Minnesota PFAS in products · Amara’s Law

The $800 filing fee is the easy part. The supplier data is the whole job.

Minnesota requires manufacturers to report intentionally added PFAS in products manufactured after July 1, 2023. The state charges one flat fee to receive your report. Everything expensive happens before that: working out what is even in scope, asking hundreds of suppliers a question most of them have never been asked, and being able to show what you did about the answers you never got.

Start the conversation See what the desk actually does

Three dates, and only one of them is still moveable

Verified against the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s reporting page, retrieved 2026-07-28. Sources are listed at the bottom of this page — check them yourself.

Extension request

August 16, 2026

Extension and waiver request forms, with fees, must be postmarked by this date. Miss it and the September date is the only date you have.

Initial report

September 15, 2026

Initial PFAS in products reports are due. MPCA has publicly reaffirmed this date; there is no signal of a further extension.

Extended deadline

December 14, 2026

Where an extension was granted, reports are due by this date. This is what the August 16 postmark buys you: thirteen more weeks of supplier chasing.

The scope narrowed in June 2026, and that is good news worth checking. A 2026 amendment excludes products manufactured before July 1, 2023. For a lot of portfolios, a meaningful share of the catalogue drops out on a date test alone — which is the cheapest work you will do all summer, and the first thing we run.

Why this is hard, and why it is hard late

As of MPCA’s June 15, 2026 announcement, the agency expected over 5,000 manufacturers to report. Over 700 companies had registered in the state’s PRISM system, and just over 30 had actually submitted. That gap is not procrastination. It is the supplier chase.

Your suppliers hold the answer

Intentionally added PFAS is a formulation and component question. It lives with the people who make your parts, coatings, membranes, seals, and inks — not in your PLM.

Silence is the common answer

Many suppliers will not respond, will respond incompletely, or will claim the information is confidential. Your report still has to say something, and what it says has to be defensible.

Effort is the record

What protects you is not certainty — it is a dated, complete record of who you asked, what you asked, what came back, and what remained unknown when you filed.

What the desk actually does

Runs the date test across your catalogue. Every product gets a manufacture-date screen against the July 1, 2023 cutoff and comes back date-needed, likely-excluded, or likely-in-scope — each result carrying the dated source it was screened against. The number you care about first is how much of the portfolio you can probably set down. The software applies the date test. It never draws the scope conclusion — that is recorded as a human determination, with an author, a date, and a stated basis, or it does not exist.

Runs the supplier chase without creating supplier accounts. Each supplier gets a single-use link to a page that asks only what you need for the components they actually supply. No portal, no password, no onboarding call — which is the entire reason response rates survive contact with reality. Unlimited links, never metered.

Ages the unknowns so they stop being invisible. Every open question carries the date it was asked, the date it was chased, and how long it has been sitting. An unknown that is thirty days old and twice chased is a different object from an unknown nobody ever asked about — and only one of them is a problem.

Builds the due-diligence record as a by-product. The export carries who was asked, when, what came back, what did not, and the retention stamp for Minnesota’s five-year records clock — which stays open-ended while you are still in the supply chain. You are not assembling this at the end. It accumulates while you work.

Assembles the Extension Readiness Pack. If August 16 is the realistic call, you get the portfolio position, the outreach evidence, and the unknowns register in one place, so the request you file is a document rather than an assertion. You file it. We never touch PRISM and never hold your credentials.

What we deliberately do not do

We do not submit anything to PRISM, do not hold or share your state credentials, and do not determine whether your product is in scope, whether a substance is intentionally added, or whether an exemption applies. Those are your determinations and your qualified reviewer’s or counsel’s — we record them, with their basis and their date. We do not provide legal or chemical advice, and nothing on this page is either. We are not affiliated with or endorsed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The Minnesota lane is private and by conversation only — there is no self-serve signup for it, deliberately, because restricted chemistry data belongs on separate infrastructure with a named reviewer, not behind a credit-card form.

Pricing

Deadline work is priced as deadline work — a fixed fee for a defined outcome, not a meter that rewards us for going slowly. Scope is set on the first call from your product count, supplier count, and how many states you are already carrying.

Extension Sprint

$2,500fixed · before Aug 16

Date test across the catalogue, supplier outreach launched, unknowns register opened, and the Extension Readiness Pack in your hands in time to postmark. Credited in full against a Report-Ready engagement.

Report-Ready

$7,500–$15,000fixed · through Sep 15 or Dec 14

The full run to a filing-ready position: scope determinations recorded, supplier chase worked to a closed or aged state, due-diligence record and export assembled. Banded by product and supplier count.

Continuing Unknowns Desk

$750per month · after you file

The unknowns that stayed open do not close themselves. Ongoing chase, aging, new-product screening, and a maintained record for the next cycle.

What is not in that number: Minnesota’s own fees. The state charges a one-time initial reporting fee of $800 per manufacturer, and extension requests carry their own fee, both paid by you directly to MPCA. We never quote, collect, or optimize government fees.

Engagements are invoiced, not card-checkout — this lane starts with a conversation by design. The monthly desk moves to card once you are filed.

Start the conversation

Tell us roughly how many products and suppliers are in play, whether you have registered in PRISM yet, and whether August 16 or September 15 is the date you are working toward. A person reads every message and replies from [email protected]. No newsletter, no sequence. Please keep chemistry specifics and anything confidential out of a first message — that material belongs on the restricted plane, after paperwork, not in a web form.

Prefer email? [email protected] reaches the same person.

Sources

Every date and dollar figure on this page came from a primary source we retrieved on the date shown. If one of these changes and this page has not, tell us and we will fix it.

FACTDeadlines, fee, and scope cutoff — September 15, 2026 initial reports; extension and waiver forms plus fees postmarked by August 16, 2026; extended reports due December 14, 2026; one-time initial reporting fee of $800 per manufacturer; products manufactured before July 1, 2023 excluded. MPCA, Reporting PFAS in products — retrieved 2026-07-28.
FACTParticipation figures — MPCA expects over 5,000 manufacturers to report; over 700 companies registered in PRISM and over 30 reports submitted, as stated in the agency’s announcement dated June 15, 2026. MPCA news announcement — retrieved 2026-07-28. These figures are as of that date and have not been restated by the agency since.
FACTFive-year records retention — Minn. R. 7026.0080. The clock runs open-ended while the product remains in the supply chain.
NOTEThe June 2026 scope amendment is 2026 Minn. Laws ch. 127. Read it, or have your counsel read it, before you rely on a date-test result — we record your determination, we do not make it.