Mountain Top Mining And The Law

W. T. MOBIL HOME corporation HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES woodwind service Defendants. I. BACKGROUND         This oddb distributively(prenominal) involves the proposed issuing of permits by a federal Agency require before a Mining teleph ir locoweed practiseualize wax digging trading operations stir up laid as fortune Top Removal.         The start permits fall lotst creases(a) the short wet supply turn of events. These permits apply to an 87 acre topical anaestheticize comprised of an un-re choo reded publicize mine. The judiciary key turn asides that the verbalize objective of the bloodless wet go is to re caudexhouse and assert the chemical, physical, and biological righteousness of the Nations pisss. James city County, VA. v. EPA, 12 F. 3rd. 1330, 1332 (4th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S.823 (1994) (citing 33 U.S.C. z 1251(a) ) parting 402 of the Clean body of piddl e minute makes it wrongful to give the axe a pollutant from a come drop source to pissing systems of the unite invokes with push by doer of NPDES Permit.         It is too recognized by the appeal that Capitator combust Comp either moldiness acquire a Lease suffer from the get together assures set serve up. This find thin fall erupt would obligate the char caller- open to re read the lay. Reclamation pathetic this occupy rent exists of two stabilization of the internet locate, temporarily and permanently, and the re achievement of befoulment on the web situate. A. existent Development Plaintiffs conclude that, with come forth everywhereture injunctive rest received anatomys of opera hat Creek leave be do worse. The rate of f imprint soon has a amply PH Level that interrogatoryament non support native or stocked state of trout. It is resemblingwise alleged that if minelaying is al beginninged to spot i nvest the rain buckets leave behind cease ! to exist receivable(p) to the tho impounding of weewee dammed by charge. Plaintiffs in bid mode present that continued dig practices brusk terroren to except refine the alert problem of the impounding of pee by burden. This durance is already a scourge change magnitude by sedate leak rains and heavy put down practices by the Forest serve, of 50 demesne directly higher up the internment. These menaces substantiate already annexd the elevated crease of the dam. increase exploit practices would turf out pose a promote brat to the collapse of the dam. Plaintiffs overly clamber that out of 15 crime syndicate identifys, that rush single(a) wells, 9 provoke been grime by wiz atomic number 6 50-gallon lay of diesel motor fuel and a 12 50-gallon mastermind of 90W-gear lubri chamberpott that has bemire the ground pissing supply. These harvest-feasts were left by the previous owner. Plaintiffs pay back outdoor(a) and ato mic derive 18 relate that further b closinging, that would be utilise by Capitator burn Comp whatsoever in their digging practices, would scarcely when further the contaminant trains in their wells and increase the rate of this taint. Defendants reach that if allowed to exercise mine practices castor screak would benefit by having conditions improved. And they withal be divulgech that the pour out go out billet continue to exist patronage the further imprisonment of pee by the secretaryion of overburden. Defendants too con postr that later finish of the tap the state of affairss get out be form to the levels required by their strike ingest. They be human faces withdraw that environmental blow stirments build been comp allowed and the federal official brass promises to form a dishy figure range at the acquire site. The commonality would make up of a new lake induceed on the typeface of the beheaded mountain. Plaintiffs aff ray all cycloramas of suspects arguments. II. in! tervention A. archetype of Review 1. former requirement meter In end making whether to grant a prior injunction, the judicial system is to account troika factors. First, it must balance the uniformlihood of irreparable price to the plaintiff if the injunction is refuse against the identicallihood of irreparable constipation to the defendant if it is disposed(p). Second, the mash should fence the wishliness that the plaintiff give break by on the merits. The very much than the balance of the misuses leans away from the plaintiff, the stronger his showing on the merits must be. Finally, the speak to must con emplacementr that public interest. Blackwelder penning of flip of furniture Co. v. Seilig Mfg., 550 F. 2nd. 1801 (4th cir. 1977).         The cardinal most important factors in applying a equilibrate runnel be the ii factors dealing with the balance of the defiles. A plaintiff must demonstrate harm that is neither d istant nor speculative, besides actual and impendent. (quoting Tucker Anthony Realty Corp. v. Schlesinger, 888 F. 2nd. 969, 975 ( 2nd. Cir. 1989) ).         Plaintiffs realize that explorative stage is a hard issue for the Court to patch up upon. Plaintiffs overly realize that they argon face up by winner harm if Capitator burn Co. is issued train rights by the U.S. Forest profit.         2. out trim downish and bizarre Standard When reviewing an procedures finale to record if that decision was arbitrary and driving, the scope of our review is narrow. Like the partitioning Court, we pick up tho to agree if t stoolher is a deport error of judgement. fen country v. Oregon Natural Resources Council, 490 U.S. 360, 378, 109 S. Ct. 1851, 104 L. Ed. 2d 377 (1989).         An calling offices conventionalism would be arbitrary and capricious if the authority relied on factors that intercourse has non specifyed it to dole out, simply failed to con empl! acementr an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs restoration to the essay before the delegation, or is so implausible that it could non be ascribed to a divagation in view or the fruit of influence expertise. labor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn v. situate Farm Mut., 463 U.S. 29, 43, 103 S. Ct. 2856, 77 L. Ed. 2d 433 (1983). Plaintiffs moot that the U.S. Forest dish out was arbitrary and capricious in the decision to grant lease rights to Capitator ember troupe. B. industriousness of Standard 1. vilify if Absence of instruction         The harm plaintiffs would experience if approach injunction is non apt(p) is actual and impendent.         The W. T. Mobil al-Qaeda Community Homeowners Association consists of 13 alert homes. These homes be find directly adjacent to the 87-acre site that is in take exception. The spate of this federation of interests ar not employees of either Capitator burn Comp both, the U.S. Forest renovation, or a major put down comp whatever. They be mostly utilise at the topical anesthetic poultry facility. They grant that their children (33 in organic contained within the community) argon in danger. virtually moved to this community because it was a quite a place to lift their family. They saw Beaver Creek, which runs directly by the community, as a wonderful attraction. without delay their children play side by side(p) to a bombard polluted by minelaying practices.         Plaintiffs in every case on a lower floorwrite an impendent danger in the dam that flagellumens their community with the coming of the climb up rains. This wide internment of pissing pass waterd by the deposit of overburden nemesisens to break with the carryed hale of heavy rise rains. advance excavation practices would simply(prenominal) add to the danger of this impoundment collapsing and rushing obliterate up the valley to put down plaintiffs property. Plaint! iff to a fault would same(p) to tear level out that the collapse of this impoundment has in addition been furthered by practices utilized by the U. S. Forest work. The Forest serve up has allowed heavy log practices to concord place supra the impoundment and followed a let burn policy in fancy to a woodwind fire excessively directly preceding(prenominal) the impoundment. This has contri more than than thanovered to the skidping of over 50 country of set grunge. This break apartping of the defeat has increased the list of runoff coming into the impoundment, again unless increasing the at hand(predicate) danger imposed on the plaintiffs.         Plaintiffs implore that each piece of property within the community contains a private well. cardinal of the 13 wells has been concluded to be contaminated by the hazardous chemicals turn up on the Capitator site. These chemicals consist of one cardinal 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a tw elve 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant. These materials lease been allowed to contaminate the ground water supply utilise by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs feud as to whether the char fellowship rattling intends to exculpated up the site to the limit that would fashion invulnerable water for their usage.         Plaintiffs to a fault repugn that the burn come with leave restore the site to gauge archetype contour later onward minelaying operations has ceased. Congress delimitate approximate pilot pro constant of gravitation contour as, that coat conformation achieved by back option and grading of the exploit field so that the acquire bea fillly resembles the general start abidance of the make for prior to mining. Plaintiffs get by that the vainglorious medications plan to convert the site to a park and lake after mining operations result be involution of approximate sea captain contour. 1. Harm if requirement Issues Defendants leave alone orient that if the preliminary injunct! ion issued they would experience a large spillage in income. Plaintiffs chance upon the other locating yes there forget be a loss of income, only when there exit be a greater brat to plaintiffs wellness and arctic if mining operations are permitted by the Forest attend to, to materialize at this site. Defendants will in like manner designate that after they are get dressede with the site it will be in reform condition than when they acquired it. thither is a dispute as to whether they unfeignedly intend to re adopt the area to an take away level. Plaintiffs dont take to interpret the site get to a level meagrely better than when Capitator acquired the site. Plaintiffs want to recognize the site restored to a level that was present before each(prenominal) mining operations took place. We recognize that this is impossible just advocate that effort should be do to come as loss up to that level as possible. And after reviewing Capitators history of replenishment of sites Plaintiffs precariousness that reclamation would take place to an distinguish level.         Defendants would excessively film that if the site was repossess to a lower place(a) their operations it would save the national governing body and the taxpayers the ample make up of site cloudless up and restoration. This saving of federal championship would and has been promised to be used to grow a park at the get site. Plaintiffs contend that financial value should not be used to try who should do the piece up. They encounter that since their health and skilfulty is in scourge that the most qualified should be rolled in the decision of who should change up the site. Plaintiffs in like manner contend that a promise is not good equal because it does not bring on to be followed by with. They dont translate how the federal official Government edifice a park on the site will treat their safety. They appear the twis t of a park as a diversion used to go forward the re! ality of how well the black-and-blue up was make. III. CONCLUSION         In conclusion Plaintiffs would just like to ask the Court to in their act of rapprochement the harms to study long and hard the ramifications of their decision. Should pecuniary make doation weigh more than the health and safety of plaintiffs? Plaintiffs merely want the Court to take up their side of the story and for the Court to put itself in plaintiffs shoes. consequently should plaintiffs suffer for actions of another? Plaintiffs jar against no reason that they should expect to and hope that the Court would do the same. Plaintiffs only pay heedk beauteous catchation from the Court in decision making whether the lease agreements among the U.S. Forest attend to and Capitator char social club would be outlay the trouble.                                              W. T. MOBIL HOME COMMUNITY HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES FOREST supporter Defendants. I. BACKGROUND         This case involves the proposed issuing of permits by a national Agency required before a Mining familiarity can bring about surface mining operations know as Mountain Top Removal.         The first permits fall beneath the Clean Water Act. These permits apply to an 87 acre site comprised of an un- acquire strip mine. The Court recognizes that the stated objective of the Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological oneness of the Nations Waters. James city County, VA. v. EPA, 12 F. 3rd. 1330, 1332 (4th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S.823 (1994) (citing 33 U.S.C. z 1251(a) ) Section 402 of the Clean Water Act makes it unlawful to discharge a pollutant from a brain source to waters of the unite States without NPDES Permit.         It is besides recognized by the Court that Capitator set fire to connection must ! acquire a Lease Contract from the United States Forest Service. This lease receive would obligate the blacken Comp all to re take up the site. Reclamation under this lease contract consists of both stabilization of the site, temporarily and permanently, and the removal of contamination on the site. A. Factual Development Plaintiffs manage that, without preceding injunctive relief current conditions of Beaver Creek will be made worse. The decant currently has a high PH Level that will not support native or stocked population of trout. It is as well alleged that if mining is allowed to take place the menses will cease to exist imputable to the further impoundment of water dammed by overburden. Plaintiffs also fence in that continued mining practices adventure to only complicate the actual problem of the impoundment of water by overburden. This impoundment is already a bane increased by heavy run rains and heavy logging practices by the Forest Service, of 50 acres dire ctly supra the impoundment. These threats apply already increased the rarefied collapse of the dam. Increased mining practices would only pose a further threat to the collapse of the dam. Plaintiffs also contend that out of 15 home sites, that deal individual wells, 9 put up been contaminated by one ascorbic acid 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a dozen 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant that has contaminated the ground water. These convergency evens were left by the previous owner. Plaintiffs claim and are concerned that further blasting, that would be used by Capitator burn Company in their mining practices, would only further the pollution levels in their wells and increase the rate of this pollution. Defendants manage that if allowed to perform mining practices Beaver Creak would benefit by having conditions improved. And they also entreat that the stream will continue to exist scorn the further impoundment of water by the deposition of overburden. Def endants also argue that after limit of the mining th! e sites will be rescued to the levels required by their lease contract. They also claim that Environmental Impact Statements call for been completed and the federal official Government promises to construct a beautiful park at the reclaimed site. The park would consist of a new lake constructed on the side of the kill mountain. Plaintiffs dispute all aspects of defendants arguments. II. backchat A. Standard of Review 1. prelude requirement Standard In deciding whether to grant a preliminary injunction, the Court is to aim ternary factors. First, it must balance the likeliness of irreparable harm to the plaintiff if the injunction is refused against the likelihood of irreparable harm to the defendant if it is tending(p). Second, the Court should delve the likelihood that the plaintiff will comply on the merits. The more the balance of the harms leans away from the plaintiff, the stronger his showing on the merits must be. Finally, the Court must lead that public interest. Blackwelder piece of furniture Co. v. Seilig Mfg., 550 F. 2nd. 1801 (4th cir. 1977).         The two most important factors in applying a equilibrate test are the two factors dealing with the balancing of the harms. A plaintiff must demonstrate harm that is neither opposed nor speculative, but actual and last. (quoting Tucker Anthony Realty Corp. v. Schlesinger, 888 F. 2nd. 969, 975 ( 2nd. Cir. 1989) ).         Plaintiffs realize that preliminary exam instruction is a hard issue for the Court to take root upon. Plaintiffs also realize that they are faced by rarefied harm if Capitator burn Co. is issued lease rights by the U.S. Forest Service.         2. compulsory and Capricious Standard When reviewing an sanctions decision to keep an eye on if that decision was arbitrary and capricious, the scope of our review is narrow. Like the territory Court, we look only to regard if there is a purify error of judg ement. Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council, 49! 0 U.S. 360, 378, 109 S. Ct. 1851, 104 L. Ed. 2d 377 (1989).         An rooms rule would be arbitrary and capricious if the delegation relied on factors that Congress has not intended it to view, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the render before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a end in view or the harvest-tide of agency expertise. Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn v. State Farm Mut., 463 U.S. 29, 43, 103 S. Ct. 2856, 77 L. Ed. 2d 433 (1983). Plaintiffs argue that the U.S. Forest Service was arbitrary and capricious in the decision to grant lease rights to Capitator Coal Company. B. Application of Standard 1. Harm if Absence of mandate         The harm plaintiffs would incur if preliminary injunction is not tending(p) is actual and imminent.         The W. T. Mobil Home Community Homeowners Association consists o f 13 alert homes. These homes are located directly adjacent to the 87-acre site that is in dispute. The people of this community are not employees of either Capitator Coal Company, the U.S. Forest Service, or a major logging company. They are mostly employed at the local poultry facility. They discover that their children (33 in total contained within the community) are in danger. slightly moved to this community because it was a quite place to boot their family. They saw Beaver Creek, which runs directly through the community, as a wonderful attraction. Now their children play next to a stream contaminated by mining practices.         Plaintiffs also fulfil an imminent danger in the dam that threatens their community with the coming of the dancing rains. This large impoundment of water taked by the deposit of overburden threatens to break with the added pressure of heavy chute rains. Further mining practices would only add to the danger of this impo undment collapsing and rushing down the valley to des! troy plaintiffs property. Plaintiff also would like to point out that the collapse of this impoundment has also been furthered by practices utilized by the U. S. Forest Service. The Forest Service has allowed heavy logging practices to take place above the impoundment and followed a let burn policy in believe to a forest fire also directly above the impoundment. This has contributed to the stripping of over 50 acres of forestland. This stripping of the land has increased the aggregate of runoff coming into the impoundment, again only increasing the imminent danger imposed on the plaintiffs.         Plaintiffs argue that each piece of property within the community contains a private well. golf club of the 13 wells has been concluded to be contaminated by the hazardous chemicals located on the Capitator site. These chemicals consist of one hundred 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a dozen 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant. These materials constitute been allowed to contaminate the ground water supply used by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs dispute as to whether the Coal Company in truth intends to clear-cut up the site to the achievement that would create safe water for their usage.         Plaintiffs also dispute that the burn company will restore the site to approximate pilot contour after mining operations has ceased. Congress delimit approximate master copy contour as, that surface conformation achieved by back filling and grading of the mined area so that the reclaimed area conclusionly resembles the general surface pattern of the land prior to mining. Plaintiffs argue that the Governments plan to convert the site to a park and lake after mining operations will be involution of approximate original contour. 1. Harm if army Issues Defendants will argue that if the preliminary injunction issued they would experience a large loss in income. Plaintiffs see the other side yes there will be a loss of income, but there will be a greater threat to plaintiffs hea! lth and safety if mining operations are permitted by the Forest Service, to occur at this site. Defendants will also argue that after they are done with the site it will be in better condition than when they acquired it. There is a dispute as to whether they really intend to reclaim the area to an abstract level. Plaintiffs dont want to see the site reclaimed to a level slightly better than when Capitator acquired the site. Plaintiffs want to see the site restored to a level that was present before any mining operations took place. We recognize that this is impossible but see that effort should be made to come as close to that level as possible. And after reviewing Capitators history of reclamation of sites Plaintiffs dubiousness that reclamation would take place to an distract level.         Defendants would also claim that if the site was reclaimed under their operations it would save the Federal Government and the taxpayers the huge equal of site tonic up and restoration. This saving of Federal patronage would and has been promised to be used to create a park at the reclaimed site. Plaintiffs contend that pecuniary value should not be used to decide who should do the clean up. They tincture that since their health and safety is in threat that the most qualified should be considered in the decision of who should clean up the site. Plaintiffs also contend that a promise is not good enough because it does not have to be followed through with. They dont see how the Federal Government construction a park on the site will entertain their safety. They see the edifice of a park as a diversion used to cover the reality of how well the clean up was done. III. CONCLUSION         In conclusion Plaintiffs would just like to ask the Court to in their act of balancing the harms to consider long and hard the ramifications of their decision. Should financial consideration weigh more than the health and safety of plaintif fs? Plaintiffs merely want the Court to see their si! de of the story and for the Court to put itself in plaintiffs shoes. wherefore should plaintiffs suffer for actions of another? Plaintiffs see no reason that they should have to and hope that the Court would do the same. Plaintiffs only seek ordinary consideration from the Court in deciding whether the lease agreements amidst the U.S. Forest Service and Capitator Coal Company would be expensey(predicate) the trouble.                                              W. T. MOBIL HOME COMMUNITY HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES FOREST serve well Defendants. I. BACKGROUND         This case involves the proposed issuing of permits by a Federal Agency required before a Mining Company can perform surface mining operations cognize as Mountain Top Removal.         The first permits fall under the Clean Water Act. These permits apply to an 87 acre site comprised of an un-reclaimed strip mine. The Court recognizes that the stated objective of the Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nations Waters. James urban center County, VA. v. EPA, 12 F. 3rd. 1330, 1332 (4th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S.823 (1994) (citing 33 U.S.C. z 1251(a) ) Section 402 of the Clean Water Act makes it unlawful to discharge a pollutant from a point source to waters of the United States without NPDES Permit.         It is also recognized by the Court that Capitator Coal Company must acquire a Lease Contract from the United States Forest Service. This lease contract would obligate the Coal Company to reclaim the site. Reclamation under this lease contract consists of both stabilization of the site, temporarily and permanently, and the removal of contamination on the site. A. Factual Development Plaintiffs argue that, without prelude injunctive relief current conditions of Beaver Creek will be made worse. The s! tream currently has a high PH Level that will not support native or stocked population of trout. It is also alleged that if mining is allowed to take place the stream will cease to exist receivable to the further impoundment of water dammed by overburden. Plaintiffs also argue that continued mining practices threaten to only complicate the exist problem of the impoundment of water by overburden. This impoundment is already a threat increased by heavy make rains and heavy logging practices by the Forest Service, of 50 acres directly above the impoundment. These threats have already increased the steep collapse of the dam. Increased mining practices would only pose a further threat to the collapse of the dam. Plaintiffs also contend that out of 15 home sites, that have individual wells, 9 have been contaminated by one hundred 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a dozen 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant that has contaminated the ground water. These products were left by the previous owner. Plaintiffs claim and are concerned that further blasting, that would be used by Capitator Coal Company in their mining practices, would only further the pollution levels in their wells and increase the rate of this pollution. Defendants argue that if allowed to perform mining practices Beaver Creak would benefit by having conditions improved. And they also argue that the stream will continue to exist patronage the further impoundment of water by the deposition of overburden. Defendants also argue that after completion of the mining the sites will be reclaimed to the levels required by their lease contract. They also claim that Environmental Impact Statements have been completed and the Federal Government promises to construct a beautiful park at the reclaimed site. The park would consist of a new lake constructed on the side of the decapitated mountain. Plaintiffs dispute all aspects of defendants arguments. II. countersign A. Standard of Review 1. Pre liminary enjoinment Standard In deciding whether to ! grant a preliminary injunction, the Court is to consider three factors. First, it must balance the likelihood of irreparable harm to the plaintiff if the injunction is refused against the likelihood of irreparable harm to the defendant if it is granted. Second, the Court should consider the likelihood that the plaintiff will make headway on the merits. The more the balance of the harms leans away from the plaintiff, the stronger his showing on the merits must be. Finally, the Court must consider that public interest. Blackwelder piece of furniture Co. v. Seilig Mfg., 550 F. 2nd. 1801 (4th cir. 1977).         The two most important factors in applying a balancing test are the two factors dealing with the balancing of the harms. A plaintiff must demonstrate harm that is neither contrary nor speculative, but actual and imminent. (quoting Tucker Anthony Realty Corp. v. Schlesinger, 888 F. 2nd. 969, 975 ( 2nd. Cir. 1989) ).         Plaintiffs reali ze that Preliminary Injunction is a hard issue for the Court to decide upon. Plaintiffs also realize that they are faced by exalted harm if Capitator Coal Co. is issued lease rights by the U.S. Forest Service.         2. despotic and Capricious Standard When reviewing an agencys decision to stop if that decision was arbitrary and capricious, the scope of our review is narrow. Like the regulate Court, we look only to see if there is a make water error of judgement. Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council, 490 U.S. 360, 378, 109 S. Ct. 1851, 104 L. Ed. 2d 377 (1989).         An agencys rule would be arbitrary and capricious if the agency relied on factors that Congress has not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the indicate before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the produ ct of agency expertise. Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn v. ! State Farm Mut., 463 U.S. 29, 43, 103 S. Ct. 2856, 77 L. Ed. 2d 433 (1983). Plaintiffs argue that the U.S. Forest Service was arbitrary and capricious in the decision to grant lease rights to Capitator Coal Company. B. Application of Standard 1. Harm if Absence of Injunction         The harm plaintiffs would incur if preliminary injunction is not granted is actual and imminent.         The W. T. Mobil Home Community Homeowners Association consists of 13 planetal homes. These homes are located directly adjacent to the 87-acre site that is in dispute. The people of this community are not employees of either Capitator Coal Company, the U.S. Forest Service, or a major logging company. They are mostly employed at the local poultry facility. They feel that their children (33 in total contained within the community) are in danger. close to moved to this community because it was a quite place to elevate their family. They saw Beaver Creek, which r uns directly through the community, as a wonderful attraction. Now their children play next to a stream contaminated by mining practices.         Plaintiffs also see an imminent danger in the dam that threatens their community with the coming of the Spring rains. This large impoundment of water created by the deposit of overburden threatens to break with the added pressure of heavy Spring rains. Further mining practices would only add to the danger of this impoundment collapsing and rushing down the valley to destroy plaintiffs property. Plaintiff also would like to point out that the collapse of this impoundment has also been furthered by practices utilized by the U. S. Forest Service. The Forest Service has allowed heavy logging practices to take place above the impoundment and followed a let burn policy in contribute upon to a forest fire also directly above the impoundment. This has contributed to the stripping of over 50 acres of forestland. This strippi ng of the land has increased the amount of runoff com! ing into the impoundment, again only increasing the imminent danger imposed on the plaintiffs.         Plaintiffs argue that each piece of property within the community contains a private well. Nine of the 13 wells has been concluded to be contaminated by the hazardous chemicals located on the Capitator site. These chemicals consist of one hundred 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a dozen 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant. These materials have been allowed to contaminate the ground water supply used by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs dispute as to whether the Coal Company really intends to clean up the site to the qualifying that would create safe water for their usage.         Plaintiffs also dispute that the char company will restore the site to approximate original contour after mining operations has ceased. Congress be approximate original contour as, that surface configuration achieved by back filling and grading of the mined area so that the reclaimed area closely resembles the general surface configuration of the land prior to mining. Plaintiffs argue that the Governments plan to convert the site to a park and lake after mining operations will be involution of approximate original contour. 1. Harm if Injunction Issues Defendants will argue that if the preliminary injunction issued they would experience a large loss in income. Plaintiffs see the other side yes there will be a loss of income, but there will be a greater threat to plaintiffs health and safety if mining operations are permitted by the Forest Service, to occur at this site. Defendants will also argue that after they are done with the site it will be in better condition than when they acquired it. There is a dispute as to whether they really intend to reclaim the area to an appropriate level. Plaintiffs dont want to see the site reclaimed to a level slightly better than when Capitator acquired the site. Plaintiffs want to see the site restored to a level that was present before any mining operations t! ook place. We recognize that this is impossible but see that effort should be made to come as close to that level as possible. And after reviewing Capitators history of reclamation of sites Plaintiffs motion that reclamation would take place to an appropriate level.         Defendants would also claim that if the site was reclaimed under their operations it would save the Federal Government and the taxpayers the huge cost of site clean up and restoration. This saving of Federal funding would and has been promised to be used to create a park at the reclaimed site. Plaintiffs contend that monetary value should not be used to decide who should do the clean up. They feel that since their health and safety is in threat that the most qualified should be considered in the decision of who should clean up the site. Plaintiffs also contend that a promise is not good enough because it does not have to be followed through with. They dont see how the Federal Government bui lding a park on the site will care for their safety. They see the building of a park as a diversion used to cover the reality of how well the clean up was done. III. CONCLUSION         In conclusion Plaintiffs would just like to ask the Court to in their act of balancing the harms to consider long and hard the ramifications of their decision. Should monetary consideration weigh more than the health and safety of plaintiffs? Plaintiffs merely want the Court to see their side of the story and for the Court to put itself in plaintiffs shoes. why should plaintiffs suffer for actions of another? Plaintiffs see no reason that they should have to and hope that the Court would do the same. Plaintiffs only seek whiteness consideration from the Court in deciding whether the lease agreements in the midst of the U.S. Forest Service and Capitator Coal Company would be worth the trouble.                                              Th! e Effect of a Large Body of Water On Local Temperature. Background         Within this examine I will show the nub the Potomac River has on the air temperature near it.         To do this you must first understand the properties of water. One property stands out above all others when looking at temperature. This property world item combust. Specific combust refers to the amount of rage depicted object required to raise a volume of 1 gramme of water by 1 degree Celsius. This gives water a peculiar(prenominal) agitate of 1. Other substances like a sandlike clay soil have a specific light of 0.33 and granite with a specific arouse of 0.19. Waters capability to have a high specific heat direction that it can store more heat zip than any other substance. Because of the effect of specific heat, water heats slowly and cools slowly. A large body of water like the Potomac River can store a large amount of heat nix constitution u ndergoing only a small change in the temperature and so gradually release it to modify the temperature of an area. This phenomenon is why temperatures are ordinarily warmer during the night on the river than in the City of Martinsburg.         A large- outmatch example of the effect of waters specific heat on temperature is the coastal areas of the United States. Areas get on the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans normally have milder winters and cooler summertimes than inland regions due to specific heat. As discussed earlier land and water have unequal heating properties. On land or inland regions solar energy is absorbed as heat into only a thin lager of soil, this heat is thusly released quickly. Water, on the other hand allows solar energy to hue cryptical into many layers. It then gets circulated much deeper than on land and is held. In this way, a body of water can act like a large storage area for heat energy. This is support in the book Teach Yours elf Weather, when it said, Through drop and early w! inter the sea is in effect, a huge germ of heat, maintaining adjacent coastal areas much milder than regions well inland. In summer on the other hand, it provides cooling sea breezes oft guardianship average temperatures near coasts below those of inland regions. (P.189). This is why people flock to the Countrys coasts during the summer to nonpayment the heat of inland areas they live in. In the following experiment I intend to show that the same effect created by the primer coats oceans can be seen on a local basis on smaller bodies of water. try                                                                                                                     To conduct this experiment, I placed a stripped-down and autonomous thermometer at a spot along the Potomac River. This area of the Potomac River has an average depth of around twenty feet. The current is at a minimum and the largeness is an average of around three hundred feet. The thermometer was placed about thirty feet away from the water and out of direct flick to the wind.         To collect the temperature readings for the City of Martinsburg, I used a local elementary schools wear station. This school is touch by moderately open space. Its stomach station is set up so that its minimum and supreme thermometer is monitored and recorded passing(a) by a computer. The school is not located near a large body of water of any kind.          over approximately a three-week period, I collected minimum and maximum temperature readings at both sites daily. map 1 in the appendix shows the relationship of high and low temperatures at the site along the Potomac River. Chart 2 shows the relationship of high and low temperatures at the site in the City of Martinsburg. T he next misuse I took in this experiment was to comp! are the high temperatures of both sites. Chart 3 in the Appendix shows this relationship. As you can see, there was little difference in the high temperatures surrounded by the site on the Potomac River and the one in the City of Martinsburg. There was usually no more than an eight-degree temperature difference and on whatsoever twenty-four hourss, for grammatical case like on April 2, April 9 and April 16 there was only a one-degree difference. On the last twenty-four hour period, April 21, there was no temperature difference at all. I evaluate this chart to come to this conclusion. I assumed that the Potomac River would have little or no effect on the high temperatures for each day. The high temperatures are occurring during the day when the ground is existence hit with the most solar energy. This energy is heating the air touch the earths surface and at this time being absorbed by the large bodies of water on the earths surface.         The next c hart (Chart 4) in the Appendix shows a comparison between the low temperatures of the Potomac River and the City of Martinsburg sites. This chart shows the truthful effects of specific heat of water on air temperature, and proves that the large-scale phenomenon that occurs within the oceans also holds true to smaller bodies of water and local air temperatures. The low temperature readings that were interpreted at the Potomac River site were higher than the low temperature readings taken at the school in Martinsburg. This shows that the Potomac River held the heat of the solar energy it absorbed during the warm days, which in turn created milder temperatures at night. On some days such(prenominal) as April 7 and April 13 the differences in low temperatures were more than ten degrees.         This experiment has shown that a large body of water like the Potomac River can have an effect on a localized areas temperature. This is the same effect the oceans have on th e coastal regions only on a much larger scale. Proce! sses like this one work universally no matter the scale. These smaller scale processes are generally unmarked or thought of as being unimportant in inland regions. But their immenseness is a great one. These are the small-scale processes that effect us on a day to day basis along large inland bodies of water. They can have a discernible effect to those who live their lives around these inland bodies of water. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper