ARTICLE
21 August 2026

New Mexico Accepting Comments For HJM Report On Risks Of The Exemptions Codified In The PFAS Protection Act, Including The Fluoropolymer Exemption

BC
Bergeson & Campbell

Contributor

Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. is a Washington D.C. law firm focusing on chemical product approval and regulation, product defense, and associated business issues. The Acta Group, B&C's scientific and regulatory consulting affiliate provides strategic, comprehensive support for global chemical registration, regulation, and sustained compliance. Together, we help companies that make and use chemicals commercialize their products, maintain compliance, and gain competitive advantage as they market their products globally.
New Mexico's Environment Department has opened a public comment portal for stakeholders to weigh in on the state's review of exemptions under the PFAS Protection Act, including the controversial fluoropolymer exemption. The review stems from a legislative memorial requesting analysis of whether current exemptions should be retained, modified, or removed based on public health, environmental, and economic risks. NMED will incorporate public feedback into its report ahead of a November 2026 presentation to st
Mexico Environment
Bergeson & Campbell are most popular:
  • within Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration and Technology topic(s)

The New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) held a webinar on August 18, 2026, to explain how the public can participate in the state’s review of the Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Protection Act. As reported in our February 23, 2026, blog item, on February 18, 2026, the New Mexico legislature passed House Joint Memorial (HJM) 3, requesting the development of two reports. The first, prepared by the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board (NMEIB), will be on the implementation of the PFAS Protection Act, “including the efficacy of the rules promulgated by the environmental improvement board pursuant to that act.” The second, prepared by NMED, in consultation with other state agencies, will be on the public health, environmental, and economic risks of the exemptions codified in the PFAS Protection Act and should “provide recommendations to the legislature regarding whether such exemptions, such as the exemption for fluoropolymers, should be continued, modified or removed.” The PFAS Protection Act exemptions include:

  • A product for which federal law governs the presence of a PFAS in the product in a manner that preempts state authority;
  • Used products offered for sale or resale;
  • Medical devices or drugs and the packaging of the medical devices or drugs that are regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), including prosthetic and orthotic devices;
  • Cooling, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, or refrigeration equipment that contains intentionally added PFAS or refrigerants listed as acceptable, acceptable subject to use conditions, or acceptable to narrowed use limits by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program, 40 C.F.R. Part 82, Subpart G and sold, offered for sale, or distributed for sale for the use for which the refrigerant is listed pursuant to that program;
  • A veterinary product and its packaging intended for use in or on animals, including diagnostic equipment or test kits and the veterinary product’s components and any product that is a veterinary medical device, drug, biologic, or parasiticide or that is otherwise used in a veterinary medical setting or in veterinary medical applications that are regulated by or under the jurisdiction of:

    • FDA;

    • The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) pursuant to the federal Virus-Serum-Toxin Act; or

    • EPA pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), except that any such products approved by EPA pursuant to that law for aerial and land application are not exempt from this section;
  • A product developed or manufactured for the purpose of public health or environmental or water quality testing;
  • A motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment regulated under a federal motor vehicle safety standard, as defined in 49 U.S.C. Section 30102(a)(10), except that the exemption does not apply to any textile article or refrigerant that is included in or as a component part of such products;
  • Any other motor vehicle, including an off-highway vehicle or a specialty motor vehicle, such as an all-terrain vehicle, a side-by-side vehicle, farm equipment, or a personal assistive mobility device;
  • A watercraft, an aircraft, a lighter-than-air aircraft or a seaplane;
  • A semiconductor, including semiconductors incorporated in electronic equipment, and materials used in the manufacture of semiconductors;
  • Non-consumer electronics and non-consumer laboratory equipment not ordinarily used for personal, family, or household purposes;
  • A product that contains intentionally added PFAS with uses that are currently listed as acceptable, acceptable subject to use conditions, or acceptable subject to narrowed use limits in EPA’s rules under the SNAP Program; provided that the product contains PFAS that are being used as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances under the conditions specified in the rules;
  • A product used for the generation, distribution, or storage of electricity;
  • Equipment directly used in the manufacture or development of the products listed above;
  • A product for which the NMEIB has adopted a rule providing that the use of PFAS in that product is a currently unavoidable uses (CUU); or
  • A product that contains fluoropolymers consisting 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.

According to NMED’s webinar slides, NMED “is conducting primary literature reviews in consult with other state agencies to provide the state of the science of the public health, environmental, and economic risks associated with the exemptions.” NMED has opened a public comment portal for its HJM 3 report. Submissions are due September 17, 2026. The webinar slides state that NMED will continue its technical analysis and incorporate public comments into its report. NMED will provide a preliminary presentation to the Radioactive and Hazardous Materials Interim Committee on November 5, 2026. A recording of the webinar will be available on NMED’s YouTube channel., although as of August 21, 2026, the recording is not yet available.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More