The preamble of SB 682 states that the “intent of this act is to phase out the sale of products with avoidable PFAS use.” To effectuate this intent, SB 682 would ban, as of January 1, 2028, the sale or distribution of virtually all food packaging, cleaning products, cookware, juvenile products, dental floss, and ski wax that contain “intentionally added PFAS,” which is defined to include both PFAS added to a product that has a functional or technical effect in the product, and PFAS that is the result or outcome of an added chemical process, such as PFAS created as a result of fluorination of plastic. The only consumer products in these categories exempt from the 2028 ban are (1) those for which federal law governs the presence of PFAS in the product and therefore preempts similar state regulation, and (2) previously used products.
“Food packaging” that is subject to the ban is defined in SB 682 to include any “package, packaging component, or food service ware that is intended to provide a means to market, protect, handle, deliver, serve, contain, or store a food or beverage, if it is likely to contact a food or beverage.” This includes, but is not limited to:
- A unit package, an intermediate package, or a shipping container;
- Unsealed receptacles, including carrying cases, crates, cups, plates, bowls, pails, rigid foil and other trays, wrappers and wrapping films, bags, or tubs; and
- An individual assembled part of a food package, including an interior or exterior blocking, bracing, cushioning, waterproofing, heat or cold protection, coating, closures, inks, or labels.
The bill clarifies that food packaging products made in substantial part from paper, paperboard, or other materials derived from plant fibers are not included in this definition, because sale or distribution of such food packaging was already banned in California starting January 1, 2023, under prior legislation (AB 1200).
SB 682 also includes requirements to ensure that this PFAS ban and similar prior bans are effective. Starting July 1, 2030, manufacturers will be required to provide, upon request of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), a statement of compliance certifying that each of their covered products are in compliance with SB 682, along with technical documentation, including analytical test results, to demonstrate compliance.
Achieving and demonstrating compliance with these PFAS bans may be more difficult than manufacturers anticipate. Even if a product can be successfully reformulated—likely at a significant cost—such that “intentionally added PFAS” are not present, PFAS could still be present and detectible in the product for other reasons, including:
- The presence of PFAS in production process water, due to its ubiquity in groundwater and surface water bodies;
- The presence of PFAS in fluids, lubricants, and oils associated with machinery used in the production process; or
- The presence of fluorinated compounds in the product, which are not actually PFAS, but which may be assumed to be PFAS under certain testing methods or regulatory interpretations.
As such, if SB 682 becomes law in California before the end of the legislative session in early September, manufacturers will need to quickly develop and implement a plan for ensuring that they can both achieve and demonstrate compliance by January 1, 2028 (i.e., within 27-30 months, depending on exact date of bill enactment), when the ban comes into effect, or face potential exclusion of their products from the California market.
In sum, if SB 682 is enacted as law, it will be one of the most far-reaching PFAS bans implemented by the California Legislature to date, and it will result in major costs and technical hurdles for the food packaging industry, including with respect to reformulation of products, certification of compliance, and—where compliance is not feasible or cost-effective—ceasing distribution and sale of that food packaging in California.
The current text of SB 682 and related legislative information are available at the California Legislative Information website, here.
