July, 31 2012, 04:52pm EDT

Appalachian Communities Win Case Against Unlawful Mountaintop Removal Mining Permit While Federal District Court Issues Decision Finding EPA Must Act Through Regulation, not Guidance
Appalachian communities win challenge to state permit, but still seeking federal protection from devastating mines and pollution
WASHINGTON
Today rulings were issued in both West Virginia and the U.S. District Court demonstrating the need for Environmental Protection Agency standards that are based on the overwhelming scientific consensus that pollution from surface coal mining and coal waste disposal threatens Appalachian streams.
Today the West Virginia Environmental Quality Board (WV EQB) ruled that the state's Clean Water Act permit for a mountaintop removal mine, Patriot Mining Company's New Hill West mine, is unlawful because it does not limit harmful pollution that degrades water quality. Also today the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in the coal industry case challenging a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance document meant to ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act and protect Appalachian communities from extreme mountaintop removal mining pollution. This court found that, to protect Appalachian streams from the harm caused by mining pollution, EPA should have issued a formal regulation instead of a guidance document. On these grounds, the court vacated the EPA's conductivity guidance.
The West Virginia Environmental Quality Board decision demonstrates that the science is clear and stricter permits are necessary for protecting Appalachian waterways from coal mining pollution, including very high levels of conductivity and total dissolved solids that harm aquatic life. The EPA relied on these same studies to support its final guidance, and although the federal court ruled against the guidance, nothing in its decision questioned the scientific consensus behind the guidance. The federal court ruling also does not affect the West Virginia Environmental Quality Board decision.
In July 2011, the EPA issued this final guidance following its own two extensive peer-reviewed scientific reports, as well as multiple independent peer-reviewed scientific reports, that all found that mountaintop removal mines create lasting, irreparable harm to streams and water quality. In light of these scientific reports, EPA issued the guidance to assist its staff in meeting longstanding and well established requirements of the Clean Water Act. This final guidance also came after the EPA's consideration of 60,000 public comments.
Sierra Club and Appalachian Mountain Advocates won the case in front of the West Virginia Environmental Quality Board.
In the federal case, the Sierra Club, Coal River Mountain Watch (WV), Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition (WV), West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, Kentuckians For The Commonwealth, Southern Appalachian Mountain Stewards (VA), and Statewide Organizing for Community eMpowerment (TN) -- represented by Earthjustice and the Appalachian Mountain Advocates -- opposed this coal mining industry lawsuit as intervenors in support of EPA's effort to follow the Clean Water Act, consider the latest science, and protect America's waters from destruction.
The following are their statements:
Said Ed Hopkins, Sierra Club's Environmental Quality Program Director:
"We are heartened to see the West Virginia Environmental Quality Board affirm basic protections of the Clean Water Act, and overturn the unlawful mountaintop removal mining permit today. In addition to continuing to follow the Clean Water Act consistent with federal court rulings, we urge the EPA to adopt the water quality benchmarks in the guidance addressed by today's court decision as federal rules to ensure full protection for all local communities from the dangerous industry of mountaintop removal coal mining," "Together, the state environmental quality board and EPA must ensure that all Appalachian communities finally receive the protection from mountaintop removal mining that we deserve."
Said Dianne Bady, co-director of the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, based in West Virginia:
"We're saddened that this federal court ruling will prevent the EPA from using this scientific guidance to protect Appalachia's waters from mountaintop removal mining operations that have been linked to increased harm to human health. But with or without this one particular guidance document, the EPA still has a duty to protect our waters and our people directly under the Clean Water Act, and it is a relief to see our state environmental quality board affirm the science and follow the Clean Water Act. In keeping with today's decisions, we urge the EPA to continue advancing strong, science-based policies to safeguard our lives."
Said Vernon Haltom, executive director of Coal River Mountain Watch in West Virginia:
"Our people's health and the survival of our communities depend on strong enforcement of the laws and regulations intended to protect us from pollution. Since the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection chooses instead to enable unfettered pollution from mountaintop removal, we must rely on the U.S. EPA. It is a victory to see the state environmental quality board affirm fundamental requirements of the Clean Water Act. Because the science is clear on what we need to do to protect our waters, we hope that today's court decision does not weaken EPA's resolve to protect us from mountaintop removal, which is increasingly linked to deadly human health problems."
Said Emma Cheuse, Earthjustice attorney:
"EPA and state regulators still have a legal duty to uphold the Clean Water Act, and today's court decision recognizes EPA's authority to set rules to protect our waterways. It is essential for both EPA and state agencies charged with protecting communities to follow the science, and they must doing everything possible under the law to prevent the irreversible destruction of mountaintop removal mining, before more mountains and streams are destroyed forever."
Said Rick Handshoe of the Kentuckians For The Commonwealth:
"The federal court decision is a setback for the people of Appalachia. This conductivity guidance - based on scientific evidence - gives us the first sign that something may be wrong with our water. Whatever may happen in the courts, assuming today's decision is appealed, the science EPA has highlighted will continue to be a great tool for people in Appalachia. It's been a great tool for me. I've tested a creek where the water was crystal clear but the conductivity meter ran over 4000 micro Siemens. That told me something was wrong, and after further testing was done we saw how bad it was - some of the pollutant levels were 100 times the water standard. We need to do something federally to protect Appalachians from mountaintop removal mining. And we will continue to look to the Kentucky governor to use this science to protect the water and health of people all over the Commonwealth."
Said Cindy Rank, mining board chair of the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy:
"For years mining companies have fought science and even minimal clean water protections under the 40-year-old Clean Water Act using every legal trick in the book. In some cases, such as today's federal court decision, they have won. This continues to put us living in Appalachia in the unconscionable position of having to document our own communities' sickness, disease and other unexplained health impacts as reasons to finally stop the devastating practice of mountaintop removal coal mining. As we do this, it's critical that West Virginia keep doing as it did today and use strong science to deny permits."
Said Cathie Bird, chair of the E3 Committee of Statewide Organizing for Community eMpowerment:
"EPA's conductivity guidance supports a broader science-based strategy to keep mountain ecosystems resilient and healthy. While the court's decision is disappointing, we hope the EPA and the states will continue to use the full force of their authority under the Clean Water Act to strengthen the protection of water, upon which human communities and other species depend."
FURTHER INFORMATION:
Final Guidance: Improving EPA Review of Appalachian Surface Coal Mining Operations Under the Clean Water Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and the Environmental Justice Executive Order: https://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/upload/Final_Appalachian...
Information on the EPA's Clean Water Act oversight of Appalachian surface mining activities: https://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/mining.cfm
Information on Appalachian groups' intervention to support EPA in lawsuit filed by the coal mining industry: https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2010/appalachian-and-national-organiz...
Final EPA Scientific Reports on Water Quality and Mountaintop Removal Mining Pollution Impacts:
* Field-based Aquatic Life Benchmark (2011): https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_Report.cfm?dirEntryId=233809
* Effects of Mountaintop Mines/Valley Fills (2011): https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_Report.cfm?dirEntryId=225743
Final EPA Report: Review of Clean Water Act SS 402 Permitting for Surface Coal Mines by Appalachian States (2010): https://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/guidance/pdf/Final_Appalachian_Mining_P...
Contact:
Liz Judge, Earthjustice, (202) 797-5237 or (970) 710-9002 (cell)
Oliver Bernstein, Sierra Club, (512) 289-8618
Dan Radmacher, Appalachian Mountain Advocates, (540) 798-6683
Cindy Rank, West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, (304) 924-5802
Vernon Haltom, Coal River Mountain Watch, (304) 854-2182
Vivian Stockman, Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, (304) 360-1979
Rick Handshoe, Kentuckians For The Commonwealth, (606) 358-4912
Jane Branham, Southern Appalachian Mountain Stewards, (276) 679-7505
Casey Self, Statewide Organizing for Community eMpowerment, (865) 249-7488
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
New Face of GOP Healthcare Fix Is Senator Linked to Largest Medicare Fraud Scheme in US History
Sen. Rick Scott is warning fellow Republicans of a "slow creep" toward single-payer healthcare if they don't craft an alternative to the Affordable Care Act.
Dec 03, 2025
US Sen. Rick Scott, former CEO of the company that was at the center of the biggest Medicare fraud scheme in American history, has emerged as the most vocal Republican proponent of healthcare reform, warning his fellow GOP lawmakers that continued refusal to engage with the issue risks a "slow creep" toward single-payer healthcare.
On Thursday, according to Axios, Scott (R-Fla.) is "convening a group of House and Senate conservatives on Capitol Hill to pore over fresh polling to develop GOP alternatives to the Affordable Care Act."
Late last month, Scott unveiled his own proposal titled the More Affordable Care Act, which would keep ACA exchanges intact while creating "Trump Health Freedom Accounts" that enrollees could use to pay for out-of-pocket costs. Scott's plan, as the health policy group KFF explained, would allow enhanced ACA tax credits to expire and let states replace subsidies in the original ACA with contributions to the newly created health savings accounts.
"Unlike ACA premium tax credits, which can only be used for ACA Marketplace plans, the accounts in the Scott proposal could be used for any type of health insurance plan, including short-term plans that can exclude people based on preexisting conditions," KFF noted. "States could also waive certain provisions of the ACA, including the requirement to cover certain benefits."
"While ACA plans would still be required to cover people with preexisting conditions under the Scott proposal," the group added, "it is likely that the ACA marketplace would collapse in states that seek a waiver under his approach."
Last month, amid the longest government shutdown in US history, Scott leapt at the opportunity to champion possible Republican alternatives to the healthcare status quo, despite his ignominious record.
In 2003, the US Justice Department announced that the hospital chain HCA Inc.—formerly known as Columbia/HCA—had agreed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties and damages to settle what the DOJ characterized as the "largest healthcare fraud case in US history."
Scott resigned as CEO of Columbia/HCA in 1997, days after federal agents raided company facilities as part of the sweeping fraud probe. The federal government and company whistleblowers said the hospital giant "systematically defrauded" Medicare, Medicaid, and other healthcare programs through unlawful billing and other ploys.
"In 2000, Scott invoked the Fifth Amendment 75 times in a deposition as part of a civil case involving his time leading the company," Florida Phoenix reported last year. A former HCA accountant accused Scott, who was never directly charged in the case, of leading "a criminal enterprise."
Scott later served two terms as governor of Florida and is now one of the wealthiest members of Congress, and he maintains he was the victim of a politically motivated DOJ investigation.
"The Clinton Justice Department went after me," Scott complained during his 2024 Senate reelection campaign.
It's unclear whether Scott's healthcare ideas will gain sufficient traction with President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers, who have seemed content to bash the existing system without proposing anything concrete or viable to replace it. Trump was supposed to unveil his own healthcare proposal last month, but the White House pulled the plug amid GOP pushback.
Some members of the Democratic caucus, meanwhile, are making the case for the very system Scott is warning his colleagues about.
"Let’s finally create a system that puts your health over corporate profits," Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said earlier this week. "We need Medicare for All."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Political Stunt Wrapped in Badges’: New Orleans Readies Resistance as Trump Operation Begins
“Our city is not a stage for political theater," said the Democratic congressman representing New Orleans. "Our people are not props."
Dec 03, 2025
The Trump administration on Wednesday launched a major operation against what it said are "criminal illegal aliens" in New Orleans but that critics contend is political theater targeting what the Louisiana city's mayor-elect called people “just trying to survive and do the right thing."
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said in a statement that it launched Operation Catahoula Crunch—which some Trump administration officials are also calling "Swamp Sweep"—because New Orleans is a sanctuary city that refuses to cooperate with the anti-immigrant crackdown ordered by President Donald Trump.
The blitz—which began on the same day as a similar operation in Minneapolis and follows federal invasions of cities including Charlotte; Chicago; Los Angeles; Memphis; Portland, Oregon; and Washington, DC—is expected to involve at least hundreds of federal agents and National Guard troops and reportedly aims for 5,000 arrests in Louisiana and Mississippi.
"Sanctuary policies endanger American communities by releasing illegal criminal aliens and forcing DHS law enforcement to risk their lives to remove criminal illegal aliens that should have never been put back on the streets," Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said Wednesday.
While McClaughlin claimed the targets of the operation will be "monsters" that "include violent criminals who were released after arrest for home invasion, armed robbery, grand theft auto, and rape," examination of detention statistics of similar operations in other communities has shown that a large percentage of those swept up have no criminal record.
Academic studies and analyses by both left- and right-wing groups and have repeatedly affirmed that undocumented immigrants commit crime at a dramatically lower rate than native-born US citizens. The libertarian Cato Institute last week published data showing that nearly three-quarters of the 44,882 people booked into Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody since October had no criminal conviction and just 5% had been convicted of violent crimes.
Detention data published last month by the Department of Justice revealed that just 16 out of 614 people arrested in the Chicago area during DHS's Operation Midway Blitz had criminal histories that present a “high public safety risk.”
Elected officials representing New Orleans called the DHS operation an unnecessary and unwelcome stunt.
“It’s one thing if you would have a real strategic approach on going after people... who have criminal felonies or are being accused of some very serious and violent crimes. But that’s not what the public is seeing,” Democratic New Orleans Mayor-elect Helena Morena told the Washington Post on Wednesday.
“They’re seeing people who are just trying to survive and do the right thing—and many of them now have American children who are not causing problems in our community—treated like they are violent, violent criminals," she added.
Moreno's website published a "know your rights" resource page with tips from the National Immigrant Justice Center—a move that could possibly run afoul of a state law cited by Republican Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill to threaten felony prosecution of people who nonviolently resist Trump's crackdown. On Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit arguing that the law is a violation of the right to free speech.
Congressman Troy Carter (D-La.) said in a statement Tuesday that “if the administration truly wants to support public safety in New Orleans, they can help us recruit and retain well-trained local officers, invest in modern policing tools, and build transparent partnerships with city and parish leaders."
New Orleans welcomes partnership. We do not welcome occupation.What we are seeing unfold in our community is not public safety; it is a political stunt wrapped in badges, armored vehicles, and military uniforms.
[image or embed]
— Congressman Troy A. Carter, Sr. (@reptroycarter.bsky.social) December 3, 2025 at 6:35 AM
"Dropping armed federal agents and National Guard troops into our communities without coordination is not cooperation—it is chaos," Carter continued. “As Congressman for New Orleans, I want to be clear: We will always stand for the rule of law. We will always stand for safe communities. And we will always stand against tactics that terrorize families and undermine public trust."
“Our city is not a stage for political theater," he added. "Our people are not props. If the administration wants to be a partner, then act like one; share the plan, respect local law, and work with us, not around us.”
Hundreds of New Orleans residents took to the streets Monday night despite cold, heavy rain to protest the impending DHS operation. Demonstrators shared umbrellas and held signs showing support for immigrants. They chanted messages, including "No ICE! No fear! Immigrants are welcome here!" and "Chinga la Migra"—roughly translated as "Fuck the Border Patrol."
“We have to fight for the rights of everyone. I’m out here to support the immigrant community because it’s an integral part of New Orleans. New Orleans was built by immigrants," protester Jamie Segura told Gambit.
Addressing the crowd at Monday's rally, resident Mitch Gonzalez said: “This is my home. My trans sister was kidnapped and taken from me. Now she has to fight from Mexico, not even her home country, because they’re snatching people.”
Last night, hundreds marched through the streets of New Orleans, in the pouring rain, chanting “No ICE.”
If people are willing to storm the streets after dark in a downpour, it tells you everything about how fed up this country is with state-sanctioned cruelty. pic.twitter.com/kF5KjpU2SX
— Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) December 2, 2025
As New Orleans residents anticipated the impending operation, mutual aid groups kicked into action in defense of immigrant communities, citing effective rapid response efforts in Chicago.
“What we’ve learned is that even a street witness who is not recording makes these interactions less traumatic and less violent,” Beth Davis, press liaison officer at Indivisible NOLA, told the Washington Post on Wednesday. “So we need to get eyes on these people.”
The New Orleans branch of Democratic Socialists of America—which is hosting training sessions—said ahead of the federal blitz: "We call upon all of New Orleans to get organized and resist this fascist occupation. Protect your neighbors and make these troops and federal agents feel unwelcome in every part of our city."
Other Orleanians prepared by closing or displaying signs telling the federal invaders that they are not welcome.
“We’re going to make sure that any hotel that they stay at, any neighborhood that they try to terrorize, we’re going to bring as many people there to stop them in their tracks, whether it’s in New Orleans, Los Angeles, Chicago—anywhere in this country,” Antonia Mar of Freedom Road Socialist Organization told Verite News during Monday's protest.
Suggesting that the crackdown could backfire, Mar added that "if there’s one thing Trump does well, he gets people organized against him."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Threatens Blue State SNAP Funds Unless They Turn Over Recipient Data
"Why is the Trump administration so hellbent on people going hungry?” asked New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, whose state has nearly 3 million food stamp recipients.
Dec 03, 2025
The Trump administration is threatening to strip away funds used to provide food assistance to poor Americans in Democrat-led states beginning next week, unless they provide information identifying who receives benefits.
At a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, US Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins said states would be denied the ability to access billions of dollars that Congress has appropriated to administer the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), unless they provide the federal government with personal information—including names, Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, and immigration status—of aid recipients.
SNAP provides Americans with incomes below 130% of the federal poverty line with roughly $6 per day on average to pay for food. Roughly 1 in 8 Americans—over 42 million—rely on the program. Rollins originally ordered states to provide this information to the government in May in what she said was an effort to verify the eligibility of those receiving benefits.
“As of next week, we have begun and will begin to stop moving federal funds into those states until they comply and they tell us and allow us to partner with them to root out this fraud and to protect the American taxpayer,” Rollins said Tuesday.
As of Tuesday, 29 states had provided the information, but many Democratic ones, including New York and California, had not. Rollins claimed that those states were choosing to "protect illegals, criminals, and bad actors over the American taxpayer.”
While the benefits paid to individuals would not be cut, states that don't comply stand to lose millions of dollars that they use to administer the program, which could delay benefits and force them to push some recipients off the program.
In its efforts to enact sweeping cuts to social safety net programs like SNAP, Medicaid, and Affordable Care Act insurance subsidies, the Trump administration has often fallen back on false claims that the services are being abused by ineligible people, including undocumented immigrants.
"Undocumented immigrants are not eligible to receive federal benefits under [SNAP]," explained Melissa Cruz of the American Immigration Council in November. "However, SNAP benefits are provided to households rather than individuals. If, for example, the head of a household is undocumented, they may still apply for SNAP benefits for their U.S. citizen children. But benefits are calculated based on the number of eligible people in the household, so the assistance would only cover the US citizen children—not the entire household.”
Rollins has elsewhere claimed that 186,000 deceased individuals receive benefits, while 500,000 individuals receive duplicate benefits, citing it as evidence of fraud. But as the current US Department of Agriculture website explains, these are the result of administrative efforts—such as states being slow to update eligibility rolls when recipients die or move to a new state. The USDA says that over the past 15 years, it has reduced the prevalence of illegal benefit trafficking in SNAP from 4% to 1%.
The USDA's order comes on the heels of the largest cut to SNAP in the program's history. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed by Trump in July, cut funding to the program by roughly 20%.
Like with other programs, Rollins suggested on Tuesday that the goal of USDA's order was not simply to root out "fraud," but to further slash Americans' benefits: “As [former President] Joe Biden was working to buy an election a year ago, he increased food stamp program funding by 40%, so now... we continue to roll that back,” she said.
Rollins' 40% claim is also an exaggeration; according to an estimate by the Cato Institute last month, the spending increase was actually about 21%.
Like President Donald Trump's previous efforts to deny SNAP benefits to states during this fall's government shutdown, the USDA's order has run into legal hurdles.
After 22 states sued, a federal judge in San Francisco, Maxine Chesney, issued a preliminary injunction in October blocking the administration from demanding the data.
Chesney found that these actions likely violated the SNAP Act, which says that states are only allowed to release data related to administering the program. She also found that states would likely succeed in their argument that the administration might illegally share the data with other agencies, like the Department of Homeland Security, to aid mass deportation efforts.
Gina Plata-Nino, the SNAP director at the nonprofit Food Research and Action Center, told the Washington Post that the USDA's demands for this data were likely illegal.
“The federal law restricts USDA access to this,” Plata-Nino said. “The agency has always relied on anonymized data or small samples to perform oversight… Them saying, ‘We’re going to go ahead and remove this funding,’ it’s just so unprecedented.”
The Democrats on the House Agriculture Committee accused Trump and Rollins of "illegally threatening to withhold federal dollars."
"SNAP has one of the lowest fraud rates of any government program, but Trump continues to weaponize hunger," they said.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D), whose state had nearly 3 million food stamp recipients as of 2024, asked why Trump was again threatening to strip the state of SNAP funding after his previous attack on the program during the shutdown.
"Genuine question: Why is the Trump administration so hellbent on people going hungry?” Hochul asked.
Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst who focuses on SNAP and other antipoverty programs at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, noted that while cutting funds, Trump has also scrapped the nation's most comprehensive food insecurity survey, the Household Food Security Report, which would measure the effects of those cuts on Americans.
“The Trump administration’s approach,” Bergh said, “has been enacting the deepest cuts to food assistance in history, needlessly disrupting SNAP benefits during the government shutdown, and terminating the most reliable measure of food insecurity to hide the consequences of those decisions.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


