Members of the state water quality board voted Tuesday to restart a lengthy rule-making process to expand the uses of oil and gas wastewater in New Mexico, potentially overturning rules not even a year old.
The New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission vote advanced a petition from a trade association requesting new rulemaking over objections from water and environmental advocacy groups. Seven WQCC members voted in favor, four voted against the proposal and one member abstained. A dayslong hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
The rulemaking marks the second in a year requested by the Water, Access, Treatment and Reuse Alliance, a trade association developed in 2024 advocating for expanded use of oil and gas wastewater. Board members include major oil and gas companies, including Chevron and ConocoPhillips.
Advocates for the proposal — including Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, Republican lawmakers in both chambers and local officials from Lea and San Juan Counties — have said the water, if treated, will ease strain on freshwater supplies. The petition requested the board to allow 13 counties to use in construction, industry and potentially in agriculture. The current rule, adopted in May 2025, only allows for uses on oil and gas fields and limited pilot projects.
Opponents to expanded use say the science for treating oil and gas wastewater — which is toxic and can contain salts, heavy metals, radioactive materials and proprietary chemicals that are considered trade secrets — remains limited. Opponents also argue the petition is incomplete and that the current rules adopted by the WQCC in May 2025 should stay in place.
During the hearing, WQCC Chair Bill Brancard said he would not support the petition as it was, noting significant spaces and gaps in the proposed rule, including for regulations of chemicals that are considered trade secrets. Brancard also said that there were legal issues since the rule only applies to 12 counties and said it would “be unusual for us not to adopt a statewide rule.”
Even commissioners who voted for the petition, such as State Engineer Liz Anderson, said she “shared concerns raised in public comment” and by other board members.
“I have a lot of questions and concerns that would need to be addressed,” Anderson said.
Western Environmental Law Center Senior Attorney Tannis Fox, who is representing several environmental groups opposing the petition, called the vote “disappointing but unsurprising.”
“I think in a normal WQCC world, given all the problems this petition has, it wouldn’t go further, but since this is an administration priority, it’s moving forward.”
The WQCC voted last year to toss a July vote on a similar request for new rules after environment groups filed motions seeking to disqualify seven of the WQCC’s members, saying their “impartiality and fairness” had been “compromised by interference” from Lujan Grisham’s office.
The allegation came in response to Santa Fe New Mexican reporting on an emailed exchange in July between staff at the governor’s office and cabinet heads appointed to the WQCC that encouraged them to attend the August meeting in-person and get the Water, Access, Treatment and Reuse (WATR) Alliances petition “over the finish line.”
The governor’s office has previously denied any wrongdoing in WQCC proceedings.
Leah March, deputy director of communications for Lujan Grisham’s office, noted in a statement provided to Source NM Tuesday that the WQCC vote was merely procedural to allow for a fuller hearing “at which the science will be discussed and its merits thoroughly evaluated.”
The governor’s “long-standing priority,” March said, “is to advance science-based solutions to New Mexico’s water crisis, including safe and responsible wastewater reuse that reduces pressure on dwindling freshwater supplies. Today’s commission action establishes a pathway to ensure that all the evidence is on the table before a decision is made.”
Rachel Conn, deputy director of Amigos Bravos, also released a statement noting the history of the situation. “I can’t believe we are back here,” she said. “How many times do we as New Mexicans who care about clean water have to stand up to defeat this ill-advised effort to discharge toxic oil and gas wastewater into our rivers, streams and groundwater?”
Numerous environmental groups similarly decried the WQCC vote on Tuesday.
“This was a political decision, pure and simple,” Colin Cox, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. “The same industry that gave us global warming, drought and more earthquakes while denying responsibility at every turn now wants New Mexicans to accept its treated waste in our rivers. The commission made a terrible decision for New Mexico.”
In a statement provided to Source NM, Water, Access, Treatment and Reuse Alliance Co-founder Matthias Sayer expressed appreciation to the WQCC for its “leadership” in “voting to advance our petition for a new rulemaking and giving local communities a voice at the table concerning their water futures.”
Doing so, he said, will allow “for the proper examination of a substantial body of the latest peer-reviewed research from New Mexico universities and other experts showing that produced water can be treated to reach levels of quality that are non-toxic and protective of human health and the environment for defined applications.”
Sayer also responded to opponents, saying, “It is curious that those critics who cite science as their North Star have been so resistant to hearing the latest body of scientific research and advancements. Allegations that politics played a role in the decision ignore the reality that New Mexicans deserve an honest, thorough examination of the science showing how produced water can offer beneficial, environmentally sound solutions, solutions that can help alleviate New Mexico’s water challenges.”
