|
Last Revised: 10/6/2011
Coal Combustion Byproducts Advocacy
Pre Proposal Letters
Comments
Congressional Letters
Testimony at EPA Public Meetings
NEW!
American Road & Transportation Builders Association Study on Coal Ash and Road and Bridge Construction Costs|ARTBA Press Release
Veritas Study: Utility Coal Ash Regulation Could Lead to As Many As 316, 000 Job Losses
Comments/Letters on EPA's Proposed Regulations
- CONGRESS
Senator Inhofe (November 18, 2010)
Senators Conrad & Brownback Letter to EPA (July 29, 2010)
Senators Rockefeller and Goodwin (July 29, 2010)
Senator Klobuchar (July 28, 2010)
Senator Casey letter to EPA (July 27, 2010)
Representative Upton Letter (November 19, 2010) Representative Upton Press Release
Representative Diaz-Balart (November 12, 2010)
Representative
Pomeroy (October 6, 2010)
Representative Carson (September 15, 2010)
Representative Castor (September 9, 2010)
Representative Doyle (July 30, 2010)
Representatives Boucher & Upton (House Energy & Commerce Committee) Letter to EPA (July 29, 2010)
Press Release from Reps Boucher and Upton Representative Holden letter to EPA (July 29, 2010)
Representatives Kingston, Westmoreland, Price, Linder, Graves and Broun (July 27, 2010)
Representative Ellsworth Letter to EPA (July 27, 2010)
- STATES
Arkansas Governor Beebe
Environmental Agencies
- ECOS
ASTSWMO
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality/Department of Water Resources
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Illinois EPA
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Indiana Department of Natural Resources
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Kansas Department of Public Health
Kentucky Department of Environmental Protection
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
Maryland Department of Environment
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
Nevada Department of Environmental Protection
North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources
North Dakota Department of Health
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
Pennsylvania DEP - Response to EIP/EJ Report on Pennsylvania Damage Cases
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control
South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
Washington Department of Ecology
West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources/Wisconsin Public Service Commission
DOTs
Association of State Highway Transportation Officials
Alabama Department of Transportation
Delaware Department of Transportation
Georgia Department of Transportation
Indiana Department of Transportation
New York Department of Transportation
Ohio Department of Transportation
Rhode Island Department of Transportation
Virginia Department of Transportation
Washington State Department of Transportation
Wyoming Department of Transportation
PUCs
Alabama Public Service Commission
Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor
Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission
Louisiana Public Service Commission
North Dakota Public Service Commission
Ohio Public Utilities Commission
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff
Wisconsin Public Service Commission
Miscellaneous
Association of State Dam Safety Officials
Interstate Mining Compact Commission
- LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
- American Public Works Assn/National Assn of County Engineers/National Association of Counties/National League of Cities/US Conference of Mayors
Bardstown, Kentucky
Charter Township, China, Michigan
Choctaw County, Oklahoma
Church Hill, Maryland
Fitzgerald, Georgia
Frankenmuth, Michigan
Harney County, Oregon
Lodi, Wisconsin
Morristown, Tennessee
North Belle Vernon, Pennsylvania
Routt County, Colorado
Somerset, Pennsylvania
South Boston, Virginia
Tazewell County, Virginia
Washington Township, Schuykill County, Pennsylvania
Wyandotte County, Kansas
Municipal Electric Utility of Cedar Falls, Iowa
Central Arizona Water Conservation District
City Public Service (San Antonio, Texas)
Colorado Springs Utilities
Hamilton, Ohio Department of Electric
Heartland Consumers Power District
Holland, Michigan Board of Public Works
JEA (Jacksonville, Florida)
Kansas City Board of Public Utilities
Lansing Board of Water & Power (Lansing, Michigan)
Manitowoc (Wisconsin) Public Utilities Letter | Comments
Twin Valleys Public Power District (Nebraska)
- UTILITIES/ENERGY COMPANIES/ENERGY ASSOCIATIONS
USWAG: Comments | Appendices
Allegheny Energy
Ameren
American Electric Power
Arizona Electric Power Cooperative
American Electric Power
Avista Corporation
Basin Electric Power Cooperative
Central Alabama Electric Cooperative
Cleco
Cogentrix
Constellation Energy
Consumers Energy
Dayton Power & Light
Deseret Generation & Transmission Coop
Dixie Electric Cooperative
Dominion
DTE
Duke Energy
Dynegy
Eastern Kentucky Power Cooperative
Empire District Electric Company
Entergy
Exelon
First Energy
Golden Valley Electric Association
Hoosier Energy REC, Inc.
Intermountain Power
Interstate Power & Light
KCP&L
LG&E/KUE
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power
Lower Colorado River Authority
Montana-Dakota Utilities
Minnesota Power
NextEra Energy
NiSource
Northwestern Energy
NRG Energy
Oglethorpe Power Corporation
PowerSouth Energy Cooperative
PPL Montana
PPL Pennsylvania
Prairie State Generating Company
PSEG
Puget Sound Energy
RRI
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District
Southern Company
Southern Illinois Power Cooperative
Sunflower Electric Power Corporation
TEP
Tri-State Generation & Transmission Association
TVA
We Energies
Wisconsin Power & Light
Wisconsin Public Service
Xcel Energy
Association of Electric Companies of Texas
ARIPPA
APPA
Class of '85 Regulatory Response Group
Electric Power Generating Association (Pennsylvania)
Kentucky Association of Electric Cooperatives
Lignite Energy Council
LPPC
North Dakota Association of RECs
NRECA
Ohio Utility Group
Tennessee Valley Public Power Association
UWAG
West Associates
EPRI: Part 1 | Part 2
- ACADEMIA
University of North Dakota Energy and Environmental Research Center
Clemson University
Lehigh University
Kansas Wesleyan University
MIT
Michigan State University
Underwood University
University of California Berkely
University of Utah
University of Wyoming
- ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS
Cambria County (Penna) Conservation District
Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation
- ASH USERS
American Coal Ash Association
American Concrete Pavement Assocaiiton, Indiana Chapter
American Concrete Pipe Association
American Gypsum LLC
American Road and Transportation Builders Association
Ash Development Association of Australia
Associated General Contrators of America
Association of Canadian Industries Recycling Coal Ash
CalStar
Citizens for Recycling First
Coal Ash Resources Research Consortium
Eastern PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation
European Coal Combustion Products Association
Greenleaf Advisors LLP
Gypsum Association
Headwaters
Indiana Council of Engineering Companies
Indiana Builders Association
Indiana Construction Association
Lafarge
MacDonald Farms Enterprises
Midwest Coal Ash Association
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce
National Concrete Masonry Association
National Association of Home Builders
National Ready Mixed Concrete Association
Nebraska Ash
PMI
Portland Cement Association
Revolutionary Plastics
Texas Coal Combustion Products Coalition
United Kingdon Quality Ash Association
US Gypsum
- LABOR
Indiana State Building & Construction Trades
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Unions for Jobs and the Environment
United Mine Workers of America
- BUSINESSES & BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS
American Coal Council
American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity
American Forest and Paper Association
CIBO
Indiana Cast Metals Association
Indiana Coal Council
Indiana Chamber of Commerce
Indiana Manufacturers Association
Iowa Association of Business and Industry
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce
National Association of Manufacturers
National Mining Association
National Solid Waste Management Association
Pennsylvania Anthracite Council
Pennsylvania Chamber of Commerce
Pennsylvania Coal Association
Porter Wright
Regional Chamber of Northeast Indiana
South Carolina Chamber of Commerce
South Carolina Manufacturers Association
Texas Association of Business
US Chamber of Commerce
Waste Management
West Virginia Manufacturers Associaiton
Western Business Roundtable
- Testimony at EPA Public Hearings
-
-
September 2, 2010 - Denver, CO Testimony
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pre-Proposal Letters
White Papers/Fact Sheets/Testimony
News Releases/Letters to Media
Letters
Draft/Model Letters
Congressional Letters
State Letters to EPA on CCP Regulation
Labor
Municipal Goverments
Tribal Goverment
Technical/Educational Organization Letters
Environmental Groups' Letters
Coalition & Other Stakeholder Meetings with OMB - List of Meetings Along with Materials Provided to OMB by Coalition Members
Small
Business Advocacy Review Request Letters
Regulatory Proposals
Coal Combustion Byproducts
CCP Background
Coal combustion products (CCPs) are materials produced when we burn coal to produce electricity. CCPs are categorized in four groups, each based on physical and chemical forms derived from coal combustion methods and emission controls: fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, and flue gas emission control wastes. Coal ash has been studied extensively for decades by universities and government regulatory agencies and the US EPA has conclusively determined that it is not a hazardous waste.
Coal Ash Fact Sheet
Potential Health Effects
Coal ash particles are essentially insoluble aluminosilicate glasses that contain minute traces of compounds, such as manganese, boron, arsenic and other metals that may be soluble. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and other research institutions have comprehensively studied the health and environmental effects of ash used in various applications throughout the United States and have concluded that the risks from coal ash are minimal whether in the form of CCPs that are disposed or when the CCPs are beneficially used. Numerous researchers -- US DOE, USGS and EPRI -- have also has found that radiation in coal ash is minimal -- well below EPA's action standards -- and that the use of coal ash as a recycled material can have important economic and environmental benefits. EPA studies over the past 15 years confirm this position, showing that the use of coal combustion products in construction projects has resulted in little to no impact on groundwater and surface water quality, but that some precautions are necessary.
Regulatory Background
In 1980, Congress passed the Bevill Amendment to RCRA, which required EPA to study the management of CCPs, including disposal, utilization, proven environmental damage attributable to CCPs, and economics. Pending the completion of that study, EPA was barred from applying its hazardous waste regulations to CCPs. Once the study was completed, EPA reported its findings and recommendations to Congress, and after notice and comment, determined in 1993 that coal combustion wastes do not warrant hazardous waste regulation; and again in 2000 that the remaining fossil fuel combustion wastes do not warrant regulation as a hazardous waste.
EPA did identify specific areas of concern that led the Agency to announce plans for developing non-hazardous waste regulations for CCP disposal.
EPA also made findings regarding the beneficial use of CCPs. Except for mineplacement of CCPs, which EPA addressed separately, EPA did not identify any beneficial uses of CCPs “that are likely to present significant risks to human health or the environment” and reported that there were “no documented cases of damage to human health or the environment” from beneficial uses of CCPs.
Throughout the Bevill process, the regulation of CCP management has remained a state regulatory responsibility and the states have taken the initiative to develop and implement regulatory programs tailored to the wide-ranging circumstances of CCP management throughout the country. In 2007, EPA and DOE conducted a comprehensive study of CCP disposal facilities permitted or constructed since 1994 and a review of state CCP regulations. This report, Coal Combustion Waste Management at Landfills and
Surface Impoundments, 1994-2004 confirmed the positive trend toward more protective waste management observed by EPA in 2000 has continued and, in several key respects, has significantly accelerated. For example, EPA found that nearly all new CCW disposal units had installed liners and nearly all new landfills were monitoring groundwater, thereby addressing groundwater protection concerns. The report also addressed trends in state regulation, and found that state regulatory controls have increased and that deviations from state regulatory requirements were being granted only on the basis of sound technical criteria. EPA and DOE found state regulations were generally administered in a responsible manner and were improving. These findings demonstrate a continuing commitment by the states to ensure proper management of CCWs.
CCP Mineplacement
In 2006, The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) published a comprehensive report on the mineplacement of coal ash that concluded that that placing CCPs in coal mines as
part of the reclamation process is a viable management
option when conducted in a manner that (a) avoids significant
adverse environmental and health impacts and (b)
includes public involvement in the regulatory permit process.
Neither the NAS nor the U.S. Department of Interior’s Office of Surface Mining (OSM) have identified any sites where the mineplacement of CCPs has resulted in the generation of leachate that would
threaten public health or degrade the environment. To provide a regulatory framework to ensure the continued use of CCPs in mineplacemnt activities, OSM is in the process of developing CCP mineplacement regualtions under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA).
National Mining Association Fact Sheet on CCP Mineplacement
CCP Generation and Utilization
The American Coal Ash Association reports that in 2007, the United States produced more than 130 million tons of CCPs. Over 45 percent of the CCPs produced were beneficially used. The potential for CCP utilization is exceptional and the environmental benefits significant. CCP use conserves natural resources as the need to extract virgin materials is eliminated. Millions of acres of land otherwise used for disposal are preserved by using CCPs. Substituting one ton of fly ash for one ton of Portland cement clinker eliminates one ton of CO2 otherwise released during cement production.
Applications span an infinite variety of possibilities in the architecture, engineering and construction industries as well as in manufacturing. Various applications for each CCP type include:
- Fly ash is most commonly used as a high-performance substitute for Portland cement or as clinker for portland cement production. Cements blended with fly ash are becoming more common. Building material applications range from grouts and masonry products to cellular concrete. Many asphaltic concrete pavements contain fly ash. Geotechnical applications include soil stabilization, road base, structural fill, embankments and mine reclamation. Fly ash also serves as filler in wood and plastic products, paints and metal castings.
- Flue gas desulfurization (FGD) materials are produced by chemical “scrubber” emission control systems that remove sulfur and oxides from power plant flue gas streams. Residues vary, but the most common are FGD gypsum (or “synthetic” gypsum) and spray dryer absorbents. FGD gypsum is used in almost thirty percent of the gypsum panel products manufactured in the U.S. It is also used in agricultural applications to treat undesirable soil conditions and to improve crop performance. Other FGD materials are used in mining and land reclamation activities.
- Bottom ash and boiler slag can be used as a raw feed for manufacturing portland cement clinker, as well as for skid control on icy roads. These materials are also suitable for geotechnical applications such as structural fills and land reclamation. The physical characteristics of bottom ash and boiler slag lend themselves as replacements for aggregate in flowable fill and in concrete masonry products. Boiler slag is also used for roofing granules and as blasting grit.
Coal Combustion Products Partnership (C2P2)
C2P2 Fact Sheet
In response to EPA's Resource Conservation Challenge, EPA and the utility industry are jointly implementing the Coal Combustion Products Partnership (“C2P2”), a collaborative effort to reduce barriers and encourage increased beneficial use of CCPs. While over 45% of CCPs are currently beneficially used, the balance of CCPs must be managed in landfills and surface impoundments. The goal of C2P2 is to increase the percentage of CCP beneficial use and decrease the volume of CCPs managed in landfills and surface impoundments.
USWAG CCP ACTION PLAN
The industry is committed to C2P2 as a means of ultimately achieving complete resource conservation of CCPs. Until full beneficial use of CCPs is achieved, however, continued management of CCPs in an environmentally responsible manner will remain an essential component of electric power generation. The utility industry through USWAG developed this Action Plan to complement the goals of C2P2 by ensuring that, until complete resource conservation of CCPs is achieved, the remaining CCPs will be managed in a manner that protects human health and the environment.
USWAG CCP Action Plan | Action Plan Press
Release
CCP Management & Guidance
USWAG regularly provides compliance assistance to the utility industry regarding the management of CCPs and other materials produced at coal-fired power plants. For example, USWAG, working in conjunction with EPRI, has produced Guidance
for Comanagement of Mill Rejects at Coal-Fired Power Plants to provide the industry with information regarding the environmentally sound disposal of mill rejects, and Groundwater Monitoring Guidance to provide guidance regarding the implementation of the CCP disposal facility groundwater monitoring established in the USWAG Action Plan.
In addition, EPA, in partnership with state and tribal representatives
and a focus group of industry and public interest stakeholders,
developed a set of recommendations and tools to assist facility
managers, state and tribal regulators, and the interested
public in better addressing the management of land-disposed,
non-hazardous industrial wastes: Guide for Industrial Waste Management
EPA has also created a section on their web site addressing
industrial waste management located
at: http://www.epa.gov/industrialwaste/
Utility
Solid Waste Activities Group | 701 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
| Third Floor | Washington, D.C. 20004-2696
202-508-5645 | jim.roewer@uswag.org
|