No change: Obama DOJ backs pro-coal court ruling
Folks who are hoping that President Barack Obama’s election was going to completely reverse government policies backing mountaintop removal coal mining got more evidence to the contrary today.
The Obama Justice Department filed a brief with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals opposing further consideration of a lower court ruling that would have more closely regulated mountaintop removal.
“This case does not merit further review,” said the brief filed by DOJ attorneys on behalf of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
As I’ve written here before, citizen groups want the full 4th Circuit to reconsider a three-judge panel’s decision that overturned the decision by U.S. District Judge Robert C. Chambers to require the Corps to conduct more detailed environmental reviews before it approves new valley fills. The 4th Circuit took the unusual step of requiring the government to respond to the hearing motion filed by environmental groups, something that may offer a slight hope for citizens that the full court would reconsider the case.
We don’t know yet if the full 4th Circuit will rehear the case. But we do know that the DOJ brief offered precious little to indicate what the Obama administration is going to do to curb mountaintop removal. About all it said in that regard was this:
…The Corps and EPA are also reviewing how these kinds of section 404 permits will be analyzed in the future. Because the [4th circuit panel] opinion defers to an agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous regulation, nothing in the opinion will constrain the Corps and EPA in deciding how to analyze permits in the future, which could include additional environmental safeguards.
12 comments
A little off-topic, but regular readers of this blog will be very interested by the amazing interactive NPR site on “the grid” at:
http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2009/apr/electric-grid/.
There’s also a related series that’s been going on the air this week, and transcripts can be found at the NPR site as well.
Question: Why does this map show no power being generated from wind off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts or the Great Lakes by 2030 if the map shows that the wind resources in those areas are far superior to midwestern resources?
Answer: Because the “wind power transmission” lines in the middle of the US will carry much more western coal based power than wind power for many years to come.
Much of the information on these maps comes from a study done by AEP for the Dept. of Energy. American Electric Power ain’t about offshore wind power, even if the best wind resources in the US are right next to the country’s population centers.
Reminds me of the Washington Post article not too long ago. In America you get what you pay for…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/03/06/ST2009030600119.html
All this does is confirm what we already knew, WV is to be used for extractive industries first, politicians second and the tax paying citizens last. When the citizens come up with a plan that goes against the grain of the hierarchy it is dismissed as too emotional.
Not only is this action by the Department of Justice (DOJ)disappointing on its own……. But it also calls into question just what Monday’s announcement by Interior Secretary Salazar about pulling the 11th hour Bush Stream Buffer Zone really meant.
We’ve asked for the full (en banc) 4th Circuit Court of Appeals to review the three member panel decision issued February 13th in the Chambers case. Knowing that the fills associated with the four permits at issue in that case all violate the 1983 Stream Buffer Zone Rule , the rule Secretary Salazar wants to re-enact, and with so much uncertainty and so much in flux about both the Surface Mine Act buffer zone rule and the Clean Water Act fill rule, the DOJ could (and in my opinion should) have just stepped aside and not opposed our request for review.
Cindy, isn’t there a more optimistic way of looking at it? I mean, isn’t it possible that the Obama administration plans to moot the issue with administrative rulemakings and doesn’t want to broach the issue before it is politically ready?
Well looks like the country cannot run without coal. nice map thomas.
[…] No Change: Obama DOJ Backs Pro-Coal Court Ruling (Coal Tattoo) […]
[…] via Blogs @ The Charleston Gazette - » No change: Obama DOJ backs pro-coal court ruling. […]
[…] department of justice recently refused further consideration of a lower court ruling that would result in more closely regulated mountaintop removal, […]
[…] Blogs @ The Charleston Gazette - » No change: Obama DOJ backs pro … […]
I think this country`s coal is an answer to oil, I don`t know if wind mills can handle the load, their are some groups that can make alot of money from windmill land leasing and selling this small amount of energy, by the way my house is ontop of a coal mine.
Leave a Comment