From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council
Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation
Council
Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council from the Kensington mine, an underground mine located
in Alaska. The gold mine had not operated since 1928, and
Coeur Alaska obtained a permit in 2005 from the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to dispose of up
to 4.5 million tons of tailings in Lower Slate Lake, which
is located in a National Forest. The suit was brought by
environmental groups citing the Clean Water Act, who
wanted the dumping blocked and required a determina-
Supreme Court of the United States
tion of which rules applied and which agencies had juris-
Argued January 12, 2009 diction.
Decided June 22, 2009
Full case Coeur Alaska, Inc., Petitioner v. Southeast Alaska Background
name Conservation Council, et al.
In 2005 Coeur Alaska Inc., a subsidiary of Coeur d’Alene
Docket nos. 07-984 Mines, successfully applied for a tailings disposal permit
Prior history summary judgment for appellant permit from the USACE. The permit allowed Coeur Alaska
CV-05-00012-J-JK (D. Alaska, 2005); vacated to dispose of 4.5 million tons of tailings from the Kensing-
486 F.3d 638 (9th Cir., 2006); reversed and ton gold mine (inactive since 1928), 45 mi (72 km) north
remanded US of Juneau into Lower Slate Lake. The lake is 3 mi (4.8 km)
Holding away from the mine, within the Tongass National For-
est.[1][2][3]
The Army Corps of Engineers was the appropriate agency to
The discharge of material into waters of the United
permit the disposal of mine waste material into Lower Slate
Lake. States is regulated under the Clean Water Act by either
the USACE or the Environmental Protection Agency
Court membership (EPA), depending on what the material is. Discharge of
"fill material" falls under the jurisdiction of the USACE;
Chief Justice
John G. Roberts discharge of other pollutants falls under the jurisdiction
of the EPA.[4] In 2005 Coeur was granted their permit
Associate Justices to dispose of their tailings into Lower Slate Lake by the
John P. Stevens · Antonin Scalia USACE under section 404 of the Clean Water Act on the
Anthony Kennedy · David Souter basis of a definition of "fill material" which had been
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg revised in 2002 under the administration of George W.
Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito
Bush. This new definition allowed some contaminants to
Case opinions
be included in mine waste, while still allowing the mine
waste to be classified as fill.[1] The permit allowed for
Majority Kennedy, joined by Roberts, T homas, dumping 4.5 million tons of a combination of waste rock
Breyer, Alito, Scalia (in part)
and tailings of ten years, which would result in the floor
Concurrence Scalia, joined by Breyer (in part) elevation of Lower Slate Lake to rise by 50 ft (15 m).[2]
Following the Army Corps’ permitting of the tailings
Dissent Ginsburg, joined by Stevens, Souter
disposal, the Southeast Alaska Conservation Club, the
Laws applied Sierra Club, and Lynn Canal Conservation Inc. filed suit.
The suit claimed that the permit was issued in violation
Clean Water Act
of sections 301(a), 301(e), and 306(e) of the Clean Water
Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council
Council, Act. The United States District Court for the District of
07-984 (2009), is a United States Supreme Court case that Alaska found that the USACE was correct in its applica-
was decided in favor of Coeur Alaska’s permitted right to tion of section 404 of the act, because the permit was for
dump mine waste in a lake. The case addressed tailings
1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council
"fill material", and therefore not covered under or in vi-
olation of sections 301(e) and 306(e).
See also
In May 2007 the District Court’s 2006 decision was • List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume
overturned by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The 557
Circuit Court found in favor of the non-governmental or- • List of United States Supreme Court cases
ganizations, ruling that the discharge was not permitted
under the EPA’s New Source Performance Standard.[4]
References
[1] ^ Hebert, H. Josef (23 May 2009). "Court OKs
Opinion of the Court dumping gold mine waste in lake". The Seattle
The Supreme Court found in favor of Coeur Alaska by a Times (Associated Press).
vote of 6-3, agreeing that the USACE is indeed the appro- http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/
priate body for the permitting of mine waste discharge localnews/
into Lower Slate Lake. In her dissent, Justice Ruth Bader 2009368908_apussupremecourtgoldmine3rdldwritethru.html.
Ginsburg stated that currently discharging pollutants in- Retrieved 2009-06-24.
to a lake is permitted provided there is enough material [2] ^ Vicini, James (June 22, 2009). "Miner Coeur gets
to raise the lake’s floor elevation, thereby turning it into OK to dump waste into Alaska lake". Reuters.
a waste disposal site. Ginsburg voiced concern about the http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-
potential for pollution regulation to not apply to several BusinessofGreen/idUSTRE55L3DP20090622.
industries (mining included) on the basis of this loop- Retrieved 2009-06-25.
hole.[4] [3] McKay, David L (2002). Why Mining?. Victoria,
British Columbia: Trafford. pp. 283.
ISBN 1-55369-688-3. http://books.google.com/
Subsequent developments books?id=DQ0KaiBK__AC&pg=PA283&dq=coeur+alaska+subsidiary
The decision was praised by the National Mining Associ- [4] ^ Koons, Jennifer (June 22, 2009). "Supreme Court
ation, which stated that it would "provide employment Backs Army Corps, Mining Company in Alaska
and greater economic certainty for all those involved Water Case". The New York Times.
in the project".[4] Alaska Governor Sarah Palin also wel- http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/06/22/
comed the ruling, calling it a "green light for responsible 22greenwire-supreme-court-backs-army-corps-
resource development". The environmental groups that mining-company-62747.html. Retrieved
originally filed suit against Coeur Alaska were unhappy 2009-06-24.
with the decision. Environmental groups stated that the [5] "Court OKs dumping gold mine waste in lake". The
proposed material includes aluminum, lead, and mercury Guardian (AP). http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/
(among other metals), and that discharging into Lower feedarticle/8571805. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
Slate Lake will have a detrimental effect on the lake and
surrounding waters.[5] Following the court’s decision
share prices of Coeur d’Alene Mines rose over 5%.[2]
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/in-
dex.php?title=Coeur_Alaska,_Inc._v._Southeast_Alaska_Conservation_Council&oldid=461035827"
Categories:
• United States Supreme Court cases
• United States environmental case law
• Environmental issues with mining
• 2009 in United States case law
• United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
This page was last modified on 17 November 2011 at 00:22. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-
ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of
the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.Contact us
Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Mobile view
2