AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• WildEarth Guardians challenged the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board's decision to affirm the New Mexico Environment Department's grant of an air quality permit and three general construction permit registrations to various energy companies. The challenge was based on the argument that the permits would allow emissions that violate National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, particularly focusing on the use of a de minimis standard, known as a significant impact level (SIL), in permit evaluations. Ozone, a secondary pollutant formed by the reaction of nitrogen oxide and volatile organic compounds in sunlight, poses health risks and environmental damage at ground level.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the Environmental Improvement Board: The Board affirmed the New Mexico Environment Department's grant of an air quality permit and three general construction permit registrations.

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellant (WildEarth Guardians): Argued that the regulatory requirement does not permit the use of a SIL for evaluating emissions' impact on NAAQS, contended that the permits were improperly granted as they would contribute to NAAQS violations, and claimed that the registrations were improperly granted as they are located in nonattainment areas.
• Respondent-Appellee (New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board) and Intervenors-Appellees (New Mexico Environment Department; XTO Energy Inc.; 3 Bear Delaware Operating -- NM, LLC; Spur Energy Partners LLC): Defended the use of SIL in permit evaluations, argued that the permits and registrations do not cause or contribute to NAAQS violations, and contended that the areas in question are not designated nonattainment areas by the EPA.

Legal Issues

• Whether the use of a significant impact level (SIL) is permissible under 20.2.72.208(D) NMAC for determining if a facility's emissions cause or contribute to an increase in NAAQS.
• Whether the evidence supports the conclusion that the permit and registrations' emissions do not cause or contribute to an increase in NAAQS.
• Whether the general construction permit registrations are located in a nonattainment zone, contrary to regulatory requirements.

Disposition

• The court affirmed the grant of the permits and registrations but remanded for redaction of paragraphs 102-105 of the Board’s final order.

Reasons

• The court found that the use of a SIL is permissible when determining whether a facility's emissions cause or contribute to an increase in NAAQS, aligning with EPA guidelines and past interpretations of similar regulatory language. It concluded that the evidence presented demonstrated the permits and registrations' emissions would not cause or contribute to an increase in NAAQS, primarily because the emissions were below the SIL. Additionally, the court agreed with the Board and the Department that the areas in question were not formally designated nonattainment areas by the EPA, thus not subject to the stricter permitting requirements for nonattainment areas. The court disapproved of and vacated paragraphs 102-105 of the Board’s final order, which created an irrebuttable presumption that minor sources could not exceed the SIL, finding this approach unsupported by substantial evidence and contrary to the proper use of SILs (paras 1-58).