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

• In September 2013, the New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission adopted the Copper Mine Rule, which was challenged by various petitioners. They argued that the Rule permits groundwater contamination at open pit copper mining facilities, violating the Water Quality Act (WQA) by being based on an impermissible construction of the statutory phrase regarding the "place of withdrawal of water for present or reasonably foreseeable future use."

Procedural History

• Gila Res. Info. Project v. N.M. Water Quality Control Comm’n, 2015-NMCA-076: The Court of Appeals rejected Petitioners’ contention that the Copper Rule violates the WQA and affirmed the Commission’s order adopting it.

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioners: Argued that the Copper Rule violates the WQA by permitting rather than preventing groundwater contamination at open pit copper mining facilities, based on an impermissible construction of the statutory phrase regarding the "place of withdrawal of water for present or reasonably foreseeable future use."
• Respondents: Contended that the Copper Rule is premised on a permissible construction of the statutory phrase and that it does not permit widespread pollution above the groundwater quality standards at copper mines.

Legal Issues

• Whether the Copper Rule violates the Water Quality Act by permitting groundwater contamination at open pit copper mining facilities.
• Whether the Copper Rule's construction of the statutory phrase regarding the "place of withdrawal of water for present or reasonably foreseeable future use" is permissible.
• Whether the Copper Rule circumvents the WQA's variance provision by permitting widespread groundwater pollution above 3103 standards at all copper mines without a variance.
• Whether the Copper Rule's closure provisions allow extensive groundwater pollution above 3103 Standards, in perpetuity.

Disposition

• The Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico affirmed the Commission’s decision to adopt the Copper Rule.

Reasons

• The Supreme Court found that the Copper Rule is based on a permissible construction of the statutory phrase regarding the "place of withdrawal of water for present or reasonably foreseeable future use." The Court concluded that the Rule does not permit widespread pollution above the groundwater quality standards at copper mines. Instead, it implements a comprehensive containment strategy to mitigate the environmental harms inherent in open pit copper mining. The Court also found that the Copper Rule does not circumvent the WQA's variance provision and that its closure provisions do not allow extensive groundwater pollution above 3103 standards in perpetuity. The Court deferred to the Commission's expertise and policy-making authority, stating that the petitioners did not establish that the Copper Rule is inconsistent with the WQA or otherwise clearly incorrect (paras 1-74).