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

• Communities for Clean Water (CCW), a network of organizations, appealed the decision of the Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC) which upheld the New Mexico Environment Department's (NMED) denial of CCW's request for a public hearing on a water discharge permit application by the Department of Energy (DOE) and Los Alamos National Security, LLC (LANS). CCW's request was based on their mission to protect community waters from adverse impacts from operations and legacy waste at Los Alamos National Labs (paras 1-6).

Procedural History

• Administrative Appeal from the New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission: The WQCC sustained NMED's decision to deny CCW's request for a public hearing on the water discharge permit application by DOE/LANS, leading to CCW's appeal (para 6).

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (CCW): Argued that NMED has no discretion to deny a request for a public hearing and, if discretion exists, substantial public interest in the permit application mandated a public hearing under the Water Quality Act and corresponding regulations (paras 8-9, 13-17).
• Appellee (WQCC) and Intervenors (NMED and LANS): Contended that the secretary has discretion to deny a public hearing request and that the regulation's substantial public interest standard was properly applied in denying CCW's request (paras 13, 18).

Legal Issues

• Whether NMED has discretion to deny a request for a public hearing on a water discharge permit application.
• If NMED has such discretion, whether CCW established a substantial public interest in the permit application, necessitating a public hearing under the Water Quality Act and its regulations (paras 8-9).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the WQCC's decision sustaining NMED's denial of CCW's request for a public hearing and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion (para 37).

Reasons

• The Court found that while NMED has limited discretion to grant or deny a public hearing, the WQCC lacked substantial evidence to support its decision to sustain NMED’s denial of CCW’s request for a public hearing. The Court disagreed with the WQCC's reasons for denying the hearing, including the characterization of CCW as a "sole participant," the assertion that CCW's concerns had been addressed, and the suggestion that a hearing would delay remediation efforts. The Court emphasized the legislative intent for public participation in the permitting process and concluded that the WQCC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in upholding the secretary’s denial of a public hearing (paras 15-36). Judge Bohnhoff concurred with reversing the WQCC's decision but based on a different interpretation of the statute, arguing that "opportunity for a public hearing" means a hearing must be held if requested by an interested party (paras 39-45).