California’s New PFAS Pesticide Law Focuses on Tracking and Transparency

Importantly, AB 1603 is a tracking and transparency measure, not a restriction on pesticide products, and builds on DPR’s existing pesticide-use reporting program; it does not prohibit or phase out the registration, sale, or use of pesticides containing PFAS, nor does it impose new reporting requirements on pesticide registrants or users.

What Does AB 1603 Require?

By January 1, 2028, or when DPR posts its pesticide-use reporting database containing 2026 data, whichever occurs first, DPR must identify pesticides containing PFAS ingredients in its online pesticide-use database, include PFAS as a “category of interest,” and incorporate trends concerning their use into its annual and other relevant pesticide-use reports. These requirements apply annually thereafter. 

Separately, also by January 1, 2028, DPR must publish a list of all registered pesticides containing PFAS pesticide ingredients and provide the list to each county agricultural commissioner. DPR must update that list and notify county commissioners within 60 calendar days after registering a new pesticide containing PFAS pesticide ingredients. 

The law defines PFAS as fluorinated organic chemicals containing at least one fully fluorinated carbon atom. “PFAS pesticide ingredients” are PFAS intentionally added as active, adjuvant, or inert ingredients. How DPR applies these definitions will determine which registered products are included in its database and public list.

Preparing for Implementation

For pesticide registrants and users, AB 1603’s immediate practical impact is limited. It does not require companies to stop using particular pesticide ingredients, reformulate products, or submit new reports to DPR. Its primary effect will be to make information about pesticides containing intentionally added PFAS ingredients more readily identifiable within California’s existing pesticide-use reporting framework.

As DPR implements the new law, there are several steps industry may wish to consider. Companies should review their California portfolios to understand which products could be identified under AB 1603 and, because DPR’s list and database will be publicly available, consider developing proactive communications that provide context regarding those products. Such communications could address how identified products are used, the federal and state regulatory review applicable to them, and their role in agricultural production. Preparing these communications in advance may help companies respond effectively to questions from customers, retailers, and other stakeholders once the information becomes publicly available. Industry stakeholders will also have opportunities to engage with DPR and policymakers as the law is implemented.

PFAS remains an active area of policymaking in California and elsewhere. Whether the information collected under AB 1603 will inform additional legislative or regulatory proposals remains uncertain. Continued industry engagement can help ensure that implementation of AB 1603 and broader policy discussions concerning PFAS in pesticides account for pesticide-specific considerations and are grounded in sound science and risk-based evaluation.

If you have questions about AB 1603, its potential application to particular pesticide products, or developments involving PFAS and pesticides more broadly, please contact an attorney in ArentFox Schiff’s Environmental or Agriculture & AgTech practice.