The Minnesota PFAS law prohibits the sale of products containing intentionally added PFAS in 2032. HARC has published documents below outlining important dates and additional information. 

Under the law the following fire protection agents are PFAS: FK-5-1-12, HFC-227ea, HFC-125, HFC-236fa, HCFC-123 and 2-BTP. The law contains a provision for products to be exempted from the sale prohibition as currently unavoidable uses (CUU). The rules for CUU determinations are under development and expected to be completed by 2028. The law also requires manufacturers and distributors of products containing PFAS that are sold or offered for sale in Minnesota to report on those products by September 15, 2026.

FSSA Members:

The regulatory landscape at the state and local level for battery energy storage system installations are very active. Jurisdictions are adopting NFPA 855, Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energy Storage Systems, the most current version being the 2026 edition. FSSA members should consider supporting the adoption of the 2026 edition of NFPA 855 and the identified reference standards in Chapter 2 of NFPA 855.

FSSA Call to Action - NFPA Needs Your Support for the Pro Codes Act

Critical Action Needed: The fire safety standards system that has protected lives for over 125 years is under attack. Your voice is needed now.

The Situation: NFPA's ability to develop and maintain the 300+ fire, life, and electrical safety codes our industry depends on is being threatened by recent court decisions and legislative attacks. For-profit companies are selling unauthorized copies of safety codes, multiple states are freezing code updates for years, and special interests are exploiting public misunderstanding to weaken the consensus-based standards development system. Without the Pro Codes Act (H.R. 4072), we risk losing the self-funded system that has prevented countless tragedies like the Grenfell Tower fire (72 deaths) and Ghost Ship fire (36 deaths). The Pro Codes Act preserves copyright protection for standards developers while ensuring free public access—protecting both the funding model that supports rigorous safety standards and public transparency.

Trend Overview: What States Are Doing

The FSSA PFAS Task force continues to monitor regulations across the US. The focus of this update is on Nonessential Consumer Products (carpets, clothes, ski wax). States including Connecticut, Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Rhode Island have proposed broad OECD style bans but have so far paused or rejected them.

Key State Snapshots Relevant to Suppression Industry

Maine – (2021 law)

• First consumer‑product PFAS ban.
• Potential for “currently unavoidable use” exemptions. Fire was not initially granted that exemption. We continue to pursue, as Maine granted other SNAP products to be exempt.
• Full ban by 2030.
• Reporting required since 2023.

Minnesota – HF‑2310 / “Amara’s Law” (2023)

• Bans 11 consumer product categories by January 1, 2025.
• Full ban by January 2032 unless designated 'currently unavoidable use' by MPCA.
• PFAS reporting required by July 1, 2026. Was initially January 1, 2026 but delayed to July 1^st by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
• All manufacturers of products with intentionally added PFAS need to submit a report and pay a $1000 initial fee with $500 annual fees afterwards. No reporting exemptions.

New Mexico – HB 212 (signed Apr 8 2025)

• Phased product bans for cookware, firefighting foam, etc. starting in 2027
• SNAP listed materials, like most clean agents, are exempt. SNAP products are exempt from reporting
• Full ban by 2032 unless exempted via Environmental Improvement Board (EIB).
• PFAS reporting required by nonexempt manufacturers starting January 1, 2027; enforcement includes fines up to $15,000/day.

Take‑Away for FSSA Members

• Existing and emerging state laws target firefighting foam and suppression-related PFAS.

• Phased rollouts allow time for strategy adjustments on procurement and compliance.

• Exemptions for industrial/essential use exist but require proactive industry engagement.

• Stay informed on 'currently unavoidable use' definitions from state agencies.

• Help coordinate FSSA member action during critical rule‑making windows.

Map of Relevant PFAS Bills and Status by State

The July 2024 Halon Alternatives Research Corporation (HARC) Newsletter provides a very valuable and timely snapshot of where the industry is today on the regulation of PFAS substances used in fire protection. Read the full newsletter.

For the latest news and resources surrounding PFAS, visit the FSSA PFAS Resource Center.

Due to combined efforts, proposed legislation in Alaska was amended to remove “firefighting substance” and replace with “firefighting foam.” In early 2023, an Alaskan Senate bill was introduced with the intention of regulating the use of firefighting foams, but the wording referred to “firefighting substances.” There was concern that that this could be interpreted to also regulate clean agents.

As reported by HARC, there were combined efforts by a local fire equipment distributor in Alaska and lobbyists that work for the American Chemistry Council (ACC) to convince legislators to change the language so as to focus on firefighting foams containing PFAS and not clean agents. In the spring of 2024, an amendment was introduced and SB 67 was enrolled as a Law to become effective January 1, 2025.

FSSA has filed petitions in Maine and Minnesota, seeking a Currently Unavoidable Use (CUU) exemption from the Maine PFAS law and the Minnesota PFAS law that seek to regulate products containing “intentionally added PFAS.”  These laws define PFAS so broadly they would encompass certain clean agent fire suppressant agents, including HFC-227ea, FK-5-1-12 and HFC-125.

Copies of the FSSA petitions are linked below.

If one is working through a distributor or an installing contractor that has a supply agreement or a contract with an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) for the equipment that is listed using Novec 1230 fluid, they are likely listed with FK-5-1-12 from alternative suppliers as well. Novec 1230 is a neat (single component) agent. It is typically discharged from a cylinder with a nitrogen super pressurization or one with a separate nitrogen tank design used in a piston flow fashion giving a “push” to it.

It is recommended that one first checks with the original equipment manufacturer and their representative installing contractor to make sure they are supplying it with a listed or approved system. And second, make sure that they have a certificate of analysis assuring the quality of the clean agent material.

There has not been a sufficient concern to compel regulatory authorities to put restrictions on the use of Halon from a persistent standpoint, and for other reasons. The PFCs, HFCs, and HCFCs, are all being regulated for other reasons, based on ozone depletion potential (ODP), global warming potential (GWP), and so forth. The European ECHA has a proposal in place but at this point in time, clean agents are considered for derogation in the proposal.

In December 2022, 3M announced its plans to exit the manufacturing of 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid and their fluorochemical line of products completely by 2025, shocking the fire protection industry, as no one saw it coming. There is still a lot of excitement and maybe some angst or concern out in the marketplace. The best advice is to stay calm because regulatory resolution is not something that will unfold very quickly. There currently exist proposed changes offered or enacted state legislation that have taken place, particularly here in the United States. Even with current action, time is needed to determine what really needs to be done. There will be much discussion but watch for action.

Halocarbon clean agents are not going away anytime soon. Halon manufacturing was banned in Article One countries back on December 31st, 1992, at 11:59 PM EST, yet decades later we still see halon systems in use. This is not to say that things will be exactly the same for systems using Novec 1230 fluid, but these things do not tend to move very quickly. What is important is that halocarbons are not going away anytime soon, and 3M has made it clear that they plan to honor their commitments to fulfill orders of the product already made.

Trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) actually meets the definition of PFAS because it has a CF3 radical on the molecule. Researchable comments exist regarding the fate of trifluoroacetic acid, like from Columbia Climate School Center. The source of the currently observed levels is unknown and puzzling according to them. In 2001, the observed TFA concentrations were orders of magnitude larger than those predicted to result from the atmospheric degradation of the replacement of HCFCs and HFCs. The Columbia researchers noted that at the time FK-5-1-12 was not even commercialized.

Another collaborative study was conducted in 2002 and published in Environmental Science and Technology by the Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, Washington, the Department of Environmental Chemistry and Eco Toxicity in Germany, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, the University of California San Diego in La Jolla, and NOAA. The purpose of that study was to estimate TFA in ocean waters, given the material is strongly hydrophilic, and to assess whether today's levels are mainly from anthropogenic origin or whether biological or geological sources must be considered. Their conclusion at that time was that TFA is present in the global environment in two major compartments, in the ocean water and in the atmosphere, and in other areas, precipitation and fresh waters and so forth.

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is currently accepting comments in the REACH restriction process regarding future use of per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including those used in fire protection like FK-5-1-12. This is a three-phase process according to ECHA. Phase 1 is preparation and submission of a restriction proposal, beginning with notification of intent to submit a restriction, then the registry of intentions, preparing the restriction dossier, and then submission and conformity check. Phase 2-A, a consultations phase, includes a consultation on the restriction report and a consultation on the Committee for Socio-Economic Analysis (SEAC) draft opinion. Phase 2-B is an opinion development phase that includes advice from the forum, RACs opinion and SEACs opinion. Finally, Phase 3 is the decision and follow-up phase including commission decision on the restriction, complying with the restriction, and enforcing the restriction. Regarding FK-5-1-12 as well as other halocarbon clean agents, ECHA is currently in the second phase which, again in itself has two phases; consultations and opinion development. So, once completed, with comments taken until 25 September 2023, there will be a decision and follow up on what the regulation is going to be in Europe.

The atmospheric degradation mechanism of FK-5-1-12 looks like this as a balanced equation C₂F₅(O)CF(CF₃)₂—-->4CO₂+CF₃COOH+9HF. Taniguchi concludes the photolysis of the ketone in the air results in a radical, uh, and also carbonyl fluoride will be incorporated in the air cloud and seawater where it'll undergo hydrolysis to, to give the trifluoroacetic acid. Similarly, the carbonyl fluoride will undergo hydrolysis to give CO₂ and HF. The CO₂, as well as any of these, the other two products that result from reacting with ketone at the concentrations expected in the environment is not considered harmful according to Taniguchi. The concentrations expected from what is going to be emitted into the atmosphere, combined with a short atmospheric lifetime, the global warming potential is negligible.

The acronym PFAS is short for per or polyfluoroalkyl substance. Depending on the source, there are up to 15,000 products or materials that meet the definition of PFAS. PFAS includes a broad category of materials that can be solids, liquids or gasses. Some fire protection materials, defined as PFAS, that are components in aqueous film forming foams (AFFF) are considered persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT). Because of this, their use in fire protection and other applications is being phased out globally by the U.S. EPA and other regulatory agencies.

On June 29, the EPA announced its framework for addressing new and new uses of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The framework outlines EPA’s planned approach when reviewing new PFAS and new uses of PFAS to ensure that, before these chemicals are allowed to enter into commerce, EPA will undertake an extensive evaluation to ensure they pose no harm to human health and the environment. Read the news release here.

If you want to learn more about the framework, register for EPA’s upcoming webinar on September 6 at 2:00pm ET.

At the request of FSSA membership, the FSSA PFAS Task Force has published the FSSA Advocacy Statement on Clean Agent Fire Suppressants and PFAS Regulation.

This document supports FSSA’s position that a “total ban” approach to PFAS compounds could impact society’s ability to protect mission critical applications, which keep people safe. Any legislation or regulation that restricts the manufacture, import, distribution, sale, or use of PFAS should exclude Clean Agents when they are used in fire and explosion protection applications. The document outlines the difference between PFAS, clean agents fire suppressants, and clean agents to help clearly define this issue for our members and provide fact-based information and guidance to regulators, AHJs, architects, the consulting design community, and other industry stakeholders. FSSA supports rational science-based efforts to eliminate sources of harm to humans and the environment. Due to the high risk to society in eliminating all PFAS materials due to an unnecessarily broad classification of compounds, we advocate for a scientific approach that distinguishes between Persistent,  Bioaccumulative and Toxic PFAS (PBTs) compounds from those which are not known to be PBT, based upon the best available science.

FSSA Members:

We hope everyone is enjoying the start of summer! The FSSA PFAS Task Force has been continuing to meet weekly to provide updates, resources, and webinars for you. 

FSSA Webinar: Differentiating PFAS

Thursday, June 15, 2023
1:00 pm - 2:00 pm Eastern
Presented by: Paul Rivers, FSSA Honorary Member

Per and polyfluoro alkyl compounds (PFAS) in end use are ubiquitous in society today.  PFAS are essential for modern life to which we are accustomed.  From semiconductors, computers, smart phones, pharmaceuticals, to BESS systems, refrigerants, fire protection foams and clean agents, pipe thread tape, dental floss, our car engines, to even the planes in which we fly, it is hard to imagine life without PFAS.

But, like good and bad cholesterol, there are good and bad PFAS.  Unfortunately, ‘good’ PFAS, comprising the vast majority of the estimated 7,500 to 15,000 materials meeting the PFAS definition depending on the reference, are conflated with the minimal number of ‘bad’ PFAS.  Thus, people mistakenly label the good the same as the bad.  Most notably in the fire suppression industry, ‘bad’ PFAS are the PFOS and PFOA contained in aqueous film forming foam, or AFFF, heretofore in general use.

Join the FSSA PFAS Task Force for a Zoom chat on Tuesday, May 30 at 2:00 pm Eastern. Members of the PFAS task force will be discussing the task force initiatives that have been happening over the past several months. You'll have a chance to ask questions and share comments on what FSSA can do to help you. If you're interested in attending, RSVP today using the link below.

Please note that ALL participants MUST RSVP in order to receive your personalized Zoom credentials. This meeting is for FSSA Members only.

Brenton Harris, 2023-2024 FSSA President

FSSA Members: