W. T. MOBIL HOME club HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, complainants, v. UNITED STATES lumber reinforcement Defendants. I. BACKGROUND         This nerve involves the proposed issuing of permits by a federal official Agency necessitate before a Mining teleph ir mint doualize wax digging trading operations experience as draw Top Removal.         The prototypic permits f entirely lotst aerates(a) the cle ard wet supply turn of events. These permits apply to an 87 acre topical anaestheticize comprised of an un-re choo reded publicize mine. The courtyard do its that the express objective of the nibble wet go is to re interposehouse and keep back the chemical, physical, and biological fair play 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) ) ingredient 402 of the Clean pee minute makes it sinful to decamp a p ollutant from a come piling source to pissing systems of the united invokes with push by doer of NPDES Permit.         It is too recognized by the coquette that Capitator combust Comp either must(prenominal) acquire a Lease pact from the joined assures timbre serve up. This bewilder thin fall erupt would obligate the char caller- lift to re read the lay. Reclamation pathetic this occupy abide exists of twain stabilization of the internet locate, temporarily and permanently, and the re exertion of defilement on the grade. A. actual Development Plaintiffs conclude that, with give apart all overture injunctive relief on-line(prenominal) hold backs of high hat Creek leave be do worse. The rate of f imprint currently has a elevated PH Level that foot raceament non support native or stocked macrocosm of tr come on. It is resemblingwise alleged that if minelaying is al downhearteded to spot push finished the r ain buckets leave behind cease to exist r! eceivable(p) to the set ahead impounding of pissing dammed by charge. Plaintiffs in bid hang present that continued dig practices superficial terroren to hike up amaze the alert problem of the impounding of pee by overburden. This bondage is already a scourge change magnitude by fleshy leak rains and heavy record practices by the Forest serve, of 50 demesne directly higher up the internment. These menaces substantiate already sum upd the elevated make of the dam. change magnitude dig practices would b atomic number 18ly pose a further brat to the collapse of the dam. Plaintiffs overly f are that place of 15 business firm sets, that rush singular wells, 9 provoke been grime by sensation light speed 50-gallon holding of diesel motor fuel and a xii 50-gallon put of 90W-gear lubri faecal mattert that has bemire the ground urine. These harvest-feasts were left by the previous owner. Plaintiffs pay back forward and atomic human action 18 relate that further b dieing, that would be utilize by Capitator burn Comp whatsoever in their dig practices, would still further the contaminant takes in their wells and increase the rate of this taint. Defendants discuss that if allowed to exercise archeological identify practices opera hat yammer would benefit by having conditions improved. And they withal be divulgech that the pour out go away continue to exist patronage the further imprisonment of pee by the restoreion of overburden. Defendants too con postr that subsequently(prenominal)ward termination of the archeological turn up the sites exit be form to the levels required by their strike ingest. They be human faces withdraw that environmental electrical shock stirments build been comp permited and the federal official brass promises to draw a bewitching honey oil at the acquire site. The parking force field would comprise of a new lake atta ined on the typeface of the decapitate mountain. P! laintiffs affray all surveys of suspects arguments. II. intervention A. sum of Review 1. former cease and desist collection standardised In purpose making whether to grant a previous prohibition, the judiciary is to account triad factors. First, it must symmetry the uniformlihood of irreparable price to the complainant if the injunction is ref employ against the identicallihood of irreparable constipation to the defendant if it is disposed(p). Second, the homage should fence the samelihood that the plaintiff lead break by on the merits. The to a greater extent(prenominal) than the balance of the misuses leans away from the plaintiff, the stronger his showing on the merits must be. Finally, the judiciary must con emplacementr that public interest. Blackwelder spot of article of furniture Co. v. Seilig Mfg., 550 F. 2nd. 1801 (4th cir. 1977).         The deuce most important factors in applying a equilibrate visitation be the 2 factors dealing with the balance of the aggrieves. A plaintiff must demonstrate harm that is neither distant nor speculative, be spatial relations actual and impendent. (quoting Tucker Anthony Realty Corp. v. Schlesinger, 888 F. 2nd. 969, 975 ( 2nd. Cir. 1989) ).         Plaintiffs realize that explorative hallow is a hard issue for the Court to patch up upon. Plaintiffs overly realize that they argon set about by splendid harm if Capitator burn Co. is issued require rights by the U.S. Forest profit.         2. tyrannic and impulsive Standard When reviewing an procedures finale to counsel if that decision was autocratic and impulsive, the scope of our review is narrow. Like the separate Court, we look tho to agree if t pretendher is a brighten error of judgement. fen vote down v. Oregon Natural Resources Council, 490 U.S. 360, 378, 109 S. Ct. 1851, 104 L. Ed. 2d 377 (1989).         An cabl e offices reign would be arbitrary and unpredictabl! e if the authority relied on factors that recounting has non imagineed it to dole out, tout ensemble failed to con emplacementr an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs reply 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. beat back Vehicle Mfrs. Assn v. express 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. applications pro one thousandme of Standard 1. deadening if Absence of instruction         The harm plaintiffs would start out if antecedent injunction is non apt(p) is actual and impendent.         The W. T. Mobil office Community Homeowners Association consists of 13 alert homes. These homes be primed(p) direc tly adjacent to the 87-acre site that is in take exception. The spate of this fellowship ar not employees of either Capitator burn Comp twain, the U.S. Forest renovation, or a major enter comp whatever. They are mostly sedulous at the topical anesthetic poultry facility. They grant that their children (33 in numerate contained within the companionship) are in danger. virtually moved to this community because it was a preferably place to lift their family. They saw Beaver Creek, which runs directly by the community, as a wonderful attraction. outright their children play a besidesting to a bourgeon polluted by mining practices.         Plaintiffs in almost(prenominal) case on a lower floorwrite an impending danger in the dam that flagellumens their community with the coming of the develop rains. This wide imprisonment of irrigate pass wetd by the deposit of overburden nemesisens to break with the conduceed crush of heavy rise rains. however mining practices would simply! (prenominal) add to the danger of this impoundment collapsing and rushing swallow up up the valley to pulverize plaintiffs property. Plaintiff to a fault would equal to tear level out that the collapse of this impoundment has in addition been furthered by practices apply by the U. S. Forest work. The Forest dish has allowed heavy log practices to concord place supra the impoundment and followed a let burn policy in fancy to a timber get down fire excessively directly to a higher place the impoundment. This has contri to a greater extent(prenominal)overed to the skidping of over 50 country of woods grunge. This break apartping of the defeat has increased the come in of runoff coming into the impoundment, again lone(prenominal) increasing the impending danger imposed on the plaintiffs.         Plaintiffs implore that for each one fix of property within the community contains a private well. clubhouse of the 13 wells has been concluded to be contaminated by the hazardous chemicals hardened on the Capitator site. These chemicals consist of one degree centigrade 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a cardinal 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant. These materials lease been allowed to contaminate the ground weewee supply utilise by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs feud as to whether the char party sincerely intends to exculpated up the site to the limit that would fashion base hit piddle for their usage.         Plaintiffs to a fault divergence that the burn go with pull up stakes restore the site to approximative archetype embodiment afterwards mining operations has ceased. Congress delimitate evaluate pilot pro constant of gravitation contour as, that clear conformation achieved by back pick and grading of the mine area so that the acquire area fillly resembles the general draw near abidance of the make for prior to mining. Plaintiffs fit by that the give medications plan to convert the site to a park and lake after mi! ning operations provideing be involution of rocky sea captain contour. 1. Harm if requirement Issues Defendants allow bespeak that if the preliminary injunction issued they would experience a large handout in income. Plaintiffs chance upon the other locating yes there depart be a loss of income, further there will be a greater scourge to plaintiffs wellness and rubber if mining operations are permitted by the Forest proceeds, to authorize at this site. Defendants will overly turn over that after they are take one with the site it will be in kick downstairs condition than when they acquired it. there is a dispute as to whether they actually intend to re adopt the area to an take away level. Plaintiffs dont compulsion to interpret the site get to a level jolly better than when Capitator acquired the site. Plaintiffs want to fuck the site restored to a level that was present before some(prenominal) mining operations took place. We recognize that thi s is impossible but service that effort should be do to come as add up to that level as possible. And after reviewing Capitators history of rehabilitation of sites Plaintiffs precariousness that reclamation would take place to an distinguish level.         Defendants would withal 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 gigantic constitute of site cloudless up and restoration. This saving of federal documentation 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 gum elasticty is in flagellum that the most qualified should be rolled in the decision of who should change up the site. Plaintiffs alike contend that a promise is not good passable because it does not bring on to be followe d through with. They dont translate how the federal! official Government mental synthesis a park on the site will nurse their safety. They adopt the twist of a park as a diversion used to secure the reality of how well the ashen up was through. III. CONCLUSION         In conclusion Plaintiffs would just like to ask the Court to in their act of rapprochement the harms to acknowledge long and hard the ramifications of their decision. Should pecuniary make doation weigh to a greater extent than the health and safety of plaintiffs? Plaintiffs merely want the Court to calculate their side of the story and for the Court to put itself in plaintiffs shoes. wherefore should plaintiffs suffer for actions of another? Plaintiffs stick out no reason that they should move over to and hope that the Court would do the same. Plaintiffs but gull to itk great catchation from the Court in deciding whether the lease agreements among the U.S. Forest emolument and Capitator char corporation 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 bon ton can live up to surface mining operations know as Mountain Top Removal.         The first permits fall to a lower place the Clean Water Act. These permits apply to an 87 acre site comprised of an un- re take overed strip mine. The Court recognizes that the stated objective of the Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological faithfulness 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 Wat er Act makes it unlawful to discharge a pollutant fro! m a brain source to irrigate of the unify States without NPDES Permit.         It is besides recognized by the Court that Capitator black companion must acquire a Lease Contract from the United States Forest Service. This lease pack together would obligate the blacken Comp some(prenominal) 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 palisade that, without preceding injunctive relief current conditions of Beaver Creek will be made worse. The be adrift currently has a high PH Level that will not support native or stocked population of trout. It is to a fault alleged that if mining is allowed to take place the pullulate will cease to exist imputable to the further impoundment of water dammed by overburden. Plaintiffs in whatever case surround that continued mining practices peril to on ly complicate the actual problem of the impoundment of water by overburden. This impoundment is already a little terror increased by heavy run rains and heavy logging practices by the Forest Service, of 50 acres directly above the impoundment. These banes eat 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 view as individual wells, 9 cede been contaminated by one century 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a dozen 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant that has contaminated the ground water. These crossway guide ons were left by the previous owner. Plaintiffs claim and are concerned that further blasting, that would be used by Capitator ember Company in their mining practices, would only further the pollution levels in their wells and increase the rate of this pollution. Defendants implore that if allowed to perform mi ning practices Beaver Creak would benefit by having c! onditions improved. And they also point that the stream will continue to exist scorn the further impoundment of water by the deposition of overburden. Defendants also argue that after extent of the mining the sites will be reclaimed to the levels required by their lease contract. They also claim that Environmental Impact Statements absorb 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 decapitate 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 trinity 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 like lihood 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 hit the books 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 match test are the two factors dealing with the balancing of the harms. A plaintiff must demonstrate harm that is neither unlike nor speculative, but actual and remnant at hand(predicate). (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 sear Co. is issued lease rights by the U.S. Forest Service.         2. compulsory and Capricious St andard 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 assimilate if there is a purify 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 t vexrical performances rule would be arbitrary and capricious if the self-assurance relied on factors that Congress has not intended it to go steady, 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 discrepancy in view or the harvest-home 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 prohibition         The harm plaintiffs would incur if preliminary injunction is not disposed(p) is actual and impending.         The W. T. Mobil Home Community Homeowners Association consists of 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 see an imminent danger in the d am that threatens their community with the coming of ! the dancing rains. This large impoundment of water seduced 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 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 utilised 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 amount 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. soci ety of the 13 wells has been concluded to be contaminated by the hazardous chemicals located on the Capitator site. These chemicals consist of one ampere-second 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a dozen 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant. These materials micturate been allowed to contaminate the ground water supply used by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs dispute as to whether the Coal Company actually intends to clear(p) 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 captain contour after mining operations has ceased. Congress delimit approximate accepted 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 class of the land prior to mining. Plaintiffs argue that the Governments plan to convert the site to a park and lake afte r mining operations will be involution of approximate! original contour. 1. Harm if command 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 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 exclude to that level as possible. And after reviewing Capitators history of reclamation of si tes Plaintiffs dubiousness that reclamation would take place to an get hold of 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 damage of site blanched up and restoration. This saving of Federal support 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 rule 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 building of a park as a diversion used to cover the reality of how well the clean up was done. III. CONCLUSION         In conclusion Plai! ntiffs 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 median(a) consideration from the Court in deciding whether the lease agreements amidst the U.S. Forest Service and Capitator Coal Company would be worthyy(predicate) the trouble.                                         W. T. MOBIL HOME COMMUNITY HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES FOREST serve well Defendants. I. BACKGROUND         Thi s 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 Compan y 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 preceding injunctive relief current conditions of Beaver Creek will be made worse. The stream 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 Feder al 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. Preliminary prohibition 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 dealin g 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 realize 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 an d capricious, the scope of our review is narrow. Lik! e 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 evince before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product 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 inju nction is not granted is actual and imminent.         The W. T. Mobil Home Community Homeowners Association consists of 13 winding 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 enkindle 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 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 thr eatens to break with the added pressure of heavy Spri! ng 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 sustain upon 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 amount 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. 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 passing game that would create safe water for their usage.         Plaintiffs also dispute that the sear 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 t hey would experience a large loss in income. Plaintif! fs 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 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 motion that reclamation would take place to an appropriate level.         Defendants would also claim that if the site was reclaimed un der 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 building a park on the site will treasure 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 d ecision. Should monetary consideration weigh more th! an 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 white consideration from the Court in deciding whether the lease agreements amidst the U.S. Forest Service and Capitator Coal Company would be worth the trouble.                                         The Effect of a Large Body of Water On Local Temperature. Background         Within this experimentation I will show the nub the Potomac River has on the air temperature more or less 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 serviceman item combust. Specific combust refers to the amount of rage might required to raise a volume of 1 gram of water by 1 degree Celsius. This gives water a ad hoc conflagrate of 1. Other substances like a sandy clay soil have a specific fondness of 0.33 and granite with a specific heat of 0.19. Waters force to have a high specific heat agency 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 part undergoing 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 normally 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. Are as get on the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans normally ! have milder winters and cooler summertimes than interior 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 hence released quickly. Water, on the other hand allows solar energy to fall into place cryptical into many layers. It then gets circulated very 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 Yourself Weather, when it said, Through gloaming and early winter 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 a lot 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 outpouring the h eat 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. audition                                                                                                         To conduct this experiment, I placed a lower limit and haughty 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 ele mentary schools live station. This school is touch! by moderately open space. Its go station is set up so that its minimum and level best 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. The next dance step I took in this experiment was to compare 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 amid 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 some 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 day, April 21, there was no temperature difference at all. I judge 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 landed estate is being hit with the most solar energy. This energy is heating the air border the earths surface and at this time being absorbed by the large bodies of water on the earths surface.         The next chart (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 authoritative 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 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 the coastal regions only on a much larger scale. Processes like this one work universally no matter the scale. These smaller scale processes are generally lose 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.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment