An Act to create 299.485 of the statutes; Relating to: banning products containing intentionally added PFAS and providing a penalty. (FE)
SB1138 would create a new state statute, section 299.485, to phase out products containing intentionally added PFAS, a class of fluorinated chemicals often called “forever chemicals.” Beginning January 1, 2032, the bill would prohibit the sale or distribution of specified product categories containing intentionally added PFAS, including food packaging, carpets and rugs, cleaning products, cookware, cosmetics, dental floss, fabric treatments, juvenile products, menstruation products, textile furnishings, ski wax, and upholstered furniture. It would also allow the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to add other product categories by rule.
The bill sets a broader backstop ban beginning January 1, 2038, after which no product containing intentionally added PFAS could be sold or distributed unless the DNR has determined by rule that PFAS use in that product is an “unavoidable use.” The bill also requires manufacturers to submit product and PFAS-use information to DNR, and authorizes the department to require testing and certificates of compliance when it believes a product may contain intentionally added PFAS. Certain products are exempt, including items already preempted by federal law, firefighting foam regulated elsewhere in state law, used products, and certain medical devices and medical-setting products.
SB1138 would add a new regulatory framework to Wisconsin environmental and consumer-product law by restricting PFAS in a wide range of goods and giving DNR authority to identify additional covered products, define unavoidable uses, and require manufacturer disclosures and testing. It would affect manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of consumer products, especially those in packaging, household goods, personal care, textiles, and children’s products. Violations would be subject to a civil forfeiture of $100 per product per day, creating an enforcement mechanism tied to product-level compliance.
The bill’s text and context suggest a strong environmental and public-health orientation, with the legislature proposing a broad phaseout of intentionally added PFAS rather than a narrow restriction. There is no recorded committee transcript or vote breakdown in the provided materials, and the bill ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. Based on the structure of the bill, support would likely come from PFAS-reduction and consumer-safety advocates, while opposition would likely center on compliance costs, product reformulation challenges, and concerns about the breadth of the ban and DNR rulemaking authority.
The main points of contention are likely the scope and timing of the PFAS bans, the breadth of DNR’s authority to add product categories and determine “unavoidable use,” and the compliance burden on manufacturers required to test and disclose PFAS content. Another likely dispute is whether the 2038 all-products ban is too sweeping, especially for products where PFAS may be used for performance, safety, or durability. Exemptions for federally preempted products and medical uses may reduce conflict in some sectors, but the bill still places substantial responsibility on industry to prove compliance and on DNR to administer and enforce the program.