In a significant development concerning Minnesota’s environmental regulations, an administrative court rejected the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) proposed rule on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) reporting and associated fees.¹ This decision, issued on
August 29, 2025, highlights procedural and substantive criteria considered in the MPCA’s rulemaking process.²

PFAS, often referred to as “forever chemicals,” are a group of synthetic substances widely used in various consumer products due to their resistance to heat, water, and oil.³ However, their alleged persistence in the environment and claimed potential health risks have led to increased regulatory scrutiny.⁴

In Minnesota, Amara’s Law (Minn. Stat. Ann.
§ 116.943) was enacted to phase out products containing intentionally added PFAS by 2032.⁵ The law’s initial phase, effective January 1, 2025, prohibits the sale of such products in 11 categories, including carpets, cookware, and cosmetics.⁶ The next phase is related to a 2026 deadline that requires manufacturers of any product containing PFAS sold or distributed in the state to provide detailed information regarding that product to the MPCA.⁷ Manufacturers would be required to report a description of the product, the purposes/functions that PFAS play in the product, the amount of each type of PFAS, and other information.⁸

It was these precise reporting requirements with which the Minnesota administrative law judge took issue.⁹ First, the court found that the MPCA failed to assess the cumulative impact of the proposed rule in conjunction with existing federal PFAS reporting regulations, as required by state law.¹⁰ Second, the court found that the proposed rule was not “rationally related” to the MPCA’s objectives and lacked a clear statement of need or reasonableness.¹¹ Third, the court found that certain provisions of the rule exceeded the MPCA’s statutory authority, rendering them unenforceable.¹² Consequently, the court recommended that the MPCA address these deficiencies before resubmitting the rule for further review.¹³

Despite the judicial disapproval, the compliance deadline for manufacturers remains unchanged for now.¹⁴ Initially set for January 1, 2026, the MPCA extended the reporting deadline to July 1, 2026, in response to industry concerns about the complexity of data collection and the need for adequate preparation time.¹⁵ This extension allows manufacturers additional time to establish agreements with suppliers for reporting purposes and to familiarize themselves with the forthcoming reporting platform, expected to be available before the end of 2025.¹⁶

The court’s disapproval of the MPCA’s proposed PFAS reporting and fees rule underscores the importance of thorough regulatory processes that align with statutory requirements. While the MPCA works to address the identified deficiencies, manufacturers should use this extension to ensure they are ready for forthcoming reporting obligations.

While Minnesota is attempting to ramp up its requirements, in November 2025, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed changes to its PFAS reporting regulations that it claims will make the regulations more practical and implementable.¹⁷ Unlike the MPCA’s forward-looking regulations, under the EPA’s proposal, PFAS manufacturers would be required to report historical data related to exposure and effects between 2011 and 2022.¹⁸

1. Sara Samora, Judge disapproves Minnesota PFAS rule, but 2026 deadline unchanged for now, Industry Dive (September 17, 2025); In the Matter of the Proposed Rules Relating to Amara’s Law, PFAS in Products: Reporting and Fees, Minnesota Rules 7026.0010 through .0100, Report of the Administrative Law Judge (Minn. State Ct., Court of Administrative Hearings 2025). ↩︎
2. Samora, supra note 1. ↩︎
3. PFAS Explained, United Stated Environmental Protection Agency (September 30, 2025). ↩︎
4. How PFAS Impacts Your Health, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (July 22, 2025). ↩︎
5. 2025 PFAS Prohibitions, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (last visited November 17, 2025). ↩︎
6. Id. ↩︎
7. Minn. Stat. Ann. § 116.943. ↩︎
8. Reporting PFAS in products, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (last visited November 17, 2025). ↩︎
9. Samora, supra note 1. ↩︎
10. Id. ↩︎
11. Id. ↩︎
12. Id. ↩︎
13. Id. ↩︎
14. Id. ↩︎
15. Id.; Reporting PFAS in products, supra note 8. ↩︎
16. Reporting PFAS in products, supra note 8. ↩︎
17. EPA Proposes Changes to Make PFAS Reporting Requirements More Practical and Implementable, Reducing Regulatory Burden, EPA Press Office (November 10, 2025). ↩︎
18. Id. ↩︎