RISKS POSED BY HB 137, THE STRATEGIC WATER SUPPLY ACT

• Documented Failures: Across the country, attempts to reuse and discharge treated fracking waste have resulted in contamination and public health crises.

  • West Virginia: Fairmont Brine Processing’s plant was shut down after dumping radioactive waste near a school, causing ongoing community contamination.

  • Pennsylvania: Multiple Eureka Resources treatment facilities were shuttered due to high costs, pollution, and severe worker illness and death.

  • Wyoming: Waterways downstream of the Neptune reverse osmosis treatment facility, completed in 2015 and deemed inoperable by 2020, have become so polluted that they were recently deemed “incapable of supporting aquatic life.” Those creeks feed into the drinking water reservoir for the town of Thermopolis.

Despite these documented failures, proponents of the Strategic Water Supply argue that treatment and reuse can be done safely. Yet even the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) admits that “the science regarding treatment of produced water is just not there yet.” To proceed without conclusive scientific evidence is to gamble with the health of New Mexicans.

​

2. Poisoning Our Water: A Threat to Freshwater Resources

Water is life. In our arid state, every drop of fresh water is precious. The Strategic Water Supply poses an existential threat to New Mexico’s limited freshwater resources.
 

• High Risk of Contamination: The proposed reuse of produced water for industrial purposes risks accidental spills and discharges. Even in so-called “closed-loop” systems spills are inevitable. According to self-reported industry data, at least four spills occur daily during the transport of fracking waste within the oil field.

  • NMED acknowledged during the Wastewater Reuse hearing that “closed-loop projects” are “not necessarily non-discharge,” meaning that accidental releases into the environment are likely. (WQCC 23-84, 5/16/24, Fullam, at 77.)

• Residual Waste: The Strategic Water Supply Act includes no detailed guidance on the jurisdiction or management of residual waste. The treatment process for both brackish water and fracking waste produces high volumes (at least 20% of the total treated volume) of a concentrated, salty brine which can contain salt, heavy metals, PFAS, radionuclides and other contaminants removed during treatment. Disposal of this waste presents its own set of risks, including likely contamination of New Mexico groundwater.

• Brackish Water Extraction Risks: NMED’s feasibility study noted that brackish water extraction “may lead to negative environmental impacts such as land surface subsidence, saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers, and decreased flow in rivers” as well as the residual waste mentioned above. And according to the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, deep brackish water aquifers, once depleted, often cannot be replenished due to permanent collapse in the aquifer pore spaces.

• Energy-Intensive Process: Treatment, if it can be accomplished, requires enormous energy inputs. The volumes envisioned by the Governor’s 50-Year Water Plan would demand energy equivalent to several large coal plants, undermining New Mexico’s climate goals.

​

3. Compromising Our Economic Security: A Public Liability

The Strategic Water Supply shifts financial risk from private companies to the public. This approach is not only fiscally irresponsible, but also poses long-term economic risks.

​

• Unproven Economics: The history of failed fracking waste treatment plants across the nation should caution against any public investment in such ventures, and the complexities of treatment plant development make the goals of the SWS far-fetched. The largest brackish water desalination plant in the U.S., the Kay Bailey Hutchison plant in Texas, took six years to build and produces 30,800 acre-feet of water annually at a cost of $90 million to build and $19 million per year for waste disposal. Even if brackish water treatment plants could be sited and scaled up to accomplish the goals of the SWS, the feasibility of produced water treatment at that scale is far worse due to the additional complexity of removing radioactive and proprietary fracking chemical contaminants.

  • NMED’s feasibility study projects costs ranging from $200 million to over $700 million per project, with no guarantee of economic viability.

• Public Subsidies for Private Profit: The Strategic Water Supply proposes to use public funds to guarantee purchase agreements for treated fracking waste, ensuring profits for private companies while leaving taxpayers liable for stranded assets and environmental remediation if projects fail.

• Ambiguous Financial Protections: A discussion draft of the bill dated 12/3/2024 provides for financial assurances of unspecified type or quantity, and states that financial assurances “may be required” rather than “shall be required,” providing inadequate protection against potential liabilities. The oil and gas industry’s history of abandoning wells with inadequate financial assurances is well known.

 

A Real Solution for Water Scarcity: Invest in Proven Water Conservation Measures

​

Rather than investing $75 million annually in speculative and dangerous projects, we propose a more responsible path:

• Fund the Implementation of Existing Laws: Direct resources toward fully implementing the 2023 Water Security Planning Act and the 2019 Water Data Act.

• Impose a Produced Water Barrel Fee for Oil and Gas Industry Waste Remediation: Generate revenue by taxing the oil and gas industry for each barrel of produced water, and use these funds to plug abandoned wells and remediate existing environmental damage.

• Prioritize Water Conservation: Invest in proven strategies to conserve and protect New Mexico’s freshwater resources, including watershed restoration, repairing aging infrastructure and modernizing water management systems.