The BLM's Resource Management Plan Amendment for

Federal Fluid Minerals Leasing and Development in Sierra and Otero Counties:

Risks to Water Quality and Need for More Analysis and Protections

The Salt Basin beneath Otero Mesa contains vast water resources that are vulnerable to contamination from oil and gas operations. The BLM has declined to adequately assess the resources or design needed protections; instead, the BLM wants to proceed with development and has removed the protections that were included in the Draft. More analysis is needed to minimize the risk to these important resources.

Approximately 90% of the population of New Mexico depends on groundwater for drinking water and nearly half of all water used in the State for any purpose is groundwater. The basin beneath Otero Mesa, the Salt Basin, has been identified as containing a regional aquifer and formally declared as the Salt Underground Water Basin, meriting official State interest. A 2002 report prepared for the State of New Mexico [1] concluded that the basin beneath Otero Mesa, the Salt Basin, contains approximately 15 million acre-feet of recoverable potable water in storage. Taking into account all recoverable water that meets the definition of “fresh water” used by the New Mexico State Engineer [2] , this volume increases to approximately 30 million acre-feet, which would provide water for 1 million New Mexicans for close to 13 years. [3] The New Mexico State Water Plan includes the Salt Basin and notes that the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission has filed an application to appropriate water from the Salt Basin for uses throughout southern New Mexico, as have other entities.

The characteristics of the Salt Basin (geology and hydrology) have been studied and documented. This data was utilized by Shomaker and Associates (Shomaker) in preparing the Tularosa Basin and Salt Basin Regional Water Plan and other hydrogeologic evaluation of the Salt Basin for the Interstate Stream Commission, as well as in supporting preparation of the State Water Plan.

Shomaker relied on this experience to further evaluate the vulnerability of the Salt Basin to contamination and the risks posed by the BLM's current Resource Management Plan Amendment (RMPA). [4] Key conclusions of this expert are that:

•  The BLM's analysis of risks to the water resources is flawed; the BLM has not even considered the available data and references.

•  Due to its inadequate analysis, the BLM has not taken into account the potentially significant fresh water resources or the vulnerability of this aquifer to contamination.

•  The lack of protection for the water resources in the current RMP Amendment poses a serious risk of damage to the water from oil and gas development.

•  Overall, more information about the location and condition of groundwater is needed to perform sufficient analysis and avoid endangering the vital water resources beneath Otero Mesa.

BLM has acknowledged that surface water and groundwater in the planning area are both vulnerable to contamination, and that it does not have complete information on aquifers or other aspects of the condition of the water resources. Nonetheless, BLM concludes that, because it can rely on the oil and gas industry to protect this critical resource, the risks of damage are low. BLM has even gone a step further, actually removing protections that were included in the Draft RMPA.

As the New Mexico Environment Department has concluded: “Prevention of ground-water pollution is always more cost effective and technically achievable than remediation.” [5] While there are substitute sources of energy (and the recent legislation passed by the State of New Mexico on renewable-energy development mandates of them), there are no substitutes for water. Like the State of New Mexico and Shomaker, we are urging the BLM to look at the water resources before it leaps into oil and gas development.

Shomaker Report Summary:

The Salt Basin is vulnerable to contamination:

• The majority of the basin, considered a regional aquifer, is underlain by limestone (carbonate) rock that is fractured and also permeable – such that contaminants can move throughout the system.
• The fractures in the basin occur densely and are exposed at the land surface, providing numerous and ready pathways for travel of contaminants into the regional aquifer.
• Recharge of the groundwater occurs from melting snowpack and flash flooding, which infiltrates the system. Recharge occurs in an alluvial aquifer, where depth to water is shallow, making it susceptible to contamination from surface activities.
• Depth to water in the central part of the Salt Basin is approximately 200 feet, but many of the existing wells that produce from shallow perched groundwater may have depth to water of less than 100 feet.
• The direction of regional groundwater flow is from the northern Salt Basin, Otero Mesa and Diablo Plateau toward the Salt Flats near Dell City, Texas. Groundwater flow from Otero Mesa and the Sacramento watershed is toward a highly fractured region known as Otero Break. The high density of fractures and the nature of the rocks provide for transfer of water and contaminants in the water.
• Otero Break's hydraulic connectivity (general flow rate) and hydraulic gradient (slope of groundwater flow) can be used to calculate an average flow rate for water (tracer velocity). The average tracer velocity calculated is high (20 feet per day), but within a fracture can be several orders of magnitude greater (1000 feet per day), showing how “efficiently” contaminants can travel through this groundwater.

BLM did not review key data and references :

• There are potentially significant fresh water resources above and below the formations currently targeted for oil and gas development. The oil and gas industry has reported “fresh” water in the Otero Mesa and Diablo Plateau areas at significant depths.
• The extent of these water resources has not been fully defined (although substantially more data is available than BLM took into consideration).
• The BLM does not identify the Salt Basin as an important potential source of groundwater. In fact, the BLM does not even refer to the Salt Basin as a declared basin or note the existence of a regional aquifer.
• The BLM did not review key publications that would provide more detailed information on the geology of the Salt Basin, such as 1995 and 1998 reports on the fractured limestone rock structure and the groundwater flows and the Tularosa and Salt Basin Regional Water Plan (draft issued in 2001) .
• The BLM does not identify the fractured, limestone character of the Salt Basin or its heightened vulnerability to contamination from surface disturbances.

Additional data and analysis are needed:

• In addition to taking into consideration the existing data, further study is needed to adequately assess the water resources in this area.
• Water-level data is not complete and needed to define depth to water and develop a map of groundwater elevation, especially for the Otero Mesa, Diablo Plateau and northern fringes of Otero Break.
• The fracture density study performed in 1995 could provide guidance for determining areas of the aquifer most susceptible to contamination from surface activities, but a more detailed fracture evaluation is needed to specifically define these areas.
• The water plans for the Salt Basin should be taken into account in assessing the value of the water resources and ranking the water resources and fluid mineral resources based on impacts, value and sustainability.

The BLM's current approach does not provide sufficient protection:

• The BLM's current plan leaves approximately 70% of the area open to leasing with standard lease terms and conditions and no special provisions for protection of groundwater resources
• Injection wells should not be permitted because of the widespread distribution of fresh “public ground water” and the fractured nature of the Salt Basin.
• Additional data and analysis is needed before land management decisions can be made.
• This aquifer is similar to the Edwards Aquifer (near San Antonio, Texas), where the recharge zone is sensitive to contamination and requires controlled surface use for protection.

Further Discussion : Other sources confirm the need for concern regarding the risks of contamination of groundwater from oil and gas development without appropriate assessment and protective measures.

Characteristics of the water resources make them especially vulnerable to contamination:

Much of the groundwater in the Planning Area is shallow and, for the majority of the Planning Area, the surface water is actually contained in the same basin as the groundwater, so that surface flows may be derived from groundwater and contaminants in surface water are delivered into the groundwater. The BLM acknowledges the risks in general terms, stating that portions of the aquifers in the Planning Area are considered “highly vulnerable to contamination from surface water discharges.” (RMPA/FEIS p. 3-13). The BLM also describes the many ways in which groundwater can be affected by fluid minerals exploration and production, such as use of scarce supplies, losses of drilling fluids or contaminants in drilling mud, leaks of storage pits. (pp. 4-14 - 4-17).

In its report on groundwater contamination and remediation, the New Mexico Environment Department concludes that “aquifer recharge in areas of deep ground water may be occurring more rapidly, and at greater magnitude, than is widely believed. Areas of shallow ground water are clearly vulnerable to contamination. Deeper ground waters, however, are not as well protected as many believe them to be.” (p. 7). This report indicates that delivery of contaminants is “efficient” for shallow and deeper areas of groundwater.

Oil and gas exploration and development pose a significant risk to water resources:

Oil and gas exploration and development can result in spills, seepage from pits or slow leaks from pipes or storage tanks. Substantial groundwater contamination attributable to oil and gas development in the State has been documented. A review by the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department found that, out of 734 cases of soil or groundwater contamination, 444 were at oil or gas field locations. [6]

In its July, 2000, report on groundwater contamination and remediation, the New Mexico Environment Department concludes that in New Mexico “about 70% of point-source cases result from oil and gas production and petroleum-product handling.” (p. 3).

This report also discusses groundwater contamination from oil-field sources (which includes oil and natural gas), noting that the most common cause of oil-field contamination is produced water disposal into unlined pits but also noting other causes, such as leaks from wells and pipelines and waste discharges.

The supplemental review of environmental regulations conducted by the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department also noted that “data obtained from OCD studies and recent pit closures have shown that very small volume discharges have resulted in ground water contamination.” (p. 11).

Conclusions: The BLM has not adequately assessed the impacts to groundwater and surface water, because it has failed to analyze the current location and quality of these water sources. The risk of damage to groundwater and surface water are increased by a failure to prescribe sufficient protections.

The Salt Underground Water Basin was declared in 2000, the groundwater resources were found to be substantial in 2001 and 2002 reports prepared by the State, and the State Water Plan (which includes this basin as an important potential source of water) was in development (including through public meetings) from 2001 through 2003. Reports prepared in 1995 and 1998 provided additional detail on the density of fractures and groundwater flow in this basin. The BLM did not avail itself of these reference materials or fully discuss its assessment with those familiar with the basin and the State's water resources. The BLM did not include this data or even commence an adequate analysis, although the agency was clearly aware that there was vulnerable groundwater in the area. The BLM has not formally acknowledged the important water resources of the Salt Basin or taken sufficient action to protect them – even removing protections that had been included in its Draft RMPA/EIS.

The same water-resource firm that conducted assessments of groundwater resources in Salt Basin and made additional investigations for the State Water Plan has concluded that the BLM's analysis is inadequate for making land management decisions and that the BLM's endorsement of oil and gas development without special protection for groundwater will risk damage to groundwater. The State Water Plan declares the State's policy of measuring the quantity and quality of the State's water resources (to permit effective management). The Shomaker report emphasizes both the need for a thorough inventory and the risks of acting without completing such an inventory. The BLM has not performed an adequate inventory and its current management approach has heightened the risk of contamination to an easily compromised groundwater system. Groundwater mapping, quality testing and appropriate protections are needed before reasoned decisions to permit oil and gas development can be made.

[1] Tularosa Basin and Salt Basin Regional Water Plan, May 2002, prepared by Livingston Associates, P.C. in association with John Shomaker and Associates, Inc.

[2] Waters containing 10,000 milligrams per liter or less of total dissolved solids.

[3] Based on USGS daily consumption estimates for New Mexico for all uses (household, agricultural, industrial, etc.).

[4] Evaluation of Potential Water-resource Impacts from BLM Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendment for Federal Fluid Minerals Leasing and Development in the Salt Basin, New Mexico, February 6, 2004, Steven T. Finch, Jr., CPG, prepared for Otero Mesa Coalition and included in Protest filed by The New Mexico Wilderness Alliance, Southwest Environmental Center, The Wilderness Society, Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, New Mexico Wildlife Federation and Stephen Capra.

[5] Ground-water Contamination and Remediation in New Mexico: 1997-2000, New Mexico Environment Department, Ground Water Quality Bureau, July, 2000.

[6] New Mexico Followup and Supplemental Review – State Review of Oil and Natural Gas Environmental Regulations, prepared by New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, 2001, p. 6.