Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed Senate Bill 682, authored by Senator Ben Allen, sought to dramatically limit the presence of harmful “forever chemicals” in consumer products sold in the state.
Known formally as the Environmental Health: Product Safety: Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Act, the bill targeted a wide range of goods that often contain intentionally added PFAS—synthetic compounds linked to cancer, hormonal disruption, and environmental persistence.
SB 682 proposed a phased ban on these chemicals, beginning with everyday items such as cleaning products, food packaging, and dental floss by 2028, followed by cookware in 2030, and eventually expanding to other commercial and industrial products in later years.
“I’m disappointed in the result for a bill that would have better protected our public health and environment. For decades, manufacturers of PFAS chemicals have been exposing us to dangerous toxins that lead to cancer, liver and kidney disease, decreased fertility, developmental harm, and other serious health conditions,” wrote Allen in a statement expressing his disappointment with the veto.
“While the manufacturers escape accountability, ratepayers and local governments have been struggling to keep up with the ballooning costs of cleaning these ‘forever chemicals’ from our water infrastructure. I’m hopeful we can continue working on a transition away from these dangerous products which already have safer alternatives at reasonable prices available on the market.”
Under SB 682, manufacturers would have been required to ensure that their products did not contain intentionally added PFAS unless the use was deemed “currently unavoidable” by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The agency would have been given broad authority to test products, request compliance documentation, and enforce penalties for violations.
The legislation was designed to align with California’s broader environmental health goals and to build on earlier laws that banned PFAS in textiles, cosmetics, and juvenile products. By phasing out these substances, lawmakers hoped to reduce contamination in water, soil, and the human body, addressing what environmental advocates have called one of the most pressing chemical safety issues of the decade.
“This policy would have aligned California with the other states that have already passed laws to phase out PFAS from all of these consumer products. Now California is a laggard,” wrote Dr. Anna Reade, director of PFAS advocacy with NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council).
“It’s unfortunate that misinformation and greed by some in the cookware industry tanked this policy. But people are increasingly aware of the health and pollution risks associated with forever chemicals and are demanding PFAS-free alternatives for their homes and families.”
Despite strong support from environmental and public health groups, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed SB 682 in October 2025. In his veto message, Newsom expressed concern over implementation challenges and potential conflicts with federal regulatory efforts already underway.
Industry groups had also raised objections, warning that the bill’s broad scope could disrupt supply chains and impose costly compliance burdens. Although the measure did not become law, SB 682 reflected California’s continued leadership in chemical regulation and consumer safety policy—and it is likely to influence future legislation aimed at curbing PFAS pollution both within the state and nationwide.
Author
About The Author
