From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Churchill County v. Norton

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 19, 2001
282 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2001)

Opinion

No. 00-15967.

Argued and Submitted January 11, 2001.

Filed December 19, 2001. Amended March 11, 2002.

Antonio Rossmann (argued), Roger B. Moore, Law Offices of Antonio Rossmann, San Francisco, CA; Michael F. Mackedon, Steven D. King, City of Fallon, NV; Richard G. Campbell, Ryan Campbell, Reno, NV for the plaintiffs-appellants.

Kathryn E. Kovacs (argued), Lois J. Schiffer, Sean H. Donahue, Fred R. Disheroon, Stephen M. McFarlane, Appellate Section, Environment Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for the defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada; Edward C. Reed, District Judge, Presiding.

Before SNEED, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.



ORDER


The panel has unanimously voted to deny the petition for rehearing. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the petition for rehearing en banc. Fed.R.App.P. 35(b). The petition for rehearing is denied and the petition for rehearing en banc is rejected.

The opinion filed December 19, 2001, is hereby AMENDED as follows:

1. On page 17022 of the slip opinion, in the sentence beginning, "The Secretary withdrew. . . ." delete "20,000 acres" and replace with "approximately 200,000 acres."

2. On page 17029 of the slip opinion, the sentence reading, "For example, Section 204 confirmed a court-ordered allocation between California and Nevada of water from the Carson River, Lake Tahoe, and the Truckee River." is deleted and replaced with the following two sentences: "For example, Section 204 confirmed the Alpine Decree, allocating water from the Carson River between California and Nevada. It also allocated water from the Truckee River and Lake Tahoe between the two states."

3. On page 17031 of the slip opinion, the two sentences reading, "The Newlands Project's Operating Criteria and Procedures (OCAP) must be revised. The Section also covers expansion of the Newlands Project purposes to include recreation." are deleted and replaced by the following two sentences: "It expands the authorized purposes of the Newlands Project to include recreation and water quality, among others. The Section also requires the Secretary to study the feasibility of improving the conveyance efficiency of Newlands Project facilities."

4. On page 17036 of the slip opinion, the following two sentences are deleted: "Fallon's underground water rights are served by the Newlands Project. Its municipal water system is served and supplied by wells whose aquifers are recharged through surface irrigation." They are replaced by the following sentence: "Fallon's municipal water system is served and supplied by wells whose aquifers are recharged, at least in part, through surface water diverted through the Newlands Project."


Summaries of

Churchill County v. Norton

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 19, 2001
282 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2001)
Case details for

Churchill County v. Norton

Case Details

Full title:CHURCHILL COUNTY; City of Fallon, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Gale A…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Dec 19, 2001

Citations

282 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2001)

Citing Cases

Westlands Water Dist. v. United States Dept. of Interior

NEPA is the "the basic national charter for protection of the environment." Churchill County v. Norton, 276…

Westlands Water Dist. v. United States Dept. of Interior

NEPA is the "the basic national charter for protection of the environment." Churchill County v. Norton, 276…