EPA
NRECA: EPA Choice Clear on Coal Ash
The Environmental Protection Agency should develop regulations for coal combustion residuals under the non-hazardous waste provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, a NRECA representative testified, as the agency opened hearings on the matter, Aug. 30.
Jim Stine of NRECA presents the association’s views on the regulation of coal combustion residuals, as EPA opens a nationwide series of hearings on its proposed rule. (Photo By: Todd H. Cunningham)
The association believes that the “Subtitle D prime” option, one of the prospective paths set out in EPA’s June 21 proposed rule, is the best way forward, James Stine, senior principal for environmental policy, told EPA officials at the hearing in Arlington, Va. Stine was among dozens of industry stakeholders, who spoke at the day-long hearing.
By establishing a floor that all coal combustion residuals, or coal ash, must meet, this option would ensure safe disposal, he explained.
Conversely, he cautioned, EPA’s other option, regulation of coal ash under the act’s Subtitle C hazardous waste regulations, would be counterproductive. This approach would likely cripple the current beneficial uses of coal ash and impose unnecessary regulatory costs on power plants, he said.
Electric co-ops, which rely on plants built at a time when coal was to a large extent their sole fuel choice, “will be directly and possibly disproportionately impacted” by EPA’s final rule, Stine underscored.
Co-ops, which are relatively small and barred by regulation from maintaining large capital reserves, would be forced to go directly to their lenders if confronted with sudden cost increases stemming from the Subtitle C approach, he indicated.
“There is no cushion to mitigate the increase and the costs of new loans would be shared by each co-op member-owner in the form of higher electricity rates,” Stine said.
NRECA’s representative noted that EPA has received congressional guidance on how to proceed where different regulatory options would lead to essentially the same result. In cases where small businesses like co-ops are affected, he noted, “EPA is obligated to pursue the least costly approach.”
Congress made clear in enacting the amendment under which the pending decision is being made “that EPA should avoid the Subtitle C option if at all possible,” Stine noted.
There is no reason to pursue the regulation of coal ash as a hazardous material, Stine said, when the alternative option “offers the same degree of protection without the attendant risk and burdens.”