Perfluoroalkylated and polyfluoroalkylated substances, known as PFAS, have been present in our daily lives for decades due to their water and grease repellent properties, but their persistence and mobility have set off alarm bells. In recent years, the European Union has established a robust regulatory framework to reduce its presence in the environment, minimize food exposure, and restrict its use in high-impact applications such as firefighting foams.
In this article you will find a clear, practical and detailed guide to that framework: Which PFAS are a concern and why, and how should their presence in food be controlled? (which matrices to sample, limits of quantification, indicative levels that trigger investigations) and what the major REACH restriction on firefighting foams entails (dates, limits, exceptions, and operational obligations). We also reviewed the specific restriction of PFHxA, the legal changes that anticipate more litigation and the key documents you should have on your radar.
What are PFAS and why are they under scrutiny?
PFAS are a family of thousands of synthetic compounds characterized by very stable carbon-fluorine bonds; This chemical stability makes them "eternal substances" because they barely degrade in nature. The OECD defines them as any substance with at least one perfluorinated methyl carbon (CF3) or perfluorinated methylene carbon (CF2) without H/Cl/Br/I.
They have been widely used in Water-repellent textiles and leather, food contact packaging, non-stick utensils, firefighting foams, cleaning products, electronics and even in the aerospace, automotive, and defense sectors. They can also be present in certain active ingredients of pesticides.
Human exposure occurs through various routes: food, drinking water, dust, consumer products, and the work environment. By contaminating soils and surface or groundwaterPFAS accumulate in fish, shellfish, plants and farm animals, and can migrate from equipment or food packaging (although this latter route usually contributes less than environmental ones).
Health and environmental concerns are important: Some of the compounds are highly mobile in water, bioaccumulative, and show signs of adverse effects (liver damage, immune system alterations, possible developmental effects, suspected carcinogenicity, and potential endocrine disruption in some cases). The problem is compounded by their persistence and the difficulty of reversing the contamination once released.
Monitoring PFAS in food: what, how and with what sensitivity
To assess food exposure and guide risk management decisions, the EU recommended that Member States Monitor PFAS in food during 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025in cooperation with food business operators. Previous experience already showed a significant presence of PFOS and PFOA in food and in humans, and the 2020 EFSA assessment broadened the focus to include PFNA and PFHxS.
The core of the surveillance includes the determination, at a minimum, of these four priority compounds: PFOS, PFOA, PFNA and PFHxSWhere possible, it is requested that the analysis be extended to other PFAS with a significant presence in food, drinking water or human serum:
- PFBA (perfluorobutanoic acid), PFPeA (perfluoropentanoic), PFHxA (perfluorohexanoic), PFHpA (perfluoroheptanoic)
- PFDA (perfluorodecanoic), PFUnDA (perfluoroundecanoic), PFDoDA (perfluorododecanoic), PFTrDA (perfluorotridecanoic acid), PFTeDA (perfluorotetradecanoic acid)
- PFBS (perfluorobutanesulfonic acid), PFPS (perfluoropentanesulfonic acid), PFHpS (perfluoroheptanesulfonic acid)
- PFNS (perfluorononanesulfonic acid), PFDS (perfluorodecanesulfane), PFUnDS (perfluoroundecanesulfonic acid), PFDoDS (perfluorododecane sulfonic acid), PFTrDS (perfluorotridecanesulfamethoxazole)
- PIT (perfluorooctanesulfonamide)
In addition, the recommendation suggests exploring emerging PFAS such as the acidic form of F53B, the acidic form of GenX, the acidic form of ADONA, Capstone A, Capstone B and fluorotelomer alcohols and sulfonates, given its relevance in new formulations and substitutions.
The basket of matrices to be sampled should reflect actual consumption habitsFruits, vegetables, starchy roots and tubers, algae, cereals, nuts and oilseeds, infant and young child foods, animal-based foods, non-alcoholic beverages, wine and beer. It is also key to represent different types of production (including organic), animals with or without access to the outdoors, farmed and wild species, and specificities such as peeled or unpeeled potatoes and wild versus cultivated mushrooms.
When sampling, the edible portionFruits, vegetables, and tubers must be washed beforehand to avoid introducing additional contamination. Infant foods are analyzed as sold (dry or liquid). Data from uncontaminated regions is also requested, and it must be explicitly reported when the origin is a affected zone to differentiate scenarios.
Sampling procedures, traceability, and transformation factors
In order for the samples to reliably represent the batches, the procedures of the Execution Regulation (EU) 2022/1428This standard establishes sampling and analysis methods for PFAS in specific food products. This standardization makes it easier to compare apples to apples between laboratories and countries.
You are encouraged to collect pairs of data “unprocessed product vs. processed product"from the same batch to calculate transformation factors. Of particular interest are cheese, whey powder, fine bakery products with a high egg yolk content, and meat products that incorporate liver, where the concentration can vary substantially."
In foods of animal origin, EFSA found that PFAS are transfer from feed with differences by species and substance; they can also come from ingested soil (animals that dig) and of drinking waterTherefore, if the maximum levels legislated in Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 are exceeded, it is advisable to review feed, water and soil linked to the farm.
The analytical capacity for PFAS in feed is still limited; the European reference laboratory for halogenated persistent organic pollutants in feed and food is promoting actions to expand that capacity. Meanwhile, states with trained laboratories must monitor animal feed. And those who cannot yet do so should start validating methods.
Analytical methodologies, sensitivity, and indicative levels that trigger research
The analyses must comply with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 2017 / 625 (official controls) and use methods that provide reliable results. Limit of quantification (LOQ) targets are established per matrix for PFOS, PFOA, PFNA, and PFHxS:
- Fruits, vegetables, starchy roots/tubers and baby food: PFOS 0,002 μg/kg; PFOA 0,001 μg/kg; PFNA 0,001 μg/kg; PFHxS 0,004 μg/kg.
- Milk: PFOS 0,010 μg/kg; PFOA 0,010 μg/kg; PFNA 0,020 μg/kg; PFHxS 0,040 μg/kg.
- Fish and land animal meat: 0,10 μg/kg for each one.
- Eggs, crustaceans, mollusks: 0,30 μg/kg for each one.
- Offal from land animals and fish oil: 0,50 μg/kg for each one.
If a laboratory does not meet these LOQs, results with higher LOQs are accepted, although Member States must progress towards the goals as soon as possible. To guide the investigation of sources, indicative levels are established that should be explored in greater depth:
- Fruits, vegetables (except wild mushrooms), roots/tubers: PFOS 0,010 μg/kg; PFOA 0,010; PFNA 0,005; PFHxS 0,015.
- Wild mushrooms: PFOS 1,5 μg/kg; PFOA 0,010; PFNA 0,005; PFHxS 0,015.
- Milk: PFOS 0,020 μg/kg; PFOA 0,010; PFNA 0,050; PFHxS 0,060.
- Baby food: 0,050 μg/kg for each one.
In the data report to EFSA, States must mark as “suspicious samples"Those from regions with high pollution (fish, game, free-range poultry, outdoor fruits and vegetables), specify type of production (wild/harvested vs. non-organic/organic farm; free-range/outdoor vs. indoor) and, where applicable, age of hunting y main ingredients of infant foods (cow's milk, soy, fish, meat, cereals, vegetables or fruits).
The major REACH restriction on firefighting foams containing PFAS
The objective of the new restriction adopted by the Commission is clear: to cut off a very significant flow of emissions at the root of PFAS from firefighting foams. In the EU, approximately 30,000 tons of foams are formulated annually, and around 60% still contain PFAS, with estimated emissions of 470 tons/year from formulation, formation, and use in firefighting.
The ECHA assessment concluded that the risks are not adequately controlled and that restriction is the most effective tool. Since the exact identities of the PFAS used in foams are often confidential and subject to change, a “group": cover all PFAS as defined by the OECD to avoid unfortunate substitutions with equally persistent and hazardous compounds."
The measure states that PFAS may not be marketed or used in firefighting foams ≥ 1 mg/l (sum of PFAS) from 23 October 2030with sector-specific exceptions and transitional provisions. To facilitate application, the regulations define "firefighting foam" as any foam extinguishing mixture (including concentrate, solution, and foam generated after mixing with air), and allow total fluoride methods to verify compliance.
A technical exception is foreseen: if fluorine-free foams are installed on equipment that previously used PFAS and has been cleaned using the best available techniques, a residue up to 50 mg/l (sum of PFAS) due to “rebound effect”, except for portable fire extinguishers. This exception will be reviewed before 2030 as measurement and cleanup progress.
Exclusions, transitional measures, and sectors with longer horizons
The following subgroups are excluded from the scope of direct prohibition (but are included in the calculation of the total PFAS): PFOS/PFOA/PFHxS and related compounds listed in Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 (POPs), the PFCA C9–C14 (REACH entry 68) and uses of PFHxA restricted at entrance 79.
The general transitional period for use/marketing is 5 yearswith specific deadlines: marketing in portable fire extinguishers (12 months for those not resistant to alcohol, 18 months for those resistant to alcohol), and prolonged uses up to 10 years en Seveso establishments (Dir. 2012/18/EU), offshore oil and gas installations, military vessels y civilian vessels with systems already installed (on board before 23/10/2025). Civil aviation (including civil airports) is not included in the Seveso exception.
Regarding usage, it is permitted up to 23/04/2027 for training and testing (except functional testing, and containing all emissions) and for public fire services (or private services performing a public function), with the exception of interventions in Seveso industrial fires, where they may continue to have limited use of PFAS-containing foams. portable fire extinguishers They will be able to use PFAS until 31/12/2030The exceptions for Seveso, offshore and vessels will be reviewed before they expire.
The regulations also clarify that it is not necessary to mention the “formulation” separately, because it is already included implicit in the concept of use Article 3 of REACH: production, processing and storage of firefighting foams containing PFAS are covered by the prohibition according to the established timeframes and limits.
Conditions of use during transit and labelling obligations
From 23/10/2026, all permitted uses of foams with PFAS ≥ 1 mg/l are subject to strict conditions. They may only be used in Class B fires (flammable liquids) and should reduce emissions and exposures to the minimum technically and practically possible. The technical recommendation excludes the biological wastewater treatment because it is ineffective and fixed, in case of incineration, a minimum temperature of 1 100 °C.
It is required the separate collection of unused stocks and waste (including wastewater from use and cleaning), for appropriate treatment that destroys or irreversibly transforms PFAS. In addition, each site must have a “Foam management plan with PFAS”, which includes conditions and volumes of use, collection and treatment measures, equipment cleaning and maintenance, leak/spill plans (with follow-up documentation where applicable) and a replacement strategy for fluoride-free foams. The plan is updated annually and is kept for a minimum of 15 years.
In terms of communication, all foams with PFAS ≥ 1 mg/l that are marketed (except portable fire extinguishers) and waste/wastewater generated by users from 23/10/2026 onwards must labeling with the text: “WARNING: Contains perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) with a concentration equal to or greater than 1 mg/l for the sum of all PFAS”, in the official language(s) of the relevant Member State.
Costs, socioeconomic benefits and monitoring
The Committee for Socioeconomic Analysis (CASE) estimated that the restriction entails costs of around 7 billion euros over 30 years, compared to environmental benefits measured at approximately 13,200 tons of PFAS not issued in that same period. The central cost-effectiveness ratio is around €500/kg avoided, in line with other persistent substances.
CASE acknowledges that there are technically viable fluoride-free alternatives For most sectors, this will happen by the end of the transitional periods, although in some cases (Seveso, offshore, marine, and certain fire extinguishers) the process requires additional validation and review of progress before the end of the extended deadlines. Co-benefits include lower future environmental remediation costs and an incentive for European innovation.
The Risk Assessment Committee (CER) endorsed the broad definition of PFAS, the waste management measures, the requirement for site-specific management plans, and the exclusion of inadequate treatments. The ECHA Compliance Forum was also consulted and their contributions were taken into account, especially in measurement (total fluoride) and labeling.
Specific restriction of PFHxA: focus on consumption and food contact
In addition to the major restriction on foams, the Commission has adopted a separate measure that limits the undecafluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) and related substances in uses with greater exposure to the consumer and the environment where there are mature alternatives and the cost-benefit balance is favorable.
The restriction prohibits the sale and use of PFHxA in consumer textiles (for example, raincoats), food packaging (pizza boxes and similar items), consumer mixes (such as waterproofing sprays), Cosmetics (e.g., skin care) and some applications of firefighting foam for training and testing, without compromising safety. Uses such as semiconductors, batteries, or fuel cells for green hydrogen remain excluded.
This measure responds to a replacement patternPFHxA has been used as an alternative to banned PFAS (such as PFOA). After its publication in the Official Journal, it enters into force 20 days later and applies after transitional periods ranging from 18 months and 5 yearsallowing for replacement with safer options.
Legal changes that anticipate more litigation: liability and class action lawsuits
Regulatory developments in the EU not only restrict substances; they also reconfigures the terrain of civil liabilityDirective 2024/2853 on liability for defective products allows judges to presume causality when the defect is proven and the damage is compatible with it, or when it is excessively difficult to prove the direct relationship due to technical and scientific complexity.
In cases like PFAS, with effects that may manifest in the long term and multiple intervening factors, this presumption can increase the likelihood of successful claims. Furthermore, Directive 2020/1828 on Representation Actions It strengthens the framework for collective consumer claims, which is especially relevant for environmental and product exposures.
In the US and in European countries such as France or Belgium Litigation is already underway; it is anticipated that the European insurance sector will review specific coverages and exclusions for PFAS (model clauses are already circulating in forums such as Lloyd's). The lack of harmonization and the broad definitions may generate controversies regarding the enforceability and validity of such exclusions.
Key documents and references on public policy
This regulatory architecture is based on a coherent chronology: the EFSA scientific opinion of 2008 It was already requesting more data on food and humans; the Recommendation 2010/161/EU It promoted the collection of data on its presence in food; in 2020 EFSA updated the assessment including PFNA and PFHxS; and in 2022 the Commission published the Recommendation (EU) 2022/1431 surveillance and the Execution Regulation (EU) 2022/1428 on sampling and analysis.
For the foams part, the process includes the application for a mandate from ECHA in 2020, the Annex XV dossier (March 2022, revised in January 2023), the opinions of the CER (March 2023) and the CASE (June 2023), the consultation of the Forum and the subsequent decision of the Commission, which culminates in the inclusion of the restriction in Annex XVII of REACH with points 1 to 11 (definitions, limits, exceptions, conditions of use, labeling and management plans).
The framework is completed with transverse references: the Regulation (EU) 2019 / 1021 (POPs) for PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS; the Directive 2012 / 18 / EU (Seveso III); the Regulation (EU) 2017 / 625 (official controls); the historic Regulation (CE) 1881/2006 (maximum contaminant levels in food); and the Regulation (CE) 1907/2006 (REACH) as the basis of the restriction.
Notice regarding data processing and compliance
When operators or authorities share data within the framework of controls and surveillance, they must comply with data protection regulations. Personal information is processed on an appropriate legal basis. (performance of services, consent for marketing purposes) and is not transferred to third parties except where legally required. Interested parties retain their rights of access, rectification, erasure, objection, limitation and portability, being able to contact the AEPD if necessary.
This reminder is particularly relevant for platforms and entities that communicate data to EFSA or other authorities, or that They manage identifiable user information. (for example, contact or contractual relationship) on portals and electronic services associated with the food chain.
The EU has built a scheme with three pillars: highly sensitive and broad-coverage food surveillance (with PFOS, PFOA, PFNA and PFHxS in focus plus a long complementary and emerging list), powerful sectoral restrictions where the environmental impact is greater (firefighting foams) and Specific measures regarding substitutes such as PFHxA in consumer uses. Added to this is a legal framework that favors reparation of damages in complex contexts, and management, traceability and labeling requirements that professionalize risk control in the field.