Appellant says exclusion of health evidence denied due process

Appellant counsel (Presenter) argued that the hearing examiner's relevancy rulings effectively prevented her clients from presenting witnesses, experts and documentary evidence on air pollution and health linked to PNM's proposed installations. Counsel said much of the testimony was redacted before admission and that the record lacked the contested evidence necessary to decide the as-applied question.

"He was denied a chance to to to, have witnesses testify, call experts, produce documentary, on that issue," counsel said, asking the court to return the matter to the PRC for a new hearing or, in the alternative, for a limited evidentiary hearing on air pollution and the appellant's evidence.