EPA issued an enforcement order in response to an unauthorized release of PFAS-containing firefighting foam into Maine waters. Compliance teams should review incident response and release-prevention controls for AFFF/PFAS-containing foams, verify authorization/permit conditions for discharges, and ensure documentation and corrective actions align with EPA order requirements (including potential reporting, cleanup, and future use restrictions).
EPA finalized an update to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) adding sodium perfluorohexanesulfonate (PFHxS‑Na), a PFAS, to TRI reporting. EPA indicates TRI tracking/reporting for PFHxS‑Na begins with the 2026 reporting year (starting Jan 1, 2026). Facilities in TRI-covered sectors that manufacture, process, or otherwise use PFHxS‑Na must implement tracking systems for thresholds and releases/waste management for future TRI submissions; EPA states the first TRI reports including PFHxS‑Na are due July 1, 2027. EPA also states PFHxS‑Na is treated as a chemical of special concern with a 100 lb reporting threshold, increasing the likelihood of reporting for affected facilities.
EPA updated its PFAS program landing page (noted as updated Feb 19, 2026) to reflect current PFAS-related regulatory actions and resources. While not a binding regulatory change by itself, this update is relevant for compliance teams as it serves as an authoritative navigation hub to EPA PFAS regulatory developments (e.g., TRI reporting actions and other PFAS program materials) and can be used to track official EPA announcements and links to compliance resources.
US EPA finalized a TRI rule adding sodium perfluorohexanesulfonate (PFHxS‑Na) to the Toxics Release Inventory as a PFAS chemical of special concern. Facilities subject to TRI must begin tracking releases and other reportable waste management quantities for PFHxS‑Na for the reporting period beginning January 1, 2026. The first Form R submissions covering PFHxS‑Na will be due July 1, 2027. The rule applies a 100 lb reporting threshold as a chemical of special concern, increasing compliance and data management obligations for TRI reporters handling PFHxS‑Na.
EPA issued a public roundup summarizing major PFAS actions taken during the first year of the current administration, including coordination and continued emphasis on regulatory and enforcement activities addressing PFAS risks. While the release is programmatic rather than a discrete rule text amendment, it can inform compliance teams about EPA priorities, active PFAS initiatives, and likely areas of near-term regulatory attention.
EPA issued a news release summarizing major PFAS actions taken during the first year of the administration, signaling continued cross-program PFAS priorities (e.g., regulatory actions, implementation efforts, and enforcement posture). While not itself a binding legal change, this roundup can influence compliance planning by indicating areas of anticipated scrutiny and policy direction.
EPA finalized the addition of sodium perfluorohexanesulfonate (PFHxS‑Na) to the TRI list as a PFAS chemical of special concern. TRI-covered facilities that manufacture, process, or otherwise use PFHxS‑Na must begin tracking for Reporting Year 2026 (starting Jan 1, 2026). The research summary indicates a 100 lb threshold and first TRI reporting due July 1, 2027, which compliance teams should incorporate into TRI applicability screening, supplier data collection, and environmental reporting workflows.
EPA finalized a rule adding sodium perfluorohexanesulfonate (PFHxS‑Na) to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) PFAS reporting list as a chemical of special concern. Covered facilities must begin tracking PFHxS‑Na releases and other TRI reportable activities starting with the reporting year that begins January 1, 2026. EPA indicates the TRI reporting threshold is 100 lbs, and the first TRI submissions including PFHxS‑Na are due July 1, 2027. Compliance teams should assess whether operations manufacture, process, or otherwise use PFHxS‑Na and update TRI data collection, recordkeeping, and supplier/customer communication workflows accordingly.
Canada published the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2025 in the Canada Gazette, Part II. These regulations repeal and replace the 2012 regulations and are intended to address certain toxic substances, including PFAS-related controls. Compliance teams should review product and chemical portfolios for any PFAS substances captured by the new/updated prohibitions and confirm any new compliance obligations or scope changes versus the 2012 framework.
ECHA published official information and supporting guidance indicating it plans to open a 60-day public consultation on SEAC’s draft opinion for the proposed EU-wide REACH restriction on PFAS after SEAC’s March 2026 meeting. This is a near-term stakeholder action point for companies to prepare socio-economic evidence, alternatives information, and confidentiality claims for the consultation submission process.
EPA’s TSCA §8(a)(7) PFAS reporting and recordkeeping program page reflects the operative one-time reporting submission window for most reporters (April 13, 2026 through October 13, 2026) and the later deadline for small manufacturers that are only reporting as PFAS article importers (until April 13, 2027). Compliance teams should use these dates to plan data gathering, supplier outreach, and internal TSCA reporting workflows; missing the submission window can create TSCA noncompliance risk.
EPA issued a proposed rule to amend the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) one-time PFAS data reporting and recordkeeping requirements (40 CFR Part 705). The proposal would introduce multiple scope exemptions and other adjustments intended to make reporting more practical (e.g., exemptions described in the research text include imported articles, de minimis concentrations (0.1%), certain byproducts, impurities, R&D, and non-isolated intermediates), along with technical corrections and changes to submission mechanics. Compliance teams should monitor this rulemaking because, if finalized, it could materially change which entities must report and what information is required for the 2011–2022 lookback period.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed revisions to the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS Reporting and Recordkeeping Rule, significantly narrowing the scope of the original 2023 requirements. The proposal introduces six standard TSCA exemptions, including relief for imported articles and de minimis concentrations (≤0.1%), aiming to shift the reporting burden primarily to chemical manufacturers and importers rather than finished goods importers. If finalized in 2026, the revisions could eliminate reporting obligations for approximately 127,000 businesses while maintaining requirements for primary PFAS producers under the Toxic Substances Control Act framework.
ECHA Weekly reported that the European Commission adopted an EU-wide REACH restriction on PFAS in firefighting foams on 3 October 2025, including transition periods. Compliance teams for manufacturers, importers, distributors, and users of firefighting foams should assess affected PFAS-containing formulations, transition timelines, and downstream user communications to ensure continued market access and compliant substitution planning.
EPA published implementation resources for the PFAS NPDWR, including templates intended to help primacy agencies request extensions for primacy revision actions. State primacy agencies and regulated water systems should use these materials to plan state adoption/primacy timelines and coordinate implementation planning.
EPA published primacy extension request documents (memo/templates) to support states, territories, and tribes in requesting additional time to adopt the 2024 PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) into their primacy programs. This is an implementation support update for drinking-water regulators and utilities; compliance teams should monitor primacy adoption timelines and any associated state-level implementation schedules tied to the NPDWR.
EPA published a technical guidance document for the PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) describing requirements and best practices for collection and analysis of drinking water samples for regulated PFAS. The document covers approved methods and practical considerations (e.g., sample handling and quality controls) that can affect compliance monitoring results. Drinking water compliance teams and laboratories can use this to align sampling plans and QA/QC procedures with EPA expectations.
EPA published a technical guidance document, “Requirements and Best Practices for the Collection and Analysis of Samples for the PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation,” to support implementation of the PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR). Compliance teams at public water systems, labs, and state primacy agencies should review sampling and analytical expectations described in the document to align monitoring programs and quality assurance practices with EPA’s recommended approaches.
EPA published implementation support materials for the PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR), including a technical document on requirements and best practices for PFAS drinking water sample collection and analysis. This guidance is relevant for public water systems, laboratories, and state primacy agencies supporting monitoring and compliance activities under the NPDWR, and should be incorporated into sampling plans, chain-of-custody procedures, and laboratory method selection/QA controls.
EPA announced it will keep maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for PFOA and PFOS under the PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR), while signaling planned rulemaking actions to modify implementation and scope. EPA states it plans a rulemaking to extend the compliance date for PFOA/PFOS and also intends to rescind and reconsider determinations/regulations for PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO‑DA (GenX) and the Hazard Index mixture approach (PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO‑DA, PFBS). For compliance teams at public water systems and impacted supply chains, this indicates impending changes to compliance planning and potential changes to which PFAS are regulated under the federal drinking water standards; specific new compliance dates are described as intended/planned rather than finalized in the announcement.