Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Chemical Policy Pfas topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Attorney General seeks housekeeping fixes to PFAS product bans; proposes consistent definition and enforcement tools
Summary
The Attorney General's office proposed aligning the "intentionally added" PFAS definition across product categories, adding certificate-of-compliance authority in the food-packaging and cosmetic/menstrual sections, and harmonizing resale/reuse language. The changes are presented as housekeeping to clarify scope and enforcement.
Laura Murphy, Assistant Attorney General and director of the office's Environmental Protection Unit, told the committee the office is requesting modest, mostly technical amendments to Vermont's PFAS product-ban statutes to fix inconsistencies created during last year's codification and amendments.
"We are here to walk through a few revisions to Vermont's PFAS product bans law... housekeeping revisions," Murphy said, asking the committee to make definitions and enforcement authority consistent across food packaging, consumer products, cosmetics/menstrual products and firefighting-agent sections.
What the AG proposed:
- Intentionally-added definition: The office recommends applying the newer, broader definition of "intentionally added" (which captures chemicals added during manufacture and precursor breakdown products) to food packaging and cosmetic/menstrual sections with a uniform phase-in date (suggested July 1, 2027) to match consumer-product timing.
- Certificates of compliance: The AG asked to add the certificate-of-compliance authority to the cosmetic/menstrual and food-packaging sections so the office can request written verification from manufacturers and use civil-investigative tools if needed.
- Manufacturer definition: The AG recommended adding an explicit definition of "manufacturer" to the food-packaging section to match the other product sections for clarity.
- Resale/reuse language: For consistency, staff proposed using the same resale/reuse exception language adopted last year for consumer products in the food-packaging section so second-hand sales or reused containers are not inadvertently swept into a prohibition intended for new products.
Committee members asked how certificates of compliance would be verified and whether testing or investigative demands would be used; Murphy said the office has consumer-protection tools (civil investigative demands, testing and enforcement authority) and would not simply accept a manufacturer's attestation without verification if evidence warranted enforcement.
No opponents were identified at the hearing; AG staff said these are housekeeping items rather than new bans. The committee requested the text of the proposed amendments and indicated it would consider them in forthcoming meetings.
