DNR pushes coal ash regulations, environmentalists cry foul

Protective liners, locations restrictions and groundwater monitoring are just a few of the regulations Iowa’s Department of Natural Resources would like to see implemented by the federal government in regard to coal ash disposal.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said federal regulations on the disposal of coal ash can be expected by the end of 2009.

But environmentalists believe if federal officials follow Iowa’s suggestions, the public will still be at risk for contaminated groundwater supplies.

Environmentalists have been pushing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate coal ash, the solid waste produced by coal-fired power plants, for more than 30 years. The ash contains high levels of arsenic, lead, mercury and boron, each of which has been known to cause cancer, neurological and development problems, and other illnesses. An EPA report released early this year found the cancer risk to be 1 in 2,000 from exposure to arsenic in drinking water for residents living near unlined landfills containing coal ash and coal refuse, which is 500 times the level usually regarded as safe by current federal regulations.

Yet for three decades, rules governing coal ash have been left up to the states, creating a patchwork of differing regulations with questionable effectiveness.

EPA Director Lisa Jackson told Congress earlier this year that her agency would draft new regulations for coal ash, releasing the draft rules by January, and state regulators have said they will hold off on all new rules until those regulations are made public.

In a letter to Matt Hale, director of the EPA’s Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Iowa’s DNR requested that any federal guidelines mirror the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act‘s subtitle D, which would regulate coal ash at the federal level as a solid waste.

However, Hale told the Environmental Council of the States’ annual meeting in Whitefish, Mont., last week that while he believes subtitle D solid waste rules would protect public health and the environment, the EPA does not have the authority to enforce those requirements, according to InsideEPA.com.

Environmentalists say that Hale’s comments support their claims that subtitle D rules would be insufficient to protect the public because it would leave inspection and permitting to states.

“Essentially, if there were a subtitle D program it would not be that different from business as usual,” said Mary Anne Hitt, deputy director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign. “The EPA could not require state’s to issue any further regulations than what they already have on the books. They would not be allowed to inspect the sites and would not be allowed to enforce the regulations.”

Under subtitle D, landfills that handle municipal solid waste are subject to regulations such as liners to prevent toxins from leaching off site, location restrictions, financial assurances and corrective action provisions.

Chad Stobbe, an environmental specialist with the Iowa DNR and the agency’s lead staffer on coal ash issues, said implementing RCRA subtitle D standards for coal ash disposal would significantly alter current disposal methods in Iowa.

“An important factor to consider is that implementing subtitle D standards for coal ash disposal would require both coal ash landfills and coal ash quarry reclamation sites to meet the same standards,” Stobbe said. “This would result in significant improvements in how coal ash is currently managed in Iowa.”

Currently, coal ash quarry reclamation projects, known officially as beneficial use sites, are not required to follow landfill standards. This is because the sites — three quarries and a mine — received a waiver from the state excluding them from strict regulations, including protective liners and groundwater monitoring.

Tests at sites that do have protective liners that were analyzed by Cedar Rapids-based environmental law center Plains Justice show toxins leaching out of the landfills, leading many to conclude the same is thing is taking place undetected at the unlined sites. Even the DNR’s Stobbe told The Iowa Independent in March that contamination could be taking place at the sites, but without monitoring there is no way of knowing.

Stobbe said that under subtitle D the sites that received a waiver would be forced to install bottom liners and leachate collection systems, which would sit on top of the liner and remove toxins for treatment and disposal. They would also be forced to conduct regular groundwater monitoring.

Environmentalists want the EPA to regulate coal ash using RCRA subtitle C, which would declare coal ash a hazardous waste.

“Under Subtitle C, states are required to adopt regulations that are at least as stringent as whatever federal standards are set up and the EPA will have the power to inspect sites and bring enforcement actions,” Hitt said.

According to the DNR’s letter to the EPA, enacting subtitle C requirements would make coal ash disposal prohibitively expensive in Iowa. But Hitt said those requirements give the EPA enough room to ensure the public health is protected without causing unnecessary expense.

“Subtitle C is not a regimented program that is just a cookie cutter that states will have to apply,” she said. “The EPA has a lot of flexibility under subtitle C. It’s not like they are going to treat this like nuclear waste. They will basically be able to mandate what types of landfills have to be used, what sort of protections have to be installed and they have the ability to enforce those rules.”

Nicole Molt, director of government relations for the Iowa Association of Business and Industry, said the regulations currently governing coal ash in Iowa protect the environment and public health. To prove this she points to a survey released earlier this month by the EPA showing sites in Iowa are not considered to pose any risk.

However, environmentalists point out that the survey focuses on wet coal-ash dumping ponds similar to the type that failed in Tennessee, spilling nearly a billion gallons of coal ash sludge. Those sites are not considered as dangerous in Iowa. It does not include Iowa’s beneficial use sites.

Despite the encouraging words from the EPA, Hitt said the fight to finally pass federal regulations on coal ash disposal is not over.

“The coal industry is going to fight this as hard as they can, and they have a lot of money and connections in Washington,” she said. “So we shouldn’t take anything for granted. At the same time, the EPA has been very clear that these federal regulations are long overdue and they intend to issue these new rules. I’m confident they are going to be true to their word.”