Learn who we are and how we serve our community
Meet our leaders, trustees and team
Developing the next generation of talent
Covering the latest news and trends in the marketplaces industry
Check out wide-ranging resources that educate and inspire
Learn about the governmental initiatives we support
Connect with other professionals at a local, regional or national event
Find webinars from industry experts on the latest topics and trends
Grow your skills online, in a class or at an event with expert guidance
Access our Member Directory and connect with colleagues
Get recommended matches for new business partners
Find tools to support your education and professional development
Learn about how to join ICSC and the benefits of membership
Stay connected with ICSC and continue to receive membership benefits
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a proposed rule on November 13 that would modify the one-time reporting requirement under Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for manufacturers and importers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The original rule, adopted in October 2023, required reporting by manufacturers and importers of PFAS (or PFAS‐containing articles) of uses, production volumes, disposal, exposures and hazards for the period 2011-2022. The proposed amendments reflect stakeholder feedback and a regulatory shift aimed at reducing unnecessary or duplicative reporting, minimizing compliance costs for small manufacturers.
For retail, real estate and property owners, the proposed changes bring meaningful implications. Key exemptions under consideration include: PFAS present below 0.1% concentration in a mixture or article would be exempt from reporting; imported articles that contain PFAS would be exempt; byproducts, impurities and non-isolated intermediates may be exempt; and small quantity research and development (R&D) uses may likewise be excepted. These changes, if finalized, may relieve downstream stakeholders—such as property owners, retail tenants and suppliers of building materials or consumer goods—from some of the burdens associated with tracing PFAS content. However, it is also worth noting that the reporting window remains defined by the 2011–2022 period.
Additionally, on November 19, the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee held a hearing to highlight both the urgency and complexity of nationwide PFAS cleanup—and highlighted why commercial real estate owners, developers and contractors should be closely tracking federal policy developments. Three witnesses—Clean Harbors Co-CEO Eric Gerstenberg, Associated General Contractors of America General Counsel Leah Pilconis and Congressional Research Service Supervisory Attorney Kate Bowers—offered perspectives that were generally aligned on the scale of the challenge but varied widely on the regulatory path forward. All emphasized the technical difficulty of PFAS cleanup, the strain of inconsistent state and federal standards and the need for coordinated action across federal, state and local levels. EPW members spent considerable time probing the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act’s (CERCLA) legal framework, with frequent questions directed at CRS to clarify the statute’s scope and potential liability implications.
Witnesses urged Congress to recognize the significant financial and operational burdens associated with PFAS remediation. Both Clean Harbors and AGC stressed the lack of clear regulatory guidance, the steep costs tied to transportation and disposal and the growing risk created by a patchwork of state standards. They echoed concerns long shared by ICSC members: without coherent federal policy, redevelopment projects, financing decisions and environmental due-diligence efforts become materially more complicated. Industry representatives also called for expanded research into safer disposal alternatives and for practical timelines that reflect on-the-ground technical realities.
The hearing was broadly bipartisan—yet clear philosophical differences emerged. Republicans, led by Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), focused on the need for cost-effective, science-based policies that avoid overwhelming municipalities and businesses. They raised pointed questions about landfill hauling practices, the financial strain on local governments and whether CERCLA is the appropriate vehicle for PFAS regulation. Both sides signaled interest in bipartisan legislation but acknowledged the difficulty of reconciling the policy extremes. Capito outlined a framework focused on streamlining cleanup, aligning costs with benefits and preserving state-level flexibility. Ranking Member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) emphasized accountability, transparency and strong federal enforceability.
For ICSC members, the message is clear: both Congress and EPA are motivated to act, PFAS policy will remain a top-tier environmental issue and CERCLA liability concerns will continue to dominate the debate.
As the regulatory landscape develops, ICSC will continue advocating for scientifically grounded, practical and economically workable solutions that protect both communities and ongoing redevelopment efforts.
Because many retail real estate assets and redevelopment projects increasingly face contamination oversight concerns, including PFAS as part of the “emerging contaminants” conversation, this rulemaking provides an opportunity for stakeholders to articulate how reporting burdens translate into supply chain, inventory and tenant fit-out costs, and how regulatory clarity can aid in efficient property operations.
ICSC’s Environmental and Land Use Policy Committee will be reviewing these developments and presenting its assessment of the impacts for the retail real estate industry.
For more information contact Abby Jagoda at ajagoda@icsc.com.