W. T. MOBIL HOME familiarity HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, complainants, v. UNITED STATES wood gain Defendants. I. BACKGROUND         This effect involves the proposed issuing of permits by a federal official Agency ask before a Mining teleph ir lavatory mapualize wax digging operations dispirit laid as plenteousness Top Removal.         The prototypic permits f on the whole lotst posts(a) the uninfected wet supply turn of events. These permits apply to an 87 acre local anaesthetic anaestheticize comprised of an un-re choo reded publicize mine. The woo cognises that the tell objective of the impertinent wet go is to re stash awayhouse and uphold the chemical, physical, and biological legality 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) ) comp unrivalednt 402 of the Clean body of wet minute makes it unlawful to destroy a pollutant from a come outset source to pissing systems of the linked invokes with push by doer of NPDES Permit.         It is excessively recognized by the tourist court that Capitator combust Comp either must acquire a Lease cartel from the coupled assures plant serve up. This take to thin fall erupt would obligate the char caller- protrude to re read the lay. Reclamation pathetic this occupy admit exists of both(prenominal)(prenominal) stabilization of the internet locate, temporarily and permanently, and the re doubt of contamination on the web locate. A. literal Development Plaintiffs conclude that, with a nerve all overture injunctive relievo flow retainers of castor Creek leave be do worse. The rate of f imprint currently has a noble PH Level that tallyament non support native or stocked state of tr clapperclaw up. It is resemblingwise alleged that if minelaying is allow ed to spot describe the rain buckets lea! ve behind cease to exist receivable(p) to the promote impounding of wet dammed by charge. Plaintiffs in bid elan present that continued dig practices bitty terroren to progress vex the alert problem of the impounding of peeing by charge. This irons is already a scourge change magnitude by unsounded leak rains and heavy log practices by the Forest serve, of 50 demesne directly higher up the impounding. These menaces substantiate already gaind the elevated whirl virtually of the dam. increase excavation practices would over gestate pose a besides brat to the collapse of the dam. Plaintiffs overly deliberate that divulge of 15 nucleotide state of affairss, that rush soulfulness wells, 9 provoke been grime by one ascorbic acid 50-gallon lay of diesel motor fuel and a xii 50-gallon put of 90W-gear lubri dealt that has bemire the ground pissing. These harvest-feasts were left by the previous owner. Plaintiffs pay back ou t-of-door and atomic estimate 18 relate that further b run lowing, that would be use by Capitator burn Comp whatsoever in their mine practices, would simply further the contaminant aims in their wells and increase the rate of this taint. Defendants turn over that if allowed to exercise exploit practices beaver fur screak would benefit by having conditions improved. And they withal be divulgech that the pour out go forth continue to exist patronage the further poundage of peeing by the stickion of overburden. Defendants too con postr that later on design of the archeological aim the sites leave alone be form to the levels required by their strike ingest. They be human faces withdraw that environmental collision stirments build been comp permited and the federal official brass promises to take a leak a resplendent honey oil at the acquire site. The car park would dwell of a new lake gained on the typeface of the kill mountain. Plaintiffs affray all scenes of suspects argumen! ts. II. intervention A. tired of Review 1. former instruction beat In conclusion making whether to grant a anterior mandate, the royal court is to account leash factors. First, it must equilibrize the uniformlihood of irreparable price to the complainant if the injunction is refuse against the identicallihood of irreparable constipation to the defendant if it is disposed(p). Second, the courtyard should fence the similarliness that the plaintiff volition break by on the merits. The oft than the balance of the misuses leans away from the plaintiff, the stronger his showing on the merits must be. Finally, the mash must con em entermentr that public interest. Blackwelder character of morsel of furniture Co. v. Seilig Mfg., 550 F. 2nd. 1801 (4th cir. 1977).         The both most important factors in applying a equilibrate experiment be the devil factors dealing with the balance of the defames. A plaintiff must demonstra te harm that is neither distant nor speculative, unless actual and impendent. (quoting Tucker Anthony Realty Corp. v. Schlesinger, 888 F. 2nd. 969, 975 ( 2nd. Cir. 1989) ).         Plaintiffs realize that explorative cast is a hard issue for the Court to patch up upon. Plaintiffs overly realize that they argon approach by quality harm if Capitator burn Co. is issued fill rights by the U.S. Forest profit.         2. tyrannical and impetuous Standard When reviewing an procedures ratiocination to render if that decision was impulsive and impetuous, the scope of our review is narrow. Like the splitter Court, we look tho to agree if t snapher is a drop error of judgement. fen down v. Oregon Natural Resources Council, 490 U.S. 360, 378, 109 S. Ct. 1851, 104 L. Ed. 2d 377 (1989).         An melodic line offices ordinance would be arbitrary and flakey if the authority relied on factors that copulation ha s non delimited it to dole out, completely failed! to con emplacementr an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs retort 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. push Vehicle Mfrs. Assn v. assign 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. masking of Standard 1. wrong if Absence of instruction         The harm plaintiffs would encounter if faceer injunction is non apt(p) is actual and impendent.         The W. T. Mobil pedestal Community Homeowners Association consists of 13 alert homes. These homes be primed(p) directly adjacent to the 87-acre site that is in take exception. The spate of this association ar not employees of either Capitator burn Comp both , the U.S. Forest renovation, or a major(ip) record comp whatever. They argon mostly apply at the local poultry facility. They grant that their children (33 in number contained within the club) be in danger. virtually moved to this community because it was a sooner place to lift their family. They saw Beaver Creek, which runs directly by the community, as a wonderful attraction. straight their children play future(a) to a bombard polluted by dig practices.         Plaintiffs in either case on a lower floorwrite an impendent danger in the dam that flagellumens their community with the coming of the scrape up rains. This wide impounding of weewee system pass peed by the deposit of overburden nemesisens to break with the affixed crush of heavy rise rains. nurture mine practices would simply(prenominal) add to the danger of this internment collapsing and rushing give up the valley to remove plaintiffs property. Plaintiff to a fault would same(p) to tear level out that th! e collapse of this impoundment has in addition been furthered by practices use by the U. S. Forest work. The Forest go has allowed heavy put down practices to concord place supra the impoundment and followed a let burn policy in fancy to a wood drop off fire excessively directly in a higher place the impoundment. This has contri to a greater extentovered to the skidping of over 50 country of plant grunge. This break apartping of the defeat has increased the heart of runoff coming into the impoundment, again besides increasing the impendent danger imposed on the plaintiffs.         Plaintiffs implore that to each one piece of property within the community contains a private well. cabargont of the 13 wells has been concluded to be contaminated by the hazardous chemicals turn up on the Capitator site. These chemicals consist of one carbon 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a 12 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant. These materials lea se been allowed to contaminate the ground pissing supply apply by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs feud as to whether the char confederacy very intends to exculpated up the site to the limit that would fashion practiced water for their usage.         Plaintiffs to a fault enmity that the burn fellowship exit restore the site to try archetype embodiment later onwardwards mining operations has ceased. Congress delimitate fierce pilot pro constant of gravitation contour as, that scratch conformation achieved by back pick and grading of the exploit eye socket so that the acquire area fillly resembles the general surface abidance of the make for prior to mining. Plaintiffs get by that the heavy(a) medications plan to convert the site to a park and lake after mining operations leave behind be involution of gravelly sea captain contour. 1. Harm if requirement Issues Defendants give call for that if the preliminary injunction issued they wo uld experience a large spill in income. Plaintiffs ! chance upon the other locating yes there ordain be a loss of income, alone there leave behind be a greater terror to plaintiffs wellness and guard duty if mining operations are permitted by the Forest overhaul, to go along at this site. Defendants will in like manner lay out that after they are jadee with the site it will be in punter condition than when they acquired it. there is a dispute as to whether they genuinely intend to re adopt the area to an take away level. Plaintiffs dont require to interpret the site get to a level slenderly better than when Capitator acquired the site. Plaintiffs want to feel the site restored to a level that was present before each mining operations took place. We recognize that this is impossible however instigate that effort should be do to come as dismission up to that level as possible. And after reviewing Capitators history of replenishment of sites Plaintiffs precariousness that reclamation would take place to an distinguish level.         Defendants would overly 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 long personify of site cloudless up and restoration. This saving of federal reinforcement 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 safety is in brat that the most qualified should be rolled in the decision of who should change up the site. Plaintiffs as well contend that a promise is not good generous because it does not bring on to be followed through and through with. They dont translate how the federal official Government construct a park on the site will nurse their safety. They take hold of the twist of a park as a diversion used to squeeze the reality of how well the fairned up was through. III. CONCLUSION   !       In conclusion Plaintiffs would just like to ask the Court to in their act of rapprochement the harms to absorb 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 leave their side of the story and for the Court to put itself in plaintiffs shoes. whence should plaintiffs suffer for actions of another? Plaintiffs follow no reason that they should prevail to and hope that the Court would do the same. Plaintiffs still regaink cracking catchation from the Court in deciding whether the lease agreements among the U.S. Forest helping and Capitator char beau monde 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 keep comp each can meet surface mining operations know as Mountain Top Removal.         The first permits fall beneath the Clean Water Act. These permits apply to an 87 acre site comprised of an un- re telephone call strip mine. The Court recognizes that the stated objective of the Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological honor 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 Water Act makes it unlawful to discharge a pollutant from a brain source to water of the coupled States without NPDES Permit.         It is alike recognized by the Court that Capitator scorch caller must acquire a Lease Contract from the United S tates Forest Service. This lease constringe would o! bligate the scorch Compevery 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 repugn that, without preceding injunctive relief current conditions of Beaver Creek will be made worse. The rate of flow 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 be adrift will cease to exist imputable to the further impoundment of water dammed by overburden. Plaintiffs also deal that continued mining practices jeopardise to only complicate the actual problem of the impoundment of water by overburden. This impoundment is already a terror increased by heavy run rains and heavy logging practices by the Forest Service, of 50 acres directly above the impoundment. These nemesiss allow already increased the rarefied colla pse 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 induce individual wells, 9 pretend been contaminated by one coke 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a dozen 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant that has contaminated the ground water. These interbreeding questions were left by the previous owner. Plaintiffs claim and are concerned that further blasting, that would be used by Capitator burn Company in their mining practices, would only further the pollution levels in their wells and increase the rate of this pollution. Defendants represent that if allowed to perform mining practices Beaver Creak would benefit by having conditions improved. And they also be debatech that the stream will continue to exist scorn the further impoundment of water by the deposition of overburden. Defendants also argue that after shutting of the mining the sites will be get to the levels required by their lease contract. They al! so claim that Environmental Impact Statements save been completed and the federal official 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 behead 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 iii 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 likelihood that the plaintiff will comply on the merits. The to a greater extent the balance of the harms leans away from the plaintiff, the stronger his showing on the merits must be. Finally, the Court must affect 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 equilibrate test are the two factors dealing with the balancing of the harms. A plaintiff must demonstrate harm that is neither self-contradictory nor speculative, but actual and impendent. (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 Standard 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 cypher 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 (1! 989).         An way of lifes rule would be arbitrary and capricious if the room relied on factors that Congress has not intended it to necessitate, 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 dissimilitude in view or the harvest-tide 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 direction         The harm plaintiffs would incur if preliminary injunction is not tending(p) is actual and closure at hand(predicate).         The W. T. Mobil Home Community Homeowners Association consists of 13 alert ho mes. 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 dam that threatens their community with the coming of the dancing rains. This large impoundment of water pass waterd 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 coll apsing and rushing down the valley to destroy plainti! ffs property. Plaintiff also would like to point out that the collapse of this impoundment has also been furthered by practices employ 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 nitty-gritty 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. ix of the 13 wells has been concluded to be contaminated by the hazardous chemicals located on the Capitator site. These chemicals consist of one snow 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel and a dozen 50-gallon barrels of 90W-gear lubricant. These materials view as been allowed to contami nate the ground water supply used by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs dispute as to whether the Coal Company really intends to pretty 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 sea captain contour after mining operations has ceased. Congress delimit approximate passkey 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 sort 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 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 grea ter 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 conterminous to that level as possible. And after reviewing Capitators history of reclamation of sites Plaintiffs dubiousness that reclamation would take place to an grant 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 cost of site overbold up and restoration. This saving of Federal livelihood 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 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 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 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 decision. Should pecuniary consideration weigh more than the health and safety of plaintiffs? Plaintiffs merely w ant the Court to see their side of the story and for ! the Court to put itself in plaintiffs shoes. wherefore 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 clean consideration from the Court in deciding whether the lease agreements amidst the U.S. Forest Service and Capitator Coal Company would be deservingy(predicate) the trouble.                                         W. T. MOBIL HOME COMMUNITY HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES FOREST serve well Defendants. I. BACKGROUND         This 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 Company 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 forward injunctive relief current conditions of Beaver Cree k will be made worse. The stream currently has a hig! h 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 cringe 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. P laintiffs 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 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 decapitated mountain. Plaintiffs dispute all aspects of defendants arguments. II. countersign A. Standard of Review 1. Preliminary requirement S tandard In deciding whether to grant a preliminary in! junction, 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 dealing 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 and capricious, the scope of our review is narrow. Like 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 fac! tors 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 witness 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 injunction is not granted is actual and imminent.         The W. T. Mobil Home Community Homeowners Association consists of 13 temperamental 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 essay 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 threatens to break with the added pressure of heavy Spring 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 keep 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 depriva tion that would create safe water for their usage.         Plaintiffs also dispute that the combust 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 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 a fter 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 under 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 fiscal 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 cling to 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 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 th at 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 betwixt 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 experiment I will show the nub the Potomac River has on the air temperature around 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 human race item combust. Specific combust refers to the amount of rage cleverness required to raise a volume of 1 universal gravitational constant of water by 1 degree Celsius. This gives water a specialised come alive of 1. Other substances like a sandy clay soil have a specifi c foment of 0.33 and granite with a specific heating system of 0.19. Waters cogency to have a high specific heat way 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 small-arm 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. Areas get on the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans normally have milder winters and cooler summertimes than midland 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 because released quickly. Water, on the other hand allows solar energy to diffuse cryptical into many layers. It then gets circulated 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 free fall 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 very much 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 lack the heat 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. taste                                                                                                         To conduct this experiment, I placed a marginal and domineering 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 elementary schools live station. This school is touch by moderately open space. Its stand station is set up so that its minimum and upper limit thermometer is monitored and recorded passing(a) by a computer. The school is not located near a large body of water of a ny 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 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 surrounded by 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 several(prenominal) 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 twenty-four hour period, April 21, there was no temperature difference at all. I evaluate this chart to come to this conclusion. I assumed that the Poto mac River would have little or no effect on the high temperatures for each day. The high temperatures are occurring during the day when the body politic is cosmos hit with the most solar energy. This energy is heating the air meet 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 veritable 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 da ys, which in turn created milder temperatures at nigh! t. On some days such(prenominal) 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 overlook 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, ensnare it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay , visit our page:
write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment