| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"Foaming at the Mouth Psychotic" |
| Date: |
25 Nov 2005 08:36:29 AM |
| Object: |
Administration Ignores Scientific Evidence and Pushes Forward with Mountaintop Removal, despite environmental impact |
This is why we need a civil war.
Administration Ignores Scientific Evidence and Pushes Forward with
Mountaintop Removal
A long-anticipated Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the
mountaintop mining waste disposal process ignores scientific evidence
in order to validate the waste disposal method preferred by industry
and the administration.
Mountaintop mining uses explosives to expose coal seams for mining,
resulting in waste dumped in nearby valleys, often burying streams and
disrupting local ecosystems.
Federal Protections Undermined
The potential harm to waterways from mountaintop mining triggers the
federal government's duties under environmental law. Under the Clean
Water Act, the Army Corps of Engineers and EPA are required to prevent
serious degradation of waterways. Under current regulation, the act is
interpreted as keeping mine waste from being dumped within 100 feet of
streams. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) also requires
agencies to assess the environmental impact of projects that may have
significant environmental effects.
Despite these provisions, the Army Corps of Engineers has issued
nationwide general permits for mountaintop waste disposal that do not
require prior scrutiny of the environmental impact. Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act allows the government to bypass the requirement of
detailed, individualized permits for pollution discharges when the
discharge in question is "dredged or fill material." In such cases the
Clean Water Act permits agencies to issue general permits good on a
state, regional, or even nationwide basis. "Fill material" generally
refers to material deposited for a beneficial primary purpose, such as
development or construction, but a 2002 rule change expanded the
definition to include mine waste. In the wake of that rule change,
federal agencies are now streamlining the permit process, thus paving
the way for more mountaintop mining.
Citizens and environmental groups have been forced to take federal
agencies to court in a series of cases aimed at requiring these
agencies to comply with CWA and NEPA and protect streams from
mountaintop waste. In July 2004, the courts handed environmental groups
a victory by determining that 11 mining waste disposal permits required
environmental impact statements. The case is currently under appeal,
and a final decision could determine if the Army Corps of Engineers may
use the streamlined permits for mountaintop mining waste disposal or if
the corps must use individual permits that consider environmental
impacts prior to mining.
Federal agencies have also failed to enforce the 100-foot buffer zone
provision. And in another gift to the mining industry, a 2004 proposed
rule would revise the mining standards to allow the Office of Surface
Mining to waive the buffer zone requirement for streams as it sees fit.
Companies could receive permits to conduct surface mining activities
near streams provided that they, "to the extent possible," "prevent
additional contributions of suspended solids," and "minimize
disturbances and adverse impacts."
Agencies Ignore Their Own Findings
Released Oct. 29, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which was
required of the agencies in a settlement agreement with citizens
groups, validates both the administration's approach of using the
general permit as well as the relaxation of the buffer zone
requirements, despite scientific evidence of irreversible damage to
streams and the wildlife dependent on them.
The EIS includes more than 30 scientific and technological studies,
many of which point to serious environmental harm if the current course
is not reversed. One such study found that 2,200 square miles of land
will be damaged by 2010 without stronger environmental controls. Rather
than developing alternatives that would mitigate the impacts of
mountaintop mining, the agencies instead claimed that while the studies
used "were useful in identifying data gaps and needs for further
study," they could not be used to determine "a bright-line threshold of
minimal impacts." Further, the agencies deemed that conducting more
studies would be too costly, effectively burying the chance for more
stringent regulations under exhaustive analytical requirements.
Citizen action groups have met with limited success at the state level,
but without an overarching federal policy, their efforts leave only
patchworks of protection for mountains, valleys and streams in Ohio,
West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia.
Timeline
December 23, 1998: Settlement with West Virginia citizens group
requires the federal government to halt the routine issuance of
nationwide mining waste permits until Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) on the mountaintop mining process could be completed. Instead,
the Army Corps of Engineers would be required to issue a greater number
of individual permits with greater scrutiny of the environmental
impact. Bragg v. Robertson (S.D. W.Va.)
February 5, 1999: The Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the Office of Surface Mining, and the Fish and
Wildlife Service issue a notice of intent in the Federal Register to do
an EIS. 64 Fed. Reg. 5,778
October 25, 1999: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West
Virginia rules that state and federal agencies overseeing mountaintop
mining permits violated the Clean Water Act by failing to enforce a
100-foot buffer zone meant to keep mine waste from disturbing streams.
April 24, 2001: A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Fourth Circuit reverses the lower court's decision, claiming that
the suit was barred under the sovereign immunity clause of the Eleventh
Amendment. Bragg v. Robertson, 248 F.3d 275 (4th. Cir. 2001)
May 8, 2002: District Court rules that mining waste cannot be fill
material and any rule issued that says otherwise is illegal.
Kentuckians for the Commonwealth v. Corps of Engineers, 204 F.R.D. 301
(S.D. W. Va. 2002). See Court Rejects Move to Dump from Mountaintop
Mining (5/13/2002)
May 9, 2002: New rule relaxes mountaintop mining dumping requirements
under the auspices of harmonizing the definition of "fill material."
New rule opens the door for greater dumping of rock waste and dirt as
well as trash in streams and also grants the Army Corps of Engineers
greater discretion in deciding when dumping can be permitted. 67 Fed.
Reg. 31,129 See Administration Clears Way for Dumping, Mountaintop
Mining (4/29/2002)
January 29, 2003: Fourth Circuit Court rejects the lower court decision
restricting mountaintop mining and invalidating the fill material rule,
paving the way for further mountaintop removal. Kentuckians for the
Commonwealth v. Rivenburgh, 317 F.3d 425 (4th Cir. 2003) See Court
Ruling Overturned: Mining Companies Free to Bury Streams Once Again
(2/10/2003)
February 12, 2003: House bill introduced to reinstate original
definition of "fill material." See Clean Water Protection Act of 2003.
January 7, 2004: Proposed rule would gut prohibition on dumping mine
waste within 100 feet of streams and ease the way for new mountaintop
mining. 69 FR 1,035 See Administration Moves to Allow Dumping of Mining
Waste into Streams (1/12/2004)
July 8, 2004: Court rules that 11 general nationwide permits for
mountaintop mining waste disposal violate the Clean Water Act because
they take into consideration the environmental impact only after the
fact. The case is now under appeal. Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition
v. Bulen, No. 3:03-2281 (S.D. W. Va. filed July 8, 2004), available at
http://www.wvsd.uscourts.gov/district/opinions/pdf/BULEN_FINAL.pdf.
October 28, 2005: Agencies issue a final Environmental Impact Analysis,
as required under the 1999 settlement agreement with the West Virginian
citizen's group (Bragg v. Robertson, 72 F. Supp. 2d 642 (S.D. W. Va.
1999)). The EIA does propose alternatives to the streamlined general
grant. None of the alternatives, however, seeks to limit damage to
mountaintops, and all ignore incontrovertible scientific evidence of
long-term environmental damage of mine waste dumping.
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
