Part of Project Jupiter Watch — the public record of the $165B data-center deal in Doña Ana County, NM. New here? Start with the Film →

The Web / Who's Who / Nick Maxwell

Dossier · Who's Who

Nick Maxwell

Pro se intervenor in the air-permit hearing, NMED proceeding AQB 26-57(P)

verification: primary-source

Hobbs government watchdog and pro se intervenor in the air-permit hearing, who put the record of NMED's contract with its hearing-officer supplier into the hearing record.

At a glance

Current role: Pro se intervenor in the air-permit hearing, NMED proceeding AQB 26-57(P)2026-07–present
Category: Advocate or organizer
Jurisdiction: Private sector (no public jurisdiction)
Also known as: Nicholas Maxwell
Verification: primary-source — Read off the primary document itself
In the record: 1 sources · 1 connections · 3 dated entries
Record id: PJP105

Key facts

2026-08-21Filed a 133-page response and supplemental motion on August 21, 2026 that put the NMED–ERG contract documents into the hearing record.^[1]
2026-08-21The filing separates what the documents establish from what they do not: it says adverse rulings are not bias and alleges no financial stake for the contractor in the permit.^[1]
Cited a 2021 Court of Appeals opinion in the WIPP permit case, where a hearing-officer contract challenge went unanswered because it was raised too late.^[1]
2026-08-21The hearing officer denied Maxwell's request to supplement technical testimony on August 20, 2026, and denied the motion to reconsider on August 21 without reasoning.
Pushed the Open Meetings Act violation analysis and shared emails with journalist Heath Haussamen.

The record

Government watchdog (Hobbs NM); pushed the OMA-violation analysis, shared emails with Haussamen Pro se intervenor in the air-permit hearing, AQB 26-57(P) (Jul 2026 scheduling order).

Appearing for himself in the air-permit proceeding, he filed the 133-page response and supplemental motion of August 21, 2026 that assembled the NMED–ERG contractual record from the procurement, the master contract, the 2025 amendment and the July 2026 correspondence — and that distinguished, carefully and repeatedly, between what those documents establish and what they do not.

Relationships · 1

Source for

Heath Haussamen

In the timeline · 3

Jul 29, 2026Two days later, the hearing moves five weeks earlier Aug 20, 2026The remedy was the hearing, and there was no hearing Aug 21, 2026The same question was put to a court once before, and went unanswered

Dated entries in the record that involve this party. Appearing here is not an allegation — it means the graph draws an edge from this dossier to that event.

Claims involving them · 2

Cross-examination cannot supply what the rules require before the hearingprimary-source

The question has been put to a New Mexico court before, and it was never answeredprimary-source

In the Watch · 3

documentMaxwell's response and supplemental motion on the ERG relationship (Aug 21 2026)

documentOrder denying Maxwell's expedited motion to reconsider (Aug 21 2026)

documentOrder denying limited supplementation of direct technical testimony (Aug 20 2026)

Sources · 1

1.filingMaxwell's Response and Supplemental Motion concerning the ERG contractual relationship — AQB 26-57(P), Aug 21 2026 (PDF) ↗

Corrections, updates, and disputes are taken seriously and logged. If you are the subject of this page, this is your standing right of reply.

Your name / affiliation (optional)MessageSend via your mail app ↗

Opens your email client addressed to projectjupiterwatch@protonmail.com. Nothing is transmitted until you press send there. Responses from those named in the Watch are published verbatim.