State finds no evidence of fraud by water utility in southern New Mexico

After unsafe levels of arsenic were found in drinking water in southern New Mexico late last year and earlier this year, an investigation found no proof that the local water utility misused public funding to cause unsafe conditions, the Office of the State Auditor announced this week.

This finding comes after exceedingly high levels of arsenic were found in the Sunland Park and Santa Teresa water supply multiple times since late last year. High levels of arsenic are linked to cancer and other negative health conditions.

In early December, residents were told by Camino Real Regional Utility Authority, the local water utility, and the state not to drink water for nearly a week due to dangerous levels of arsenic. In March, the New Mexico Environment Department found high levels of arsenic once again after conducting a round of unannounced tests.

This fueled mistrust of the local water utility amongst Doña Ana County residents and called its operations into question. The New Mexico Environment Department in March requested the Office of the State Auditor to look into if the water utility misused $5.3 million in public funds received from the Water Trust Board in 2013 for an arsenic treatment plant, constructed in 2015-2017.

“NMED is aware of millions of dollars that CRRUA has received to achieve mandated arsenic levels, and yet the arsenic issue persists,” state Environment Secretary James Kenney wrote.

The state auditor’s investigation concluded that the utility used the $5.3 million for its intended purpose of constructing a water treatment plant and that expenditures were approved by the New Mexico Environment Department, according to a Tuesday news release.

NMED also announced its own third-party audit of CRRUA in May. The NMED audit was broader in scope, Kenney told the Journal, and focused on CRRUA’s operations and compliance with the federal Clean Water Act.

The Clean Water Act was put into effect in 1972 and regulates water-quality standards and pollution.

Prior to the audit, in March NMED filed a civil case against CRRUA with a $250,000 penalty for noncompliance. The case is still ongoing.

The Journal also reached out to CRRUA for comment and did not hear back.

”We’ve never wavered in holding (CRRUA) accountable and ensuring that they comply going forward,” Kenney said.