New Mexico Passes Comprehensive Ban on PFAS in Products

On April 8, 2025, New Mexico became the third state to sign into law a comprehensive ban on the use of intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in consumer and commercial products: the “Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances Protection Act” or “PFAS Protection Act.” The PFAS Protection Act builds upon similar laws passed by Maine and Minnesota to provide greater detail and clarity about both the restrictions created by the law and certain statutory exemptions available, including a first-of-its-kind exemption for fluoropolymers, which are regarded by some as less toxic than other PFAS compounds.

Key Provisions

The New Mexico law will phase out the use of PFAS in a variety of products by instituting gradual statewide prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, distribution and distribution for sale of products containing intentionally added PFAS. The first phase of the law’s prohibition will ban the use of intentionally added PFAS in the following products beginning January 1, 2027: cookware, food packaging, dental floss, juvenile products and firefighting foam. The second phase, beginning January 1, 2028, will impose sales prohibitions to the following: carpets or rugs, cleaning products, cosmetics, fabric treatments, feminine hygiene products, textiles, textile furnishings, ski wax and upholstered furniture. These enumerated product lists may be expanded by the Environmental Improvement Board of the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) via rulemaking if it is determined that there are other products or categories of products containing intentionally added PFAS for which a prohibition is necessary to protect human health or the environment.

The third phase, beginning January 1, 2032, is a comprehensive ban under which no product containing intentionally added PFAS shall be sold, offered for sale, distributed or distributed for sale in New Mexico unless the Environmental Improvement Board has determined through rulemaking that the use of PFAS in the product is a “currently unavoidable use,” or if a product is covered by one of the many exemptions offered in the legislation, as described further below. Pursuant to the new law, “currently unavoidable use” means that the use of PFAS is “essential for health, safety or the functioning of society and for which alternatives are not reasonably available,” as determined through rulemaking.

New Mexico’s PFAS Protection Act also creates a notification requirement beginning January 1, 2027, for manufacturers of a product sold, offered for sale, distributed or distributed for sale in New Mexico that contains intentionally added PFAS, which requires such manufacturers to submit certain information about such products to the NMED. Specifically, manufacturers are required to submit a report to the NMED containing: (1) a brief description of its product, including a universal product code; (2) the purpose of the PFAS being intentionally added to the product; (3) the respective amounts of each type of PFAS in the product; (4) contact information for the manufacturer; and (5) any additional information requested by the NMED. Manufacturers are not required to divulge confidential business records or trade secrets. And beginning January 1, 2028, manufacturers that fail to comply with this reporting provision are prohibited from selling, offering for sale, distributing or distributing for sale any unreported product that contains, or that is found to contain through testing, intentionally added PFAS.

A manufacturer may receive a waiver to the reporting requirement by the NMED if it is determined that substantially equivalent information is publicly available. Additionally, the NMED may work with other states through shared information systems, such as an information clearinghouse, that have enacted similar reporting requirements to collect information about a manufacturer’s product containing intentionally added PFAS.

Exemptions

Unlike the versions of the PFAS Protection Act enacted in Maine (House Bill 1503, signed into law in July 2021;[1] Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 38, § 1614) and Minnesota (House Bill 2310, signed into law in May 2023; Minn. Stat. § 116.943),[2] New Mexico’s law provides detailed information about 16 exemptions to its prohibitionary provisions and reporting requirements.

Unique to New Mexico, the most notable exemption is for products that contain fluoropolymers. Specifically, the exemption notes that such products are exempt from the provisions of the newly enacted law when they consist of “polymeric substances for which the backbone of the polymer is either a per- or polyfluorinated carbon-only backbone or a perfluorinated polyether backbone that is a solid at standard temperature and pressure.” This exemption is significant because fluoropolymers have been lauded by industry groups as being less toxic than certain PFAS compounds and therefore unlikely to present the same risk or concern to human health and the environment that certain PFAS regulations and laws are trying to prevent. Fluoropolymers are also critical components in certain technologies and products that have essential uses, such as medical devices and electronics, and in the transportation and industrial sectors, where there are no other chemical alternatives to the fluoropolymer.

New Mexico’s PFAS Protection Act also includes exemptions for: (1) products preempted by federal law; (2) products that have been used and are being resold; (3) medical devices or drugs regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration; (4) industrial products such as cooling, heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration equipment; (5) veterinary products and packaging, as well as diagnostic equipment and test kits; (6) products developed for water quality testing; (7) motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment regulated pursuant to a federal motor vehicle safety standard; (8) any other motor vehicles, such as all-terrain vehicles, farm equipment or a personal assistive mobility device; (9) watercraft or aircraft; (10) semiconductors and the materials used to manufacture them; (11) nonconsumer electronics and laboratory equipment; (12) products containing intentionally added PFAS with uses that are acceptable according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s rules under the significant new alternative policy program; (13) products used for the generation, distribution or storage of electricity; (14) equipment used to manufacture or develop any of the products listed in the exemptions above; and (15) any products for which a rulemaking has deemed the use of PFAS in the product a currently unavoidable use.

Additional Provisions

The new law also grants the NMED the authority to require manufacturers to provide it with testing results to indicate the amount of PFAS in the products it believes may contain intentionally added PFAS. If the product does not, the manufacturer must provide the NMED with a Certificate of Compliance. If testing indicates the presence of intentionally added PFAS, the manufacturer must provide to the NMED the information required under the law’s reporting requirement provision described above.

The law also imposes a significant civil penalty on any manufacturer that violates a provision of the law (including subsequent regulations) of up to $15,000 for each day during which the violation occurs. Should a manufacturer fail to comply with a court-issued administrative order issued pursuant to the law, or a rule adopted thereof, a civil penalty of up to $25,000 may be assessed for each day of noncompliance.

What’s Next?

Now that New Mexico has signed the PFAS Protection Act into law, the NMED will begin to develop rules and regulations to implement the statute’s provisions in advance of the date requirements as provided by the law. Manufacturers and potentially impacted companies should watch the state’s rulemaking process closely to develop compliance strategies and meaningful input during the public comment phase. We recommend that these businesses also watch the rulemakings that are occurring in both Maine and Minnesota. While all three states have similar statutes, each state’s enacted regulations may create nuanced and significant differences among their respective iterations of the PFAS Protection Act, and companies should be diligent of those differences to ensure compliance.

Lastly, as reported in our blog post on PFAS Legislative & Regulatory Developments for the First Quarter of 2025, other states have also introduced legislation governing comprehensive product bans for products containing PFAS: (1) California; (2) Illinois; (3) Iowa; and (4) Maryland. Since it is still early in the year and early for many legislative sessions, it is possible and likely that other states will follow.