northern plains resource council v fidelity exploration and development company

Fidelity Exploration and other CBM producers would directly discharge water produced in the extraction of CBM into local fifa 15 summer squad update streams and rivers.
Grace Company for knowingly exposing its vermiculite mine workers in Libby, Montana to the dangers of asbestos.
Next to agriculture, coal mining and natural gas drilling are the largest industrial users of water, but the Yellowstone River Compact does not explicitly address groundwater.Northern Plains Resource Council.The Yellowstone River Compact was negotiated among Montana, Wyoming and North Dakota in 1950 and later ratified by Congress in 1951.Fidelity Explorations, 325.3d 1155 (9th Cir.2003 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed water discharged in the production of coal bed methane (CBM).In 2010, the EPA voluntarily dropped its appeal in the case.For better or for worse, the Powder River Basin is now at the heart of Americas fossil fuel economy.
The following cases examine the role of state environmental regulations and constitutional provisions on water quantity and water quality controversies arising from the production of coal bed methane.
Water Quality and Quantity in the Planning Process.
Montana alleges that, while its first-tier users go without, Wyoming has allowed its users in the second and third tiers to receive water.2008 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the EPA had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in promulgating a rule under npdes which exempted oil and gas construction activities from certain CWA permitting requirements.There are, however, important exemptions for oil and gas operations from both of these laws. .Adam Moser, a lawyer and writer, is the China Environment Fellow at Vermont Law School.Central to this is the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, which requires a permit for point-source discharges into.S.The case was brought forward by ranchers who challenged the diversion of groundwater for the production of CBM.The court held that water extracted from the ground during the production of coal bed methane was subject to the restrictions of the CWA because the water negatively impacted the rivers and streams where it was discharged.If Montana cannot prove specific injury such as damage to crops or loss of livestock due to lack of water then Wyoming has not violated its obligations under the Yellowstone River Compact.Reply, download, reply submitted by TransCanada in support of supplemental motion to dismiss.Wyoming case and to make initial rulings, ruled that the Compact limits withdrawals from groundwater that is hydrologically connected to surface flows in the region.