involving the v i i this is actually my third time before this court in the past and ten months and each of these three cases involve instances where the b i a fifteen the osage agency had not conducted a single site specific environmental assessment prior to approving any oil and gas activity and that involves thousands of leases and drilling permits across the after his mother died in november two thousand or two thousand and fifteen and he filed suit less than a year later the district court counsel i respect could you if let me start with addressing the statute of limitations issues requires you to excuse our baby or to pile in a timely manner because blank blank blank isn't the because purely in based on facts in your keep out of the public domain but you're going to argue i just want to make sure i understand your equitable tolling argument are you saying what it what are you saying that you didn't know and therefore couldn't file you didn't know at any time during the limitation period that you had a potential claim and therefore didn't file and you didn't find out and still the limitations  approved it it must be ok and so i called the agency to get the need for documentation that i wanted to show to my client to say hey see look somebody look at this it will be ok and then when i called they were very suspicious and wouldn't talk to me up so i guess my question is let me you know in order to assert equitable poling you have to have some due diligence and there are plenty of opportunities i would think over these many many years for someone to say hey i wonder if maybe you wonder if the they did what they were supposed to do and if they were and i guess my point is this is just go on forever could you come in here thirty years from now and say oh i had a client in and she was  first of all beginning in two thousand and fourteen is the first time that the agency has actually been out in the open and said hey we're going to conduct environmental assessments and i think if you look into the documents at you know in your own inquiry and find out for yourself what happened here i mean the question is is there an obligation on every single landowner to can file a four year requests every time somebody shows up to make sure that the had been conducted importantly we've got oil and gas operators major oil and gas operators to conduct operations all across the country on b l m land and beyond a land where they have to do eate but when they come to us each county they don't have to what was the agency telling them that hey i know you have to do this everywhere else but you don't have to do it here and i think what they did was they loath the landowners the operators and everybody else into inac and i think it's a little difficult to impose an obligation on the landowner to conduct the jolla requests every single time when the regional office doesn't even know and we also have some documents in there that attach a motion for and then proceeding to implement those decisions on the ground but when plaintiffs have challenge those decisions in court v i i has reversed itself and sought dismissal of those cases for failure to exhaust the ministry of remedies even though the file and requiring mr change and upon need to pursue administrative appeals for a decision is already in effect and already been implemented in their on their land is directly contrary to darby and the feral and i i hold it please we've identified that we have a goal back to the old technology where there is a delay in transmission so if one of us was to ask the question what you're talking would raise or and there are at least four aspects in this case that show that mr chance and his predecessor knew should have known or had constructive notice of the c b i approvals that they challenge even in the absence of any for the well permits will begin with the regulations at twenty five c f r section two to six point one eight those require that left c s and surface owners have actual and substantively significant interactions before any underground activities occur or before the well permits are approved now mr chance but before we get to that i don't want to jump over specific needs but wasn't done not that it's not clear how they've been injured by the lack of that that procedural document was a procedural activity underneath occurring there are allegations of harm seems to be limited to surface damages on the way out and so i'm not i still i'm still not clear as to actually what the injury is underneath was simply other than stating so it wasn't done which i only read it at as an articulation  must tell the surface plane order what the procedures will be for the settlement of surface damages that might ensue from any of the operations also the regulations require that before commencing any actual drilling the lessee must pay the surface owner commencement fees for every well and on the left the drilling permit application which ultimately is then submitted to be i a e a for approval the lefty must indicate the following s that lack of notice that mr chanteuse relying on as excusing his his failures in this case did function as an absolute and complete bar statute of limitations so indeed the district court found that there was no what you've argued that it just seems to be it's confusing to me you're arguing that prior to the commencement and deposited commencement speeches received from g s t and these are three that are paid before the operation speaking and the district court made the factual finding that g s t negotiated with mr chances predecessor and to payments mr chance is known by constructive notice or by having having acquired lands that from the very moment they were acquired have been subjected to government regulations and the unique written regulations that are involved with he's charged with knowing the regulations and the laws and regulations are very clear to back up the regulations are and have been available to the regulations are clear as to what the administrative proceedings are what the approval process is there's nothing here that mr chance wasn't able to get his hands on that at the very least made a scratch its head and think what might be subjected to and now that we have a district court she generously gave you another twenty seconds may police court i'm james sitting and i'm here to represent great southwestern expiration and i can clarify for you analysis well i'm not willing to concede that from the standpoint that back in one nine hundred seventy nine the county wide environmental assessment was performed by order of the northern district and pollster pursuant to two lawsuits that were in front of them regarding me back in so they came in and performed a county wide assessment so depending on the chances level of involvement in the county they would have known that their property was part of this environmental really it's hard to defend when that's part of the reason for the statute of limitations is it's hard to defend yourself against these accusations as witnesses die and papers get lost a red herring they are relying on conduct by a private party to justify their failure to give notice it seems to me that the regulation and the laws impose an obligation on the government to provide notice of all written decisions to interested parties now they are coming in here and telling you well this other guy did this in a southern person did that so let's forget about it and then also i do want to point out that counsel kept referring to  two which is well three and four never issue that i'd like to address is the idea of oh well it's just a procedural injury well that's what you think it is it's a procedural statute the law requires that the government conduct the need for analysis before they do the approval it's like you have to take the driver's test before we can stamp the driver's license you have to do the analysis before we give you the approval and as if she wants to see environmental contamination on the chances property one other issue i'd like to race when we're talking about the due diligence that was raised earlier if you look at the assignment work papers first time that i'm aware that anybody tried it you know that they were stumbling onto this and thinking hey you know maybe they're not doing things right they stood up for your request and the comments association is a nonprofit association and what do they get already in the record that the i a e a the osage agency has bent over backwards to keep this from the public domain that they were not following through they were not complying with new thought and then finally