August, 27 2009, 01:36pm EDT

Earthjustice Seeks Supreme Court Review in Mountaintop Removal Mining Case
Clean Water Act violated in issuance of permits for mining
WASHINGTON
Earthjustice and the Appalachian Center for the Economy & the Environment have filed a petition
with the U.S. Supreme Court that asks the Court to review a recent
decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in a
controversial mountaintop removal mining case. The case challenges the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' issuance of permits allowing companies to
dump waste from mountaintop removal mining into streams without
following basic requirements of the Clean Water Act designed to prevent
irreversible harm to the nation's waters.
"This case is of great national importance," said Earthjustice
attorney Steve Roady. "The Corps of Engineers is ripping the heart out
of the Clean Water Act by granting permits that allow coal companies to
permanently entomb vital streams in the rubble of exploded mountains.
The destruction caused by mountaintop removal mining is enormous and
the adverse impacts on local communities are profound. We're asking the
Supreme Court to hold the Corps accountable."
Earthjustice and the Appalachian Center for the Economy & the
Environment filed this lawsuit challenging several West Virginia
mountaintop removal permits in September 2005 on behalf of the Ohio
Valley Environmental Coalition, West Virginia Highlands Conservancy and
Coal River Mountain Watch. The lawsuit challenged the Corps' violation
of the Clean Water Act by authorizing the permits to fill 23 valleys
and 13 miles of mountain streams in southern West Virginia without
first performing even the most basic, legally required assessment of
the harm that would occur when the streams are buried forever.
"The Supreme Court must intervene in a case that strives to provide
essential protections for Appalachian mountain streams under the Clean
Water Act," said Joe Lovett, executive director of the Appalachian
Center for the Economy & the Environment. "The Corps has not
adequately controlled mountaintop mining removal activity and has
allowed for the wholesale destruction of our vital waterways."
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
in March 2007 found those permits violated the Clean Water Act. In
February, a panel of federal judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Fourth Circuit ruled 2 to 1 in favor of the Corps in the case, with
a strong dissent from one judge on the panel. Earthjustice then
requested rehearing by the full court of appeals, but in late May, by a
close vote of 4 to 3, with 4 additional judges abstaining from the
vote, the court denied that petition.
However, two judges filed dissenting opinions, each of which Judge Diana Gribbon Motz joined.
In his dissent, Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote that he voted for
the full court of appeals to hear the case because of "the potentially
irreversible effects that the permitted operations will have on the
Appalachian ecosystem." He concluded: "The requirements of the Clean
Water Act are important. . . . Once the ecologies of streams and rivers
and bays and oceans turn, they cannot easily be reclaimed. More often
than not, the waterway is simply gone for good."
In his dissent from the denial of rehearing, Judge M. Blane Michael,
who also had dissented from the panel's decision, explained that: "The
ecological impact of filling headwater streams with mining overburden
is both profound and irreversible . . . . No permit should issue until
the Corps fulfills each distinct obligation under the controlling
regulations. And this court should not defer to the Corps until the
agency has done its job."
"We're constantly hearing about the decreasing amounts of clean
water within our nation as well as 'water wars' between states," said
Janet Keating executive director of the Ohio Valley Environmental
Coalition. "Yet the coal industry is recklessly burying and polluting
our headwater streams under millions of tons of mining waste in central
Appalachia. We hope that the Court realizes how vital, urgent and
necessary their input is on this matter."
"Scientific studies show time and time again that mountaintop
removal does horrible damage to our nation's water supplies," said
Vernon Haltom, co-director of Coal River Mountain Watch. "It's now time
for the nation's high court to uphold the laws intended to protect our
communities from polluting industries that care only for their profit
margin."
"In allowing high mountain headwater streams to be filled with waste
rock, the Corps has allowed total disruption of the hydrology of
hundreds of square miles of ancient mountains and the natural and human
lives those ground and surface waters have supported for centuries,"
said Cindy Rank, chair of the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy
Mining Committee. "The future well-being of the region depends on
stricter adherence to the nation's environmental laws."
Mountaintop removal mining is a method of strip mining in which coal
companies use explosives to blast as much as 800 to 1000 feet off the
tops of mountains to reach coal seams underneath. The result is
millions of tons of waste rock, dirt, and vegetation dumped into
surrounding valleys, burying miles and miles of streams under piles of
rubble hundreds of feet deep. Mountaintop removal mining harms not only
aquatic ecosystems and water quality, but also destroys hundreds of
acres of healthy forests and fish and wildlife habitat, including
habitat of threatened and endangered species, when the tops of
mountains are blasted away. As of 2002, the Appalachian region had
already lost 1,200 miles of mountain streams to this destructive
process-and the Environmental Protection Agency has predicted that this
could rise as high as 2,400 miles by the year 2013 if current practices
continue.
This practice also devastates Appalachian communities -- in West
Virginia, Kentucky, southern Virginia and eastern Tennessee -- and
cultures that have existed in these mountains for hundreds of years.
Residents of the surrounding communities are threatened by rock slides,
catastrophic floods, poisoned water supplies, constant blasting and
destroyed property.
Additional Resources:
The EPA's Environmental Impact Statement on mountaintop removal mining can be found here: https://www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/eis2005.htm
Pending permits can be searched here: https://www.appalachian-center.org/foia/
A map of permits in West Virginia can be found here: https://www.earthjustice.org/library/maps/westva-mining-permits.pdf
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
'Pro-White Collar Crime': Trump Pardons Former Executive Indicted by His Own DOJ
"This president serves the ultra-wealthy—not working people," said one watchdog group.
Dec 04, 2025
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday granted a full, unconditional pardon to former entertainment venue executive Tim Leiweke, who was indicted just months ago by Trump's own Justice Department for "orchestrating a conspiracy to rig the bidding process for an arena at a public university."
Leiweke, who expressed "profound gratitude" for the pardon, stepped down as CEO of Oak View Group in July, on the same day that the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division announced the indictment.
The longtime sports executive was accused of conspiring with the CEO of a competitor to rig bidding for the development of the $375 million, 15,000-seat Moody Center at the University of Texas at Austin. Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater said the scheme "deprived a public university and taxpayers of the benefits of competitive bidding."
Leiweke pleaded not guilty to the charge, which carried a maximum prison sentence of 10 years.
Bloomberg observed that the pardon comes "just before Leiweke is scheduled to be deposed by lawyers for the Justice Department and Live Nation Entertainment Inc. on Thursday in the DOJ’s separate civil antitrust case against the company and its subsidiary Ticketmaster."
"Leiweke earlier unsuccessfully tried to avoid the deposition, citing liability from then pending criminal charges, according to court records," Bloomberg added.
Federal investigators have accused Oak View Group, Leiweke's former company, of quietly receiving kickbacks for promoting Ticketmaster services at Oak View Group venues.
The pardon was announced on the same day that Trump granted clemency to US Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), who faced bribery and money laundering charges. Days earlier, the president commuted the prison sentence of a former private equity executive convicted of defrauding more than 10,000 investors.
"Private equity CEO David Gentile was sentenced to seven years for defrauding investors of 1.6 BILLION," the watchdog group Public Citizen wrote Wednesday. "But Trump commuted his sentence. This isn't the first time Trump has helped the corporate class evade accountability. This president serves the ultra-wealthy—not working people."
Antitrust advocate Matt Stoller accused Trump of advancing a "straightforward pro-white collar crime agenda" by using his pardon power to rescue fraudsters from prison time.
"Trump's pro-white collar crime agenda seems pretty open at this point," Stoller wrote in response to the Cuellar pardon.
As the New York Times reported earlier this year, Trump has employed "the vast power of his office to redefine criminality to suit his needs—using pardons to inoculate criminals he happens to like, downplaying corruption and fraud as crimes, and seeking to stigmatize political opponents by labeling them criminals."
"An offshoot of this strategy is relegating white-collar offenses to a rank of secondary importance behind violent and property crimes," the Times noted. "He has even tried to create a new red-alert category—what he calls 'immigrant crime,' even though studies have shown that immigrants are not more likely to commit violent offenses than people born in the country."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Regulators Ripped for 'Rushed' Approval of Bill Gates' Nuclear Reactor in Wyoming
"Make no mistake, this type of reactor has major safety flaws compared to conventional nuclear reactors that comprise the operating fleet," said one expert.
Dec 03, 2025
A leading nuclear safety expert sounded the alarm Tuesday over the Trump administration's expedited safety review of an experimental nuclear reactor in Wyoming designed by a company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates and derided as a "Cowboy Chernobyl."
On Monday, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) announced that it has "completed its final safety evaluation" for Power Station Unit 1 of TerraPower's Natrium reactor in Kemmerer, Wyoming, adding that it found "no safety aspects that would preclude issuing the construction permit."
Co-founded by Microsoft's Gates, TerraPower received a 50-50 cost-share grant for up to $2 billion from the US Department of Energy’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program. The 345-megawatt sodium-cooled small modular reactor (SMR) relies upon so-called passive safety features that experts argue could potentially make nuclear accidents worse.
However, federal regulators "are loosening safety and security requirements for SMRs in ways which could cancel out any safety benefits from passive features," according to Union of Concerned Scientists nuclear power safety director Edwin Lyman.
"The only way they could pull this off is by sweeping difficult safety issues under the rug."
The reactor’s construction permit application—which was submitted in March 2024—was originally scheduled for August 2026 completion but was expedited amid political pressure from the Trump administration and Congress in order to comply with an 18-month timeline established in President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14300.
“The NRC’s rush to complete the Kemmerer plant’s safety evaluation to meet the recklessly abbreviated schedule dictated by President Trump represents a complete abandonment of its obligation to protect public health, safety, and the environment from catastrophic nuclear power plant accidents or terrorist attacks," Lyman said in a statement Tuesday.
Lyman continued:
The only way the staff could finish its review on such a short timeline is by sweeping serious unresolved safety issues under the rug or deferring consideration of them until TerraPower applies for an operating license, at which point it may be too late to correct any problems. Make no mistake, this type of reactor has major safety flaws compared to conventional nuclear reactors that comprise the operating fleet. Its liquid sodium coolant can catch fire, and the reactor has inherent instabilities that could lead to a rapid and uncontrolled increase in power, causing damage to the reactor’s hot and highly radioactive nuclear fuel.
Of particular concern, NRC staff has assented to a design that lacks a physical containment structure to reduce the release of radioactive materials into the environment if a core melt occurs. TerraPower argues that the reactor has a so-called "functional" containment that eliminates the need for a real containment structure. But the NRC staff plainly states that it "did not come to a final determination of the adequacy and acceptability of functional containment performance due to the preliminary nature of the design and analysis."
"Even if the NRC determines later that the functional containment is inadequate, it would be utterly impractical to retrofit the design and build a physical containment after construction has begun," Lyman added. "The potential for rapid power excursions and the lack of a real containment make the Kemmerer plant a true ‘Cowboy Chernobyl.’”
The proposed reactor still faces additional hurdles before construction can begin, including a final environmental impact assessment. However, given the Trump administration's dramatic regulatory rollback, approval and construction are highly likely.
Former NRC officials have voiced alarm over the Trump administration's tightened control over the agency, which include compelling it to send proposed reactor safety rules to the White House for review and possible editing.
Allison Macfarlane, who was nominated to head the NRC during the Obama administration, said earlier this year that Trump's approach marks “the end of independence of the agency.”
“If you aren’t independent of political and industry influence, then you are at risk of an accident,” she warned.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Report Shows How Recycling Is Largely a 'Toxic Lie' Pushed by Plastics Industry
"These corporations and their partners continue to sell the public a comforting lie to hide the hard truth: that we simply have to stop producing so much plastic," said one campaigner.
Dec 03, 2025
A report published Wednesday by Greenpeace exposes the plastics industry as "merchants of myth" still peddling the false promise of recycling as a solution to the global pollution crisis, even as the vast bulk of commonly produced plastics remain unrecyclable.
"After decades of meager investments accompanied by misleading claims and a very well-funded industry public relations campaign aimed at persuading people that recycling can make plastic use sustainable, plastic recycling remains a failed enterprise that is economically and technically unviable and environmentally unjustifiable," the report begins.
"The latest US government data indicates that just 5% of US plastic waste is recycled annually, down from a high of 9.5% in 2014," the publication continues. "Meanwhile, the amount of single-use plastics produced every year continues to grow, driving the generation of ever greater amounts of plastic waste and pollution."
Among the report's findings:
- Only a fifth of the 8.8 million tons of the most commonly produced types of plastics—found in items like bottles, jugs, food containers, and caps—are actually recyclable;
- Major brands like Coca-Cola, Unilever, and Nestlé have been quietly retracting sustainability commitments while continuing to rely on single-use plastic packaging; and
- The US plastic industry is undermining meaningful plastic regulation by making false claims about the recyclability of their products to avoid bans and reduce public backlash.
"Recycling is a toxic lie pushed by the plastics industry that is now being propped up by a pro-plastic narrative emanating from the White House," Greenpeace USA oceans campaign director John Hocevar said in a statement. "These corporations and their partners continue to sell the public a comforting lie to hide the hard truth: that we simply have to stop producing so much plastic."
"Instead of investing in real solutions, they’ve poured billions into public relations campaigns that keep us hooked on single-use plastic while our communities, oceans, and bodies pay the price," he added.
Greenpeace is among the many climate and environmental groups supporting a global plastics treaty, an accord that remains elusive after six rounds of talks due to opposition from the United States, Saudi Arabia, and other nations that produce the petroleum products from which almost all plastics are made.
Honed from decades of funding and promoting dubious research aimed at casting doubts about the climate crisis caused by its products, the petrochemical industry has sent a small army of lobbyists to influence global treaty negotiations.
In addition to environmental and climate harms, plastics—whose chemicals often leach into the food and water people eat and drink—are linked to a wide range of health risks, including infertility, developmental issues, metabolic disorders, and certain cancers.
Plastics also break down into tiny particles found almost everywhere on Earth—including in human bodies—called microplastics, which cause ailments such as inflammation, immune dysfunction, and possibly cardiovascular disease and gut biome imbalance.
A study published earlier this year in the British medical journal The Lancet estimated that plastics are responsible for more than $1.5 trillion in health-related economic losses worldwide annually—impacts that disproportionately affect low-income and at-risk populations.
As Jo Banner, executive director of the Descendants Project—a Louisiana advocacy group dedicated to fighting environmental racism in frontline communities—said in response to the new Greenpeace report, "It’s the same story everywhere: poor, Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities turned into sacrifice zones so oil companies and big brands can keep making money."
"They call it development—but it’s exploitation, plain and simple," Banner added. "There’s nothing acceptable about poisoning our air, water, and food to sell more throwaway plastic. Our communities are not sacrifice zones, and we are not disposable people.”
Writing for Time this week, Judith Enck, a former regional administrator at the US Environmental Protection Agency and current president of the environmental justice group Beyond Plastics, said that "throwing your plastic bottles in the recycling bin may make you feel good about yourself, or ease your guilt about your climate impact. But recycling plastic will not address the plastic pollution crisis—and it is time we stop pretending as such."
"So what can we do?" Enck continued. "First, companies need to stop producing so much plastic and shift to reusable and refillable systems. If reducing packaging or using reusable packaging is not possible, companies should at least shift to paper, cardboard, glass, or metal."
"Companies are not going to do this on their own, which is why policymakers—the officials we elected to protect us—need to require them to do so," she added.
Although lawmakers in the 119th US Congress have introduced a handful of bills aimed at tackling plastic pollution, such proposals are all but sure to fail given Republican control of both the House of Representatives and Senate and the Trump administration's pro-petroleum policies.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


