Despite concerns, oil and gas setbacks bill makes progress

SANTA FE — Three hours and many criticisms later, Democrats let a bill that would bar new oil and gas operations within a mile of schools through a House committee.

A 7-4 vote on a motion to pass the legislation with no recommendation pushed it through the House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee. All committee Republicans voted against it, and some Democrats said they’d like to see more work done on the legislation in its future committees.

Bill sponsor Debra Sariñana, D-Albuquerque, and bill expert Gail Evans, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity — who is also helping lead a lawsuit against New Mexico and state legislators for the state’s alleged allowance of pollution caused by oil and gas — faced hours of questioning during the first committee hearing.

House Bill 35 still must clear two more House committees before making it to the floor.

“We are on the side of public health and kids’ health,” said Rep. Matthew McQueen, D-Galisteo, who chairs the House energy committee.

Republicans on the committee argued against the bill in fear of it negatively impacting the oil and gas industry and, subsequently, New Mexico. Rep. Elaine Sena Cortez, R-Hobbs, brought up her position as a mother and the benefits oil and gas revenue, which majorly funds public schools in New Mexico, has brought children.

“I’m a momma, and my daughter was raised there (in Hobbs). Above all, I represent my daughter,” Sena Cortez said.

Sariñana said tens of thousands of operators in the state are polluting beyond a legal limit, something already hurting families. Evans added that existing wells wouldn’t have to shut down; operators would just have to comply with air quality standards. The state could also grant exceptions for new well drilling, including when it’s necessary to abandon an existing well or results in complete economic loss of a property, according to the bill.

“No one’s wells are being shut down by this bill,” Evans said.

Rep. Meredith Dixon, D-Albuquerque, questioned data provided in a legislative analysis of the bill. Specifically, she pondered why there would be more youth asthma hospitalizations in Chaves County than Eddy or Lea counties — the oil and gas hot spots of New Mexico. Dixon later said there are a lot more reasons behind asthma hospitalizations than just oil and gas.

Along the same lines, Rep. Nathan Small, D-Las Cruces, noted that vehicular pollution is what’s affecting most children in New Mexico, as most of them don’t live or go to school near oil and gas wells. A legislative analysis of the bill listed at least 864 oil and gas operations within a mile of a school.

However, the biggest polluter in the state is oil and gas, Evans pointed out. Indeed, while most greenhouse gas emissions nationwide come from transportation, New Mexico is an outlier in that most of its emissions come from the oil and gas sector.

Other concerns from Small and Dixon included a lack of scientific basis around the one-mile designation as opposed to other distances and not enough outreach to oil and gas operators for input on the bill.

“The intent of this bill is to protect our children,” Dixon said. “I do think it is a fair and valid point as to whether or not families in these communities could be adversely affected by these setbacks.”

Both Small and Dixon were among numerous legislative candidates who received hefty campaign donations last year from big energy companies, like Chevron and Marathon Oil, which ConocoPhillips recently acquired.

Meanwhile, other legislation also impacting oil and gas got delayed. After not getting to Senate Bill 23 last week in the Senate Conservation Committee, committee chair Liz Stefanics, D-Cerrillos, assigned it first on Tuesday’s schedule.

However, after discussions with Republican committee members before the meeting started, Stefanics announced the bill wouldn’t be heard until Thursday.