California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB682

Introduced
2/21/25  
Refer
3/5/25  
Report Pass
4/7/25  
Refer
4/8/25  
Report Pass
4/7/25  
Refer
4/22/25  
Refer
4/8/25  
Report Pass
5/5/25  
Refer
4/22/25  
Refer
5/6/25  
Report Pass
5/5/25  
Refer
5/6/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Engrossed
6/3/25  
Refer
6/9/25  
Engrossed
6/3/25  
Refer
6/9/25  
Refer
6/23/25  
Refer
6/23/25  
Report Pass
7/16/25  
Refer
7/17/25  

Caption

Environmental health: product safety: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

Impact

The legislation aims to significantly reduce the contamination of products with PFAS, which have been linked to severe health risks, including liver damage, immune dysfunction, and various cancers. By phasing out non-essential uses of PFAS, the bill seeks to protect public health and mitigate environmental damage. The enforcement of these provisions rests with the Department of Toxic Substances Control, which has the authority to establish regulations conducive to the bill's objectives, further strengthening product safety in California.

Summary

Senate Bill 682, introduced by Senator Allen, focuses on amending the Health and Safety Code to address the environmental health impacts associated with perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), commonly known as toxic chemicals. The bill sets a timeline for the prohibitions on the sale of various consumer products containing intentionally added PFAS, including cleaning products, dental floss, juvenile products, and food packaging starting January 1, 2028, and cookware starting January 1, 2030. Additionally, manufacturers are required to provide certificates of compliance upon request, and they are exempt from certain registration fees.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment surrounding SB 682 is largely supportive among advocates for environmental health, public safety, and consumer protection. Proponents view the bill as a vital step towards eliminating hazardous chemicals from everyday products. However, there is also some contention regarding the potential financial implications for manufacturers and the risk of increased consumer prices for compliant products.

Contention

Debate exists around the bill's potential economic impact, particularly on small manufacturers who may face increased regulatory burdens. Critics argue that phasing out PFAS could disrupt the availability of certain products, while supporters assert that the long-term health benefits and environmental protection outweigh these concerns. Furthermore, the bill emphasizes compliance requirements but provides a cushion for previously used products and federal preemption, showing a balanced approach to regulation.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA SB903

Environmental health: product safety: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

CA AB246

Product safety: menstrual products: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

CA AB2515

Menstrual products: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

CA AB727

Product safety: cleaning products and floor sealers or floor finishes: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

CA AB1660

Cosmetic products: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

CA AB2408

Firefighter personal protective equipment: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

CA AB347

Household product safety: toxic substances: testing and enforcement.

CA AB1290

Product safety: plastic packaging: substances.

CA AB1423

Product safety: PFAS: artificial turf or synthetic surfaces.

CA AB2761

Product safety: plastic packaging: Reducing Toxics in Packaging Act.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.