A bill package that would give the state of New Mexico authority over pollution control and discharge into the state’s waterways – and allow creation of a new permitting system – is gaining traction in the legislature.
New Mexico is only one of three states that defers water surface pollution permitting to the Environmental Protection Agency – whose regional office is located in Texas.
“This bill would move that to the New Mexico Environment Department,” said bill sponsor Sen. Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe).
The push comes on the heels of the controversial Sackett vs. EPA ruling handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2023. In their decision, justices narrowed the agency’s authority to regulate, barring around 95% of New Mexico's waterways from federal protections.
Zoe Barker is the conservation director for the non-partisan environmental policy think-tank Conservation Voters New Mexico. She said the bill package is perfectly timed with the new shift in federal political power.
“[President] Trump is gutting a lot of federal agencies and federal funding,” Barker said. “The EPA, he has been very clear, is one of the targets, and as they lose funding, they're not going to be a reliable resource to be able to continue to offer these permits to us in a robust way.”
SB 21 – the Pollution Discharge Elimination System Act – would establish a permitting system to regulate pollution discharge into the various waterways across New Mexico.
These proposed permits don’t specify an exact fee, but would allow the Water Quality Control Commission to implement them to cover accrued costs from the new program.
Sen. James Townsend (R-Artesia) voted against the bill. He’s worried about proposed permit fees that companies currently do not have to pay.
“That doesn’t seem right,” Townsend said. “I mean, here we are, in a time of plenty. Why are we imposing fees on our businesses and individuals?”
That’s a sentiment others shared during public comment.
“Small municipalities, public safety agencies and other tax-payer funded service agencies that currently pay nothing for federal permits, will now bear the financial burden for all state-issued permits,” said Allison Riley, the director of public policy for the New Mexico Chamber of Commerce
Despite lengthy debate, the passed on a party-line 6-3 vote and now goes to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
A companion bill, Senate Bill 22, is geared towards strengthening regulatory authorities outlined in the Water Quality Control Act and declares a pollution emergency – which means, once passed, it would take effect immediately.
Among a swath of changes, it updates definitions, permit requirements, and establishes a new fund to clean-up polluted areas.
The Environment Department would take up additional responsibilities, including sampling and monitoring, reviewing permit applications, and issuing and enforcing the permits themselves.
The bill had overwhelming support from the public, but tribal communities want the state to strike a balance.
“The Pueblos, who have the most senior rights in the state, need the state to adequately monitor the use of surface resources and to not infringe on our water rights and water adjudicated allocations,” said Alicia Gallegos, who’s from the pueblos of Laguna and Acoma and the climate justice organizer for the Pueblo Action Alliance.
While citizen-led lawsuits would play a role in helping enforce water rights, hefty civil and criminal penalties would be imposed on those who break the law.
Civil penalties include a minimum $5,000 a day per violation, with court discretion on additional penalties up to $25,000 per day depending on continued noncompliance.
Felonies and other fines are proposed for willful or negligent violations.
Jason Espinosa, who represents the San Juan Water Commission, argued the language could unintentionally affect water managers.
“It introduces new permitting requirements that could impact water storage, conveyance, and infrastructure,” Espinosa said. “The bill does not provide clear exemptions for water management entities.”
Exceptions include agricultural return flows and certain stormwater discharges from oil and gas and mining operations.
This piece of the package also passed with a party-line 6-3 vote and now heads to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Currently, around 110 individual EPA permits have been issued statewide and between 3,000 and 4,000 permits exist for stormwater discharges, pesticide applications and other situations.
Full program implementation of the bill package is estimated to cost between $8 million and $9 million.