Experts tell committee fluorinated pesticide containers raise technical and enforcement questions; lawmakers delay inclusion

Witnesses with technical experience told the committee that prohibiting fluorinated containers for pesticide use raises scientific and enforcement complexities that require more study.

Pam Breyer and a technical representative (Steve) told lawmakers that EPA already prohibits PFAS in pesticides and that, in some scenarios, fluorinated containers can contribute PFAS to contents — but the evidence is inconsistent across materials and manufacturing processes. The presenters said laboratory testing methods exist for certain oily formulations but that the conditions under which PFAS forms in stored products are not well defined.

"It's not automatic that if you use a fluorinated container you're going to get PFAS in whatever you've got in the container," one witness said, urging the committee to invite manufacturers and packaging experts to explain processes and supply chains. The witnesses also noted states attempting to require manufacturer affidavits are encountering confidential business information claims and potential litigation.

Lawmakers raised practical questions about identification (how to know which containers are fluorinated), disposal pathways, and whether a prohibition aimed at agricultural HDPE containers would simply shift risk to less regulated consumer products. Committee members signaled they were not prepared to add pesticide containers to the state prohibition now and suggested seeking testimony from packaging manufacturers and solid‑waste officials before any amendment is finalized.

Next steps: committee staff and witnesses suggested inviting packaging manufacturers (for example, Enhanced Technologies) and the state's solid‑waste program manager to provide technical testimony and to clarify recycling and disposal pathways before deciding on statutory inclusion.