The State of New Mexico has filed a sweeping lawsuit accusing a number of major chemical companies of knowingly polluting land, water and communities across the state with toxic “forever chemicals” linked to cancer, immune dysfunction and even reproductive harm.
The lawsuit, filed in June by Attorney General Raúl Torrez and the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), targets 21 manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF). This firefighting foam was used for decades at military bases, airports and industrial sites.
The suit names a number of industry giants, including 3M, DuPont and others. The foam in question is highly effective at extinguishing fuel fires, but it also contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are now known to cause serious health problems and don’t break down naturally in the environment.
“We are going after these companies because they knowingly continued to produce and distribute products that they knew to be toxic and harmful to humans and the environment, and did so for decades,” says Bill Grantham, director of the NMED’s Environmental Protection Bureau. “Knowing, not only that they were toxic, but that they were persistent in the environment.”
According to the lawsuit, serious PFAS contamination has been documented in groundwater and surface water at multiple sites across New Mexico, including Cannon and Holloman Air Force Bases, the Lea County Airport and the City of Santa Fe Fire Department.
Local dairies and private wells have been directly impacted. Highland Dairy, near Cannon AFB, had to destroy its entire herd of over 3,600 cows after PFAS was found in the animals’ milk, blood and drinking water. It’s believed that the contamination came from the nearby air force base.
According to the lawsuit, manufacturers were aware of PFAS dangers since at least the 1960s. Internal company documents, which have become public in similar lawsuits across the country, show that executives knew PFAS was toxic and capable of accumulating in the human body, but the companies continued selling AFFF to military, industrial and fire departments anyway.
“In the case of AFFF, the firefighting foam, it continued to be marketed as something that was completely benign,” says Grantham. “Users were advised just to wash it off the runways onto the ground. And there were stories of children playing in the stuff. The firefighters—when they were doing their drills—they would sometimes allow children to play in that foam.”
The state is asking the court to place the cleanup burden squarely on the companies that profited from PFAS production. It’s also asking the court to require companies to pay for investigating and cleaning up contaminated soil and water across the state, provide safe drinking water where necessary, monitor public health, conduct long-term environmental studies, reimburse the state for the cost of oversight and cleanup and compensate affected communities.
The state is also seeking civil penalties under New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act, punitive damages and an injunction to prevent further PFAS use that could harm the public.
For now, the lawsuit is in its early stages. The state has demanded a jury trial, and legal proceedings could take years.
