EPC chair calls on legislature to look into coal ash rules

The state legislature should hold public hearings into the way Iowa regulates coal ash disposal, the chair of the state’s Environmental Protection Commission said.

Iowa State University's power plant in Ames, which creates nearly 30,000 tons of coal ash, a majority of which is disposed of in an unlined quarry in Waterloo (photo by Jason Hancock/Iowa Independent).

It is unclear whether the federal government will move quickly on its own rulemaking regarding coal ash, said Charlotte Hubbell, who has served on the EPC since 2007. So if the state has concerns with the way coal ash is being handled, the legislature should look into the matter.

“I think it would be in the public’s best interest to have the legislature set up a study committee,” Hubbell said. “For them to hold hearings during the next session with the purpose of drafting and voting on legislation that would deal with this waste disposal.”

Last year, the state Department of Natural Resources began drafting tougher rules on coal ash disposal, in particular, disposal at unlined former quarries and mines that received a waiver allowing them to use ash as fill. Environmental groups say this type of disposal method poses an enormous risk to public health. Without liners, toxins such as mercury, zinc, lead, arsenic and selenium could leach out of the site and into groundwater supplies, and without monitoring equipment, there is no way of knowing if contamination is already taking place.

The DNR’s efforts stalled, however, because of pressure from disposal-site owners and coal-burning businesses. The EPC vowed to continue investigating the need for tougher regulations, but in March the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it would redraft federal regulations for coal ash disposal, effectively halting any action on coal ash at the state level.

Last month, Democratic state Sen. Dennis Black, who chairs the Senate Environment and Energy Independence Committee, said the EPC should conduct public hearings on Iowa’s coal ash rules, saying any federal rule-making process could get bogged down by lobbyists and end up producing regulations that do not “protect the public water supply.”

Hubbell said having the EPC hold hearings would not be practical.

“We don’t have separate staff or a separate budget,” she said. “We are a citizens, volunteer commission. That’s the legislature’s job, if you ask me.”

The EPC is authorized to call hold public hearings, “but practically speaking, in 22 years I don’t know that it has ever been done,” Hubbell said.

Another impediment, Hubbell said, is the fact that the DNR is facing staff reductions and budget cuts due to the state of the economy.

“It’s questionable whether the DNR will have the time and the people to draft rules regarding disposal of coal combustion waste,” she said.

Black agreed with Hubbell that a study committee set up by the legislature would do a better job of handling the issue than the EPC. He said he would ask Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal of Council Bluffs about the Legislative Council, a bipartisan group of Senate and House leaders that serves as a steering committee for the General Assembly when it is not in session, appointing a committee after the 2010 session.

But because the federal Environmental Protection Agency has indicated it will release its draft rules by the end of the year, Black said he would not direct his committee to study the issue any earlier.

“State government rules are often convoluted enough, without our forging ahead, making and implementing rules, only to perhaps back-off should EPA come back with something different,” he said.

In an interview last month with the Iowa Independent, the DNR’s lead staffer on coal ash issues, Chad Stobbe, said that if the EPA’s timeline is met and rules are ready for public comment by the end of the year it would likely still take two years before sites are mandated to be in compliance. Because of this, advocates for tougher regulation have begun calling for measures that can be implemented while federal rules are being worked out.

Specifically, environmentalists are calling on the state to mandate financial assurances at the four unlined, unmonitored disposal sites. Owners would have to post a bond to cover the costs of closure, post-closure care and if applicable, corrective action if there is contamination. Financial assurances are already mandated at sanitary landfills, but because the quarries and mines received waivers from the state, these mandates are not required.

If contamination is discovered before federal rules are in place, taxpayers could get stuck paying for cleanup, a cost that could run into the millions.

Carrie Le Seur, president and founder of environmental law center Plains Justice, said that while the state looks on, the idea of tougher regulations coming from the federal government is not guaranteed.

“There has been a lot of push back from industry about leaving voluntary guidelines in place, which we’ve had for more than 30 years and just hasn’t been sufficient to protect public health and the environment,” she said. “There’s a letter being circulated by senators from Kansas and North Dakota asking EPA to forgo its rulemaking in favor of voluntary guidelines. The fight is not over at the federal level.”