Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Carbon Sequestration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers press EMNRD on state takeover plan for carbon‑storage sites and long‑term liability
Summary
Deputy Secretary Ben Shelton outlined New Mexico's push to obtain EPA primacy for Class 6 carbon‑storage wells and described statutory financial assurances and a per‑ton fee designed to fund long‑term monitoring. Legislators pressed him over the bill's liability‑transfer provisions and the risk that operators could use single‑purpose LLCs to shed responsibility.
The Energy, Minerals & Natural Resources Department briefed the interim committee on its rule filing and primacy application to assume state oversight of Class 6 underground carbon‑storage wells. The department said the program would collect operator bonds during operation and a per‑ton fee to populate a fund for post‑injection site care.
Deputy Secretary Ben Shelton told lawmakers that, while New Mexico has no operating Class 6 wells, the state does have about 27 Class 2 acid‑gas injection wells and that two of those might be structurally eligible for conversion after a full permitting process. He described a typical project timeline: a decades‑long injection life (commonly 10–20 years), a five‑year post‑closure period, and a 50‑year planning horizon for long‑term site care and monitoring.
The committee's questioning focused sharply on liability. Several members warned the statute could permit operators to form limited liability companies that later dissolve, leaving taxpayers to cover long‑term monitoring costs. Shelton said the law was designed to create a managed transition and an information‑rich process to reduce the risk of orphaned facilities, but he acknowledged the tradeoffs and said the division will refine fee and bond structures under rulemaking.
Shelton also argued state primacy allows for stronger public outreach and local engagement than an EPA‑led process, and that the department will include more protective requirements than present federal minimums. Lawmakers asked for detailed proposals on fee calculations, bond sizes and clawback triggers; Shelton said the initial rule filing will demonstrate New Mexico's capacity and that subsequent rulemakings will set the fee structure and other program mechanics.
The exchange underscored a wider debate across states about whether to accept long‑term liability in return for centralized oversight and how to guard against financial and environmental risk if operators fail to meet obligations.
