Lawmakers hope to block oil wells near homes, schools via New Mexico Senate memorial

Democrats in the New Mexico Senate hoped to restore a push for create setbacks required for oil and gas facilities near residential neighborhoods and schools, after language to do so was stripped from a House bill that was sent for a vote of the full chamber.

Senate Memorial 8 would request New Mexico’s Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (ENMNRD) – the state’s lead oil and gas regulatory agency – to study the risks for people living near oil and gas facilities, consult with such “front line” communities and recommend setback legislation in the 2025 Legislative Session.

It was sponsored by Sens. Mimi Stewart (D-17) of Albuquerque and Brenda McKenna (D-9) of Corrales and scheduled for a hearing Feb. 7 before the Senate Rules Committee, about nine days before the legislative session concludes.

More: Tax credits, rape kits & highways: Find out what bills your Eddy Co. Senators are sponsoring

Setback language was originally included in House Bill 133, but after hearings before two committees in route to the House Floor, lawmakers removed language to require wells be drilled various distances away from homes, schools, bodies of water and other natural features.

The version sent to the House Floor would still reform the Oil and Gas Act by increasing civil penalties for environmental violations by oil companies, increase bonding requirement to pay for abandoned well cleanup, and up state fees companies pay for approvals.

The amendments were in response to feedback from industry and other stakeholders, but to the chagrin of environmental groups who argued the bill’s recent form no longer protected the public from pollution.

More: Lawmakers look to send more state funds to clean up New Mexico's abandoned oil wells

SM 8 could protect people in her community from breathing in air pollutants like methane or ground-level ozone tied to oil and gas production, said Kayley Shoup of Carlsbad who works as an organizer with local environmental group Citizens Caring for the Future.

“Every day southeast New Mexicans see and feel the impacts of our state leadership choosing to put profits over people. Setbacks aren’t simply an issue that is out of sight out of mind for us when the legislative session ends, like they seem to be for many state leaders,” she said.

Shoup said thousands of children go to school near oil rigs and could be put at risk of exposure to chemicals emitted by fossil fuel production, and health problems like asthma or cancer.

More: Short term state revenue loss for Hobbs passes committee, bills for Carlsbad stalled

It’s a problem, Shoup said could be fixed with tougher setback requirements in New Mexico.

And it could get worse, she argued, in southeast New Mexico where Permian Basin oil and gas production was expected to grow to almost 6 million barrels per day in February – almost half of the total U.S. crude output.

“It’s clear that the majority of the state can quite callously ignore that reality if they live in an area where their child doesn’t have to sacrifice their health for their education and the education of others,” Shoup said. “It’s time leaders make robust setbacks a priority as oil production in the Permian continues to soar and more people are put at risk.”

More: 'Fundamental disagreement' puts GOP and 'bureaucrats' in Santa Fe at odds for conservation

At the Jan. 25 meeting of the House, Environment and Natural Resources Committee, which passed a committee substitute of the HB 133 without the setback language, Jim Winchester, president of the Independent Petroleum Association of New Mexico (IPANM) said the bill would “hammer” small oil producers.

The IPANM is a trade association representing small, independent oil and gas producers in New Mexico, and remained opposed even after HB 133 was amended.

Winchester said the proposed regulations, including setback requirements, could push operators to move into Texas to avoid the stricter rules.

More: Gov. Lujan Grisham wants New Mexico to spend big. Should oil and gas foot the bill?

“Simply stated, the bill is too big, too wide-sweeping and will force our members out of state and out of business,” Winchester said. “It’s too much, too quick.”

But Tannis Fox with the Western Environmental Law Center, who voiced her opposition to lawmakers removing setback language during a Jan. 31 House Judiciary Committee meeting, said the memorial could lead to better regulation to protect vulnerable communities amid the oilfields of New Mexico.

And the New Mexico State Land Office already implemented a ban on new oil and gas wells on State Trust land within a mile of schools, a move supporters hoped to see codify into law.

“We advocated for strong setbacks this year, and they were weakened. We advocated for keeping reduced setbacks in HB 133 as a step forward, and they were removed,” Fox said. “The state needs to stand up for its people and not let oil and gas companies build health-harming infrastructure right outside our homes, schools, hospitals, and workplaces.”

Adrian Hedden can be reached at 575-628-5516, achedden@currentargus.com or @AdrianHedden on the social media platform X.

This article originally appeared on Carlsbad Current-Argus: New Mexico Senate memorial targets oil wells near homes, schools