Last Updated on September 23, 2025 by The HD Post Staff

CALIFORNIA — Governor Gavin Newsom is facing pressure from both industry groups and environmental advocates as he considers SB 682.

The legislation would restrict the sale of cookware and kitchen items containing certain PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances).

Nonstick pans, such as those coated with Teflon (PTFE), are the most common cookware containing PFAS, though some stainless steel alloys may also include them.

The Cookware Sustainability Alliance (CSA), which represents manufacturers, has called on Newsom to veto the measure. 

The group argues the bill is overly broad and could ban a wide array of common kitchen products, including pots, pans, food storage containers, and small appliances. CSA warns the move could raise costs for consumers, eliminate jobs, and undermine California’s culinary industry.

CSA president Steve Burns said SB 682 ignores the real PFAS risks, which stem from emissions during chemical production.

At normal cooking temperatures (under ~500°F), PTFE are considered inert and don’t migrate into food. Both the FDA and European Food Safety Authority approve PTFE coatings for food contact.

However, at very high heat (above 500–600°F), PTFE can degrade and release fumes which can cause “polymer fume fever” in humans and can kill pet birds.

PFAS health costs up to $8.7 billion annually

Supporters of SB 682 argue that all PFAS—including long-chain, short-chain, and polymers like Teflon, persist in the environment, can become toxic, and pose major health risks. 

They note that past PFAS bans in textiles, foam, packaging, and cosmetics show restrictions work, and say SB 682 would extend that progress while easing costs for water agencies and ratepayers. 

Supporters estimate PFAS-related health care costs at $5.5 to $8.7 billion annually in California, and call for bold action to phase out unnecessary uses. 

Governor Newsom has until October to sign or veto the bill, which would phase out affected products.

RELATED: DHS says it will not comply with Newsom’s ban on masks for ICE agents