New Mexico
New Mexico loophole may allow record methane releases – NM Political Report
By Jerry Redfern, Capital & Main
In the first two months of the year, the pipeline company Targa Northern Delaware vented more climate-damaging natural gas from its operations in New Mexico than all other oil and gas producers in the state combined — 250% more, an amount equivalent to the carbon footprint of nearly 26,000 gasoline-powered cars driven for a year.
The state’s landmark 2021 Methane Rule banned routine venting and flaring of natural gas. But some 15 exceptions for pipeline operators allow such venting and flaring in certain circumstances, including when gas is so far out of pipeline specifications that it constitutes an “emergency,” which is what the company claimed 10 times in the first two months of the year, each time releasing millions of cubic feet of the potent greenhouse gas.
Those releases were enough to push the state’s January and February venting totals to their highest levels since the state began closely tracking venting and flaring in 2021 as part of the Methane Rule. That rule was put in place as part of New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s drive to rein in greenhouse gas emissions across the state, particularly in the oil and gas industry — the state’s biggest emitter. Natural gas is mostly methane, a highly potent greenhouse gas that is 80 times more capable of trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide.
The January and February releases represent “the worst-case scenario,” said Jon Goldstein, senior director of regulatory and legislative affairs at the Environmental Defense Fund.
“One of the things that the rules do is state that, whenever possible, you ought to be flaring and not venting,” he said. In emergencies, flaring natural gas — burning it at its production site — is “a necessary evil” and one that has a far lower climate-warming effect than venting unburned gas into the atmosphere.
“Why wasn’t this massive amount of gas routed to a flare?” Goldstein asked. Doing so would have reduced the equivalent carbon dioxide emissions by 90%.
The 10 venting incidents account for nearly all of the gas released by Targa Northern Delaware in those months, including the largest reported single release — more than 65,000,000 cubic feet — since detailed record keeping began in June 2021. The reason given in all 10 cases was, “Gas was vented to atmosphere to purge the pipeline of off-spec residue gas.”
Pipelines have specifications for the composition of and contaminants in natural gas they accept from oil producers, and “Natural gas this out of spec can damage pipelines or pipeline components. This [is] why out of spec gas is one of the permissible emergency categories,” said Sidney Hill, public information officer with the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department. In documents filed with the Oil Conservation Division, Targa Northern Delaware claims that the company repeatedly received impure gas from well operators, but it does not explain why the gas wasn’t then flared. “The OCD is further investigating the situation,” Hill said.
“With the data that it now can collect, EMNRD’s Oil Conservation Division has tools to ensure those claims are correct,” said Michael Coleman, communications director for Gov. Lujan Grisham. “If they prove not to be, we are confident EMNRD will take appropriate action.”
Oil Conservation Division records running from May of 2021, when the Methane Rule went into effect, to today show that Targa Northern Delaware has vented more natural gas in that time than any other company. It is a subsidiary of Targa Resources of Houston, a natural gas pipeline juggernaut that connects wells with major pipelines across New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and North Dakota. The company did not respond to requests for comment.
* * *
The biggest single natural gas vent in New Mexico’s recorded history happened in October, 2012, when Transwestern Pipeline Company depressurized an entire pipeline to replace a valve. More than 21 billion cubic feet of natural gas escaped into the atmosphere, equivalent to the emissions of 2.7 million gas-powered cars driven for a year. It is among the biggest single releases — if not the biggest — in U.S. history.
Though diminished over time, Transwestern Pipeline’s methane remains in the sky today, warming the planet and providing a real-time example of how the effects of methane venting — accidental or otherwise — linger for years.
Targa Northern Resources’ January and February emissions were orders of magnitude smaller, but they still warm the planet and will continue to do so for at least 20 years.
“Historically, midstream operators like Targa weren’t even on our regulatory radar because they had no reporting requirements,” Coleman said, because the Methane Rule had yet to be put in place. “It should also be noted that overall levels of venting, flaring and releases have not increased significantly in recent years, despite significant increases in total oil production.”
Not increasing significantly is not the same as decreasing, however. Alex DeGolia, director of state legislative and regulatory affairs with the Environmental Defense Fund, said that New Mexico is not on track to meet the climate goal set out by Gov. Lujan Grisham at the start of her term to reduce the state’s greenhouse gas emissions by 45% below the state’s 2005 level by 2030. The Methane Rule is a key part of that policy, one that the governor regularly trumpets.
“With all existing federal and state policies in place, as of last summer, the state was only on track to reduce emissions by 13%, according to our estimates,” DeGolia said. Since then, the state has passed clean car and truck laws and funded solar power grants. But, “New Mexico needs to actually be making sure that it is implementing its important regulations on methane emissions in particular,” he said, if it hopes to even reach 13%.
The International Energy Agency has said, “Oil and gas methane emissions represent one of the best near-term opportunities for climate action because the pathways for reducing them are well known and cost-effective.” But that’s only if oil and gas companies take those pathways.
“The longer we wait, the harder it will become, until the practicality of achieving the goal diminishes substantially,” DeGolia said. And whatever greenhouse gas reductions are not made by the most lucrative industry in the country, he said, “would need to come from elsewhere.”
That would be the people of New Mexico, the third-most impoverished state in the country according to 2021 data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
* * *
In the end, Targa Northern Delaware’s venting may be legal under the state’s Methane Rule. In fact, it’s “likely,” said Tannis Fox, a senior attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center.
“The rule itself is a good rule,” she said, but “It’s not a panacea. It’s not a ‘no venting ever’ rule.”
Fox was involved in its drafting along with others from the environmental community, the oil and gas industry, public representatives and those in government. And when they were done, she remembers thinking, “‘Well, gosh, there’s a lot of exceptions.’
“It was being touted, really by everybody … as a prohibition against venting and flaring,” she said. “It’s like, ‘Yeah, but…’”
The Oil Conservation Division is not the only state institution looking at Targa Northern Delaware and its emissions.
Industrial facilities that produce and release hazardous chemicals into the environment need a permit from the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) that lays out exactly how much of those chemicals they can release before triggering a violation.
According to Jorge Armando Estrada, public relations coordinator with NMED, Targa Northern Delaware exceeded its permits 163 times in January and February alone. In total so far this year, Estrada said the company reported exceeding its emissions limits 277 times, representing 39% of all reports filed with the department, which monitors 441 companies.
In addition, he said, “Over a 10-day period, Targa Northern Delaware reports it emitted 91,000 pounds of VOCs [volatile organic chemicals], which is larger than any other single event during this time.”
VOCs are the building blocks of ozone pollution, which contributes to lung diseases and other health threats. In the last week of April, the American Lung Association released its annual State of the Air report card, which grades the air in cities and counties across the country. Targa Northern Delaware has its facilities in Lea and Eddy counties, which received a D and an F, respectively, due to ozone pollution from the oil and gas industry.
On April 29, NMED announced a $24.5 million settlement with oil and gas producer Ameredev II, of Austin Texas. Most of that money will go to the New Mexico general fund. James Kenney, NMED department secretary, said, “I don’t know that the state has ever had a civil penalty in excess of $20-plus million with one oil and gas company.”
He said, “Almost everything that they told us on paper [about their facilities] was significantly underrepresented to what they actually installed in the field.” He continued, “It wasn’t a tiny home, but a very large mansion that they built in the very southeast corner of the state.” And over a year and a half ending in 2020, the company flared billions of cubic feet of natural gas and released 7.6 million pounds of volatile organic compounds beyond their operating permit.
The flaring and releases ended four years ago, and in the time since, NMED wrangled with the company to reach the settlement. That kind of long-term legal fight between state agencies and oil and gas companies is not uncommon, and doesn’t always end in an immediate settlement.
Goldstein, the senior director at the Environmental Defense Fund, noted that NMED and the Oil Conservation Division received funding bumps in the last few legislative sessions, “But they’re still, I think, underwater.”
Whether it’s Gov. Lujan Grisham or the New Mexico Legislature, “I think they all need to be reflective of the role that these agencies play, in terms of protecting the health of New Mexicans,” he said.
It can take years to push new penalties or penalty rates through New Mexico’s Legislature and agency governing boards. However, the Ameredev settlement includes what may be a new method of funding similar enforcement actions. “The Legislature has authorized us to issue permits, and we can charge for those permits,” Kenney said. “When you don’t comply with your permit, we can charge you our staff’s time to come into compliance with that permit.”
And with Ameredev, the New Mexico Environment Department assessed a new $413,000 fee that goes directly to NMED. Going forward, “We’re effectively charging staff time to return people to compliance,” Kenney said.
Copyright 2024 Capital & Main.
Photos by Jerry Redfern.
New Mexico
New Mexico supreme court strikes down local abortion pill restrictions
The New Mexico supreme court late on Thursday ruled against several local ordinances in the state that aim to restrict distribution of the abortion pill.
In a unanimous opinion, the court said the ordinances invaded the legislature’s authority to regulate reproductive care.
“Our legislature granted to counties and municipalities all powers and duties not inconsistent with the laws of New Mexico. The ordinances violate this core precept and invade the legislature’s authority to regulate access to and provision of reproductive healthcare,” the court wrote in its opinion by the justice Shannon Bacon.
It declined to address whether the ordinances violated the state’s constitutional protections.
Abortion is legal in New Mexico, which has become a destination for women seeking abortions from Texas, especially, and other states that have banned the procedure following the US supreme court ruling in 2022 ending a woman’s constitutional right to abortion and handing powers over the issue to individual states.
Following that ruling, leaders of New Mexico’s Roosevelt and Lea counties and the towns of Clovis and Hobbs, all on the Texas border, passed ordinances seeking to stop abortion clinics from receiving or sending mifepristone, a pill taken with another drug to perform a medication abortion, and other abortion-related materials in the mail. Medication abortions account for more than half of all US abortions. Last June the supreme court upheld access to the drugs.
The ordinances invoked the federal Comstock Act, a 19th-century “anti-vice” law against mailing abortifacients, which are drugs that induce abortion, and said that clinics must comply with the law.
Under Roosevelt county’s ordinance, any person other than a government employee could bring a civil lawsuit and seek damages of at least $100,000 for each violation of the Comstock Act.
The New Mexico supreme court admonished this, saying that creating a private right of action and damages award was “clearly intended to punish protected conduct”.
The state attorney general, Raúl Torrez, praised the court’s ruling on Thursday, saying that the core of the argument was that state laws pre-empted any action by local governments to engage in activities that would infringe on the constitutional rights of citizens.
“The bottom line is simply this: abortion access is safe and secure in New Mexico,” he said. “It’s enshrined in law by the recent ruling by the New Mexico supreme court and thanks to the work of the New Mexico legislature.”
The New Mexico house speaker, Javier Martínez, called access to healthcare a basic fundamental right in New Mexico.
“It doesn’t take a genius to understand the statutory framework that we have. Local governments don’t regulate healthcare in New Mexico. It is up to the state,” the Albuquerque Democrat said.
Opposition to abortion runs deep in New Mexico communities along the border with Texas, however, which has one of the most restrictive bans in the US.
But Democrats, who control every statewide elected office in New Mexico and hold majorities in the state house and senate, have moved to shore up access to the service.
In 2021, the New Mexico legislature repealed a dormant 1969 statute that outlawed most abortion procedures as felonies, ensuring access to abortion even after the Roe v Wade reversal.
And in 2023, the Democratic New Mexico governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham, signed a bill that overrides local ordinances aimed at limiting abortion access and enacted a shield law that protects abortion providers from investigations by other states.
In September, construction began on a state-funded reproductive health and abortion clinic in southern New Mexico that will cater to local residents and people who travel from neighboring states.
The new clinic should open in 2026 to provide services ranging from medical and procedural abortions to contraception, cervical cancer screenings and education about adoptions.
It was not immediately clear whether the ruling can be appealed in federal court. The New Mexico supreme court opinion explicitly declined to address conflicts with federal law, basing its decision solely on state provisions.
The Texas-based attorney Jonathan Mitchell, a former Texas solicitor general and architect of that state’s strict abortion ban, said he looked forward “to litigating these issues in other states and bringing the meaning of the federal Comstock Act to the supreme court of the United States”.
Reuters and the Associated Press contributed reporting
New Mexico
Alec Baldwin sues New Mexico prosecutors, investigators for civil rights violations
Alec Baldwin ‘Rust’ case dismissed by judge over ‘suppressed’ evidence
Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter charge was abruptly dismissed with prejudice. He cannot be retried for involuntary manslaughter.
Alec Baldwin, whose involuntary manslaughter case was dismissed last summer over suppressed evidence, is taking the fatal 2021 “Rust” set shooting back to the court room.
The actor on Thursday filed a civil lawsuit in Santa Fe County District Court alleging prosecutors violated his civil rights and defamed him. The defendants named in the filing included special prosecutor Kari Morrissey, personnel within the district attorney’s office for New Mexico’s First Judicial District and members of the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office.
The complaint detailed Baldwin’s claims that prosecutors and investigators “conspired to procure a groundless indictment against Baldwin” by not following the proper criminal process and also intentionally kept exculpatory evidence from the defense.
In a statement to USA TODAY, Morrissey said, “In October 2023 the prosecution team became aware that Mr. Baldwin intended to file a retaliatory civil lawsuit. We look forward to our day in court.”
USA TODAY has reached out to lawyers for Baldwin as well as the DA’s office for comment. The sheriff’s office declined to comment.
Last summer, Baldwin’s lawyer Alex Spiro forewarned the sheriff’s office and prosecutor in letters sent to the parties on July 12 to preserve evidence for “potential for future litigation,” according to copies obtained at the time by USA TODAY.
The actor and producer’s attorney advised Morrissey and Santa Fe County Sheriff Adan Mendoza to preserve all “devices, hard drives, emails, text messages, and other electronic communications” in addition to “documents, records, electronically stored information (‘ESI’), and other materials and data existing in any form whatsoever, that are actually or potentially relevant or relate in any way to the investigation(s) and/or prosecution(s) conducted by the State in connection with the death of Halyna Hutchins.”
The filing comes nearly six months after First Judicial District Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer abruptly dismissed the criminal case against Baldwin on the grounds that prosecutors and law enforcement withheld evidence that might be favorable to the actor’s defense. In October, she upheld her dismissal; though prosecutors appealed the judge’s decision in November, they withdrew the notice of appeal the following month.
Baldwin’s criminal charge stemmed from an Oct. 21, 2021, incident in which Baldwin’s prop gun, which he said he’d been told did not contain live ammunition, discharged during a rehearsal for the movie, killing 42-year-old cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and wounding director Joel Souza.
‘No verdict’ can ‘undo the trauma’ of criminal case against Alec Baldwin, lawsuit says
Baldwin’s legal complaint accused New Mexico investigators and prosecutors of being ” blinded by their desire to convict Alec Baldwin for all the wrong reasons, and at any cost, for the October 2021 accidental shooting of Halyna Hutchins.”
“Defendants sought at every turn to scapegoat Baldwin for the acts and omissions of others, regardless of the evidence or the law,” the filing continued.
Baldwin seeks a jury trial and an award of financial compensation for his “injuries suffered” as well as punitive damages against the defendants.
“Defendants must now be held accountable for their malicious and unlawful pursuit of Baldwin,” the lawsuit states. “Although no verdict in this civil case can undo the trauma the State’s threat of conviction and incarceration has inflicted, Alec Baldwin has filed this action to hold Defendants responsible for their appalling violations of the laws that governed their work.”
Why was Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter case dismissed?
The conclusion of Baldwin’s case with the state of New Mexico arrived more than two years after the on-set tragedy. Sommer dismissed the charge with prejudice, meaning prosecutors cannot refile the same claim.
Baldwin’s lawyers alleged in their filing that Santa Fe sheriffs and state prosecutors “concealed” evidence that could be linked to the source of the bullet that killed Hutchins. Prosecutors and sheriffs argued the evidence had no relevance or value to Baldwin’s case.
The judge reprimanded Morrissey and her team as “they have continued to fail to disclose critical evidence to the defendant.”
“The state’s willful withholding of this information was intentional and deliberate,” Sommer said. “If this conduct does not rise to the level of bad faith, it certainly comes so near to bad faith as to show signs of scorching.”
Testimony revealed withheld evidence in ‘Rust’ case
On July 12, Baldwin’s lawyers said the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office was in possession of live rounds they argued might be connected to the one that killed Hutchins but failed to list them as evidence in the “Rust” investigation file or disclose their existence to defense lawyers.
On July 11, testimony revealed Troy Teske, a friend of “Rust” armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed’s stepfather, had delivered Colt .45 live rounds to the sheriff’s office on March 6. Baldwin’s team claimed this was evidence that could have established a connection to Seth Kenney, the prop supplier for “Rust.”
Baldwin’s attorneys alleged the rounds were evidence that the bullet that killed Hutchins came from Kenney. Kenney has denied supplying live ammunition to the production and has not been charged in the case.
Baldwin’s team has blamed Gutierrez-Reed, who is serving 18 months in prison for involuntary manslaughter, and first assistant director Dave Halls for negligence that led to Hutchins’ death. Meanwhile, prosecutors argued Baldwin handled the gun irresponsibly, exhibited “bullyish behavior on set” and changed his story to cast blame on others.
Contributing: Andrew Hay, Reuters
New Mexico
New Mexico Supreme Court Strikes Down Local Abortion Restrictions
-
Business1 week ago
These are the top 7 issues facing the struggling restaurant industry in 2025
-
Culture1 week ago
The 25 worst losses in college football history, including Baylor’s 2024 entry at Colorado
-
Sports1 week ago
The top out-of-contract players available as free transfers: Kimmich, De Bruyne, Van Dijk…
-
Politics1 week ago
New Orleans attacker had 'remote detonator' for explosives in French Quarter, Biden says
-
Politics1 week ago
Carter's judicial picks reshaped the federal bench across the country
-
Politics6 days ago
Who Are the Recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom?
-
Health5 days ago
Ozempic ‘microdosing’ is the new weight-loss trend: Should you try it?
-
World1 week ago
Ivory Coast says French troops to leave country after decades