First, let me thank Capt Jack for his comments. They serve to highlight the ignorance I alluded to in my previous comments. So there is a “bubble” below the RR injection site – that can only further impede movement of any contaminants. Yes, jet fuel contaminants move faster, as they are more mobile than water, but as Rio Rancho won't be injecting any jet fuel, why is this an issue? So the aquifer flows towards the Rio Grande – as it doesn't feed the river, why is this a problem? Treated effluent must meet EPA standards to be sent to the river, so why is sending it to the aquifer an issue?
If you are really concerned about what reaches the river, perhaps you might consider the untreated runoff that reaches the Rio every day. I'd be more concerned about the toxic elements in what drains from our roads, parking lots, parks, golf courses, and fertilized lawns than what might someday filter through the aquifer to the river.
The idea of “toilet to tap” has been long in coming to New Mexico. There are many ways we can re-use gray and treated water in our communities, most of which have been killed by simple ignorance and inertia.
Some years ago Albuquerque flirted with using non-potable water to water city parks and golf courses. This elicited outrage from parents who objected to their children playing on grass watered with “sewage”. Apparently they were unaware that the same grass is “fertilized” daily with dog urine and feces.
As for Rio Rancho, the city doesn't take water from the Rio Grande, and so doesn't need to return any. A certain amount of runoff is factored into the water budget for the Rio Grande, and some water conservation measures proposed for Rio Rancho might reduce this, but that's a different issue.
As for the concerns of the Agua es Vida Action Team (and apparently, but not clearly why, Citizens for Alternatives to Radioactive Dumping): okay, so the EPA standards are out of date, but they still govern the water we drink today. Water does not go directly from “toilet to tap”; if what is pumped from the aquifer doesn't meet standards, whatever its source, it is treated to do so. If anyone's concern is for overall water quality, they should address that issue with the EPA.
I just wonder why "Chicano" authors need to address history in insulting and inflammatory terms - consider the text "Occuped America: A History of Chicanos" by Rodolfo Acuna, one of the books "banned" by the Tucson schools. As for Sr. Anaya, he has been known to use curious "humor" concerning language: "If a person who speaks two languages is bilingual, what do you call someone who speaks only one language? American."