Senate Conservation Committee members advanced Senate Bill 178, a measure to charge a five‑cent fee per barrel of produced water and to prohibit the reuse of produced water off the oil field except for research in accredited laboratories. The committee adopted an amendment that struck language creating a new unplugging/reclamation fund and directed the fee into the existing state reclamation fund; the amendment passed on a recorded vote and the full bill passed the committee 6‑3.

The bill’s sponsor and proponents framed SB 178 as a response to thousands of unplugged, abandoned and orphaned oil and gas wells in New Mexico and as a precaution against public‑health and environmental risks from reusing produced water before science demonstrates safety. Proponents and two technical witnesses emphasized uncertainty in the science and urged that reuse off the oil field be limited to controlled laboratory study until treatment standards are established.

Why it matters: Produced water is the byproduct of oil and gas production and — according to witnesses and proponents — can contain naturally occurring radioactive material, heavy metals, per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances and other toxic or unidentified constituents. Committee testimony cited estimates of more than a thousand abandoned wells in the state and agency and stakeholder estimates that a modest fee could generate tens of millions of dollars a year to help plug and remediate sites.

What supporters said: Marielle Manasseh, lead counsel for New Energy Economy, and Norman Gom, a retired licensed professional water engineer who participated in produced‑water research discussions, told the committee the science is not yet adequate to support reuse of produced water off the oil field. “There were remarks that constituents were showing up in treated produced water that were not in the water that they tested before treatment,” Gom said during testimony, summarizing technical findings from consortium meetings. Environmental and public‑health advocates — including Melissa Bernardin of the Sierra Club Rio Grande chapter and Colin Cox of the Center for Biological Diversity — urged passage, saying the fee would (they argued) encourage industry to keep produced water on oil fields and pay more toward cleanup of unplugged wells.

What opponents said: Industry groups and agricultural representatives testified against the bill, calling the fee unnecessary or duplicative and warning the restrictions could stifle treatment innovation. Ashley Wagner, vice president of government affairs for the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association, said New Mexico already has a reclamation fund supported by a conservation tax on production and that the bill would “doubly tax industry.” The Permian Basin Petroleum Association and other trade groups warned that the fee and a broad ban on off‑field reuse could reduce incentives for commercial treatment and reuse technologies.

Amendment and votes: Committee members debated an amendment that struck language creating a new unplugging/remediation fund and instead directed revenue into the existing reclamation fund maintained by the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD)/Oil Conservation Division (OCD). The amendment was adopted on a roll call (6‑2). After additional discussion, the committee voted to give the bill a do‑pass recommendation as amended; the measure passed the committee on a recorded vote (6 yes, 3 no).

Key numeric and technical details cited in committee:
- Proposed fee: $0.05 per barrel of produced water. (Bill text)
- Estimated revenue: witnesses and agency analysis cited a range roughly between $68 million and $90 million per year at proposed fee rates based on recent produced‑water volumes.
- Abandoned/orphaned wells: witnesses cited figures ranging from about 1,700 to roughly 2,391 wells, depending on source and categorization.
- Plugging/remediation costs: testimony referenced typical plugging costs often cited in literature of $50,000 to $250,000 per well (average cited ~$125,000) and agency materials noting remediation costs can range from about $35,000 up to $1 million per site.

Discussion vs. decision: Committee record shows extended policy debate and technical questioning. Proponents asked the committee to limit reuse off the oil field while continuing laboratory and field research; opponents warned that the restrictions could undercut commercial treatment incentives. The adopted amendment removed the bill’s new‑fund language and redirected fee revenue to the existing reclamation fund; the committee then voted to advance the bill as amended.

Next steps: With the committee’s do‑pass recommendation, SB 178 will proceed through the Senate’s legislative process for further consideration and potential floor action.