The New Mexico House Committee on Energy, Environment, and Natural Resources convened on February 15, 2025, to discuss House Bill 328, which proposes the repeal of the Clean Fuel Standards (CFS) enacted in 2024. The meeting featured a range of perspectives from committee members, public supporters, and opponents of the bill.

Representative Pettigrew introduced the bill, emphasizing its intent to prevent the Environmental Improvement Board (EIB) from adopting or enforcing any Clean Transportation Fuel Standards (CTFS) rules. He indicated that the bill aims to provide legislative control over fuel regulations rather than allowing bureaucratic rule-making.

The committee heard from several opponents of the bill, including Alyssa Kenning Geier from the Sierra Club, who argued that repealing the CFS would hinder economic progress towards cleaner fuels and electric vehicle (EV) adoption. She highlighted the potential for reduced transportation emissions and financial savings for EV drivers under the existing standards.

Alex Eubanks from the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project echoed these concerns, stating that the repeal would reverse advancements in clean energy, increase pollution, and jeopardize public health. He urged the committee to maintain the CFS to support job creation and investment in clean energy.

Supporters of the bill, including Jim Winchester from the Independent Petroleum Association, argued that the CFS functions as a gas tax that disproportionately affects low-income and rural residents. He claimed that similar standards in other states have led to increased fuel prices without measurable environmental benefits.

Throughout the discussion, committee members raised questions regarding the implications of the repeal on public health, local businesses, and the clean energy sector. Concerns were voiced about the potential negative impact on communities already facing pollution challenges and the readiness of New Mexico's infrastructure to support a transition to EVs.

Representative Pettigrew defended the bill by asserting that it would allow for more effective legislative oversight and prevent bureaucratic overreach. He acknowledged the need to address emissions but suggested that the current approach may not be the most effective or equitable.

The meeting concluded without a definitive resolution, as further discussions and considerations are expected in subsequent sessions. The committee's deliberations reflect ongoing tensions between environmental policy, economic interests, and public health in New Mexico's legislative landscape.