The petition for certiorari in Mingo Logan Coal Co. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency was filed Nov. 13.
"Granting EPA this unprecedented power will chill private investment in critical sectors of the economy, where some $220 billion each year is contingent upon section 404 permits," the petition argues.
The issue is of high importance to advocates working to prevent mountaintop removal mining.
Scientific studies show that the practice, which involves extensive deforestation in a region that contains a high degree of terrestrial biodiversity, also causes damage to aquatic ecosystems that is practically irreparable.
Human health impacts, including increased risk of cancer and heart, lung, and kidney disease, have been documented in areas where mountaintop removal mining occurs. A relatively higher frequency of birth defects in areas impacted by the practice has also been confirmed.
In 2007 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued Mingo a permit to fill waterways with overburden from its Spruce Mine No. 1 in Logan County, W. Va.
In 2011 EPA demanded changes to the permit that were extensive enough to amount to an outright rejection of it.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in an opinion written by Judge Karen L. Henderson - an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush - unanimously upheld EPA's action. The other two judges that signed on to the panel's opinion were Thomas B. Griffith and Brett Kavanagh, both appointed by George W. Bush.
The focus of the legal dispute is section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act. That provision of the CWA appears to give EPA authority to revoke a permit to fill a stream with mining debris (or any wetland with any other sort of fill material), even if the polluting activity has already commenced:
The Administrator is authorized to prohibit the specification (including the withdrawal of specification) of any defined area as a disposal site, and he is authorized to deny or restrict the use of any defined area for specification (including the withdrawal of specification) as a disposal site, whenever he determines, after notice and opportunity for public hearings, that the discharge of such materials into such area will have an unacceptable adverse effect on municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery areas (including spawning and breeding areas), wildlife, or recreational areas.Referring to this section of the CWA, upon which EPA relied in forcing changes to the Mingo permit, the D.C. Circuit wrote:
Section 404 imposes no temporal limit on the Administrator's authority to withdraw the Corps' specification but instead expressly empowers him to prohibit, restrict, or withdraw the specification 'whenever' he makes a determination that the statutory 'unacceptable adverse effect' will result. . . [T]he Congress made plain its intent to grant the the Administrator authority to prohibit/deny/restrict/withdraw a specification at any time.Mingo Logan Coal Co. is represented by former U.S. solicitor general Paul D. Clement in its effort to obtain Supreme Court review of the D.C. Circuit decision.
