1
EPA
RESPONSE
TO
IMCC
DISCUSSION
OUTLINE
(
March
15,
2002
Draft)

Coal
Ash
Management
I.
Categories
of
Coal
Ash
Management
The
Discussion
Outline
identified
four
categories
of
ash
management:
1.
Used
as
product
(
e.
g.,
concrete,
asphalt
filler)
2.
Used
beneficially
in
the
environment
(
e.
g.,
structural
fill,
soil
additive)
3.
Used
beneficially
in
active
or
abandoned
minesites
4.
Disposal
EPA's
Regulatory
Determination
identified
these
same
management
practices
but
grouped
them
into
different
categories
("
Notice
of
Regulatory
Determination
on
Wastes
From
the
Combustion
of
Fossil
Fuels,"
Federal
Register,
Vol.
65,
No.
99,
May
22,
2000,
pages
32214­
32237;
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
other/
fossil/
ff2f­
fr.
pdf):
1.
Beneficial
use,
including
waste
stabilization,
beneficial
construction
applications
(
e.
g.,
cement,
concrete,
brick
and
concrete
products,
road
bed,
structural
fill,
blasting
grit,
wall
board,
insulation,
roofing
materials),
agricultural
applications
(
e.
g.,
as
a
substitute
for
lime)
and
other
applications
(
absorbents,
filter
media,
paints,
plastics
and
metals
manufacture,
snow
and
ice
control,
waste
stabilization).
2.
Minefill
(
i.
e.,
placement
of
ash
in
or
on
land
from
which
minerals
are
being
or
have
been
extracted).
3.
Landfill
or
impoundment
disposal.

EPA
exempted
all
categories
from
regulation
as
hazardous
wastes
and
indicated
no
need
to
discontinue
any
management
category.
EPA
continues
to
encourage
the
beneficial
use
of
ash,
particularly
as
products
(
e.
g.,
EPA's
Comprehensive
Procurement
Guidelines;
see
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
non­
hw/
procure/
products/
cement.
htm).
However,
EPA
determined
that
regulations
under
Subtitle
D
of
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA)
are
needed
for
the
third
category
(
landfill
or
impoundment
disposal).
Also,
EPA
determined
that
regulations
under
RCRA
Subtitle
D
and/
or
the
Surface
Mining
Control
and
Reclamation
Act
(
SMCRA)
are
needed
for
situations
where
CCW
is
placed
at
minesites
(
minefill).

In
its
Regulatory
Determination,
EPA
acknowledged
that
placement
of
ash
at
minesites
can
provide
significant
benefits.
EPA
also
recognized
in
the
Regulatory
Determination
that,
when
not
done
properly,
placement
of
CCW
at
mine
sites
has
the
potential
to
contaminate
ground
water
to
levels
that
endanger
human
health
and
the
2
environment.

II.
Coal
Ash
Management
Principles
for
Beneficial
Use
Ash
Characterization
EPA,
through
its
Regulatory
Determination,
exempted
ash
from
regulation
as
a
hazardous
waste.
Thus,
for
purposes
of
the
federal
RCRA,
ash
need
not
be
characterized
via
the
TCLP
to
determine
whether
it
is
a
hazardous
waste.
However,
it
is
appropriate
to
analyze
ash
to
determine
whether
its
placement
in
mines
might
pose
a
threat
to
human
health
or
the
environment
or
whether
it
would
pose
any
special
handling
problems.
Some
State
programs
require
receiving
mines
to
characterize
ash
either
periodically
(
e.
g.,
quarterly
or
semiannually)
or
when
the
source
of
ash
changes
(
e.
g.,
ash
from
a
different
burner
or
ash
produced
from
a
different
coal).
Characterization
is
usually
done
through
EPA's
TCLP
or
some
other
leaching
procedure
using
water
found
at
the
mine
site
or
elsewhere.
Presently,
EPA
is
unclear
as
to
how
States
determine
whether
a
specific
ash's
characteristics
are
acceptable
for
minefill,
i.
e.
the
risk
analysis
procedures,
risk
levels,
and
standards
which
States
employ
in
their
decision­
making.
EPA
wishes
to
learn
of
ash
characterization
procedures
which
will
ensure
adequate
protection
of
public
health
and
safety
and
the
environment.

Placement
in
Mines
EPA
has
observed
several
beneficial
uses
of
mine
placement
of
ash.
Coal
ash
is
a
manageable
material
in
a
mine
environment,
particularly
a
surface
mine
environment,
where
it
can
be
placed,
spread,
and
compacted
by
heavy
equipment
common
to
the
mine
environment.
Mine
placement
beneficially
employs
ash
to
occupy
void
space,
allowing
the
mine
site
to
be
reclaimed
close
to
original
contours.
Placement
of
ash
in
mines
can
be
especially
cost­
effective
for
power
plants
which
have
difficulty
obtaining
land
for
disposal
of
ash.
This
is
particularly
true
for
older
power
plants
which
have
filled
adjacent
land
with
ash
generated
in
past
years.
These
power
plants
are
often
located
adjacent
to
rivers,
causing
them
to
be
land­
locked
on
at
least
one
side;
and
are
often
in
areas
where
adjacent
land
is
unavailable
at
reasonable
cost
or
is
inappropriate
(
e.
g.,
hydrology,
geology,
flood
plain,
incompatible
land
uses)
for
ash
disposal.
Placement
of
ash
in
mines
avoids
the
need
to
utilize
green
space
to
develop
disposal
facilities
for
ash.
Additionally,
alkaline
ash
can
be
placed
in
mine
sites
so
as
to
beneficially
mitigate
acid
mine
drainage
problems.
Cementitious
alkaline
ash
can
also
beneficially
isolate
acid­
forming
spoil
at
mine
sites,
thereby
preventing
formation
of
harmful
acid
drainage.
EPA
does
not
believe
that
it
can
be
generalized
that
mine
environments
are
safe
environments
for
disposal
of
ash
or
are
geochemical
environments
conducive
to
such
placement.
Rather,
EPA
believes
that
this
must
be
considered
only
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.
A
specifically
designed,
scientifically
sound,
decision­
making
process,
in
which
3
risk
is
evaluated
and
the
public
has
a
role,
should
be
employed
in
making
such
determinations.
The
decision­
making
process,
including
the
risk
assessment,
must
recognize
that
large
amounts
of
ash,
a
material
foreign
to
the
natural
materials
at
the
mine,
will
be
placed
at
the
mine
site.
Also,
the
process
must
recognize
that
the
mine
site
is
an
extensive
area
which
has
been
substantially
disturbed
and
re­
formed,
altering
the
natural
hydrology,
geology,
and
soils.

III.
Coal
Ash
Regulatory
Principles
for
Beneficial
Use
Not
a
Hazardous
Waste
EPA
has
formally
exempted
ash
from
regulation
as
a
hazardous
waste
but
believes
coal
ash
should
be
properly
managed
so
as
to
not
adversely
impact
human
health
and
the
environment
now
and
in
the
future.
EPA
has
identified
no
documented
cases
of
damage
resulting
from
placement
of
ash
in
coal
mines.
EPA
is
aware
that
ash
has
caused
environmental
damage
when
placed
in
sand
and
gravel
pits
and
in
some
designed
disposal
units,
an
indication
of
the
potential
for
ash
to
cause
damage.
EPA
is
trying
to
better
understand
whether
the
damages
identified
elsewhere
can
occur
at
coal
mines,
and
if
so,
what
preventative
measures
need
to
be
taken.
EPA
recognizes
that
mine
sites
are
complex,
disturbed
environments
which
pose
a
formidable
challenge
to
ground­
water
modeling
and
monitoring
efforts.
As
a
result,
EPA
is
uncertain
whether
the
lack
of
known
damage
cases
is
due
to
complexities
which
impede
monitoring,
inability
to
discern
the
impacts
of
ash
from
those
of
mining
activities,
lack
of
or
inadequate
monitoring,
or
true
absence
of
adverse
impacts.
Because
mine
placement
is
a
relatively
recent
practice,
it
is
possible
that
insufficient
time
has
passed
to
be
able
to
realize
or
measure
adverse
impacts
of
the
practice.
EPA
couples
this
concern
with
the
possibility
that
existing
regulations
may
authorize
monitoring
to
cease
before
problems
become
evident.
In
its
Minefill
Risk
Assessment/
Modeling
(
MRAM)
project,
EPA
is
working
closely
with
a
variety
of
stakeholders
to
assemble
case
study
data
on
long­
term
monitoring
of
a
large
number
of
facilities.
This
compilation
and
analysis
of
data
on
ground­
water
quality
and
site
and
ash
characterization
should
advance
the
state
of
knowledge
and
contribute
to
improved
decision­
making.

State
and
Federal
Regulatory
Programs
EPA
believes
that
existing
SMCRA
and
RCRA
statutory
authorities
can
be
employed
to
properly
protect
public
health
and
safety
and
the
environment,
and
no
additional
statutory
authorities
are
required.
EPA
recognizes
that
States
and
federal
agencies,
specifically
OSM
and
EPA,
have
existing
regulatory
programs
which
have
been
operating
for
a
number
of
years
to
protect
human
health
and
safety
and
the
environment.
Varying
among
the
States,
these
regulatory
programs
are
a
blending
of
regulatory
requirements,
policy
memoranda,
and
guidelines
and
may
involve
multiple
regulatory
agencies.
From
the
perspective
of
the
public,
these
factors
increase
the
4
complexity
and
difficulty
of
discerning
specific
protective
requirements,
standards,
and
limits
which
are
enforceable
at
facilities.
It
is
difficult
for
the
public
to
understand
the
performance
levels
which
they
can
expect
from
specific
facilities,
how
they
can
know
whether
performance
levels
are
being
met
or
exceeded,
and
where
accountability
rests
for
compliance
assurance
and
issues
such
as
QA/
QC
of
monitoring
data.
Placement
of
ash
at
mine
sites
is
a
permanent
action
which
cannot
feasibly
be
undone,
should
adverse
impacts
become
apparent
in
the
future.
For
this
reason,
especially,
EPA
agrees
that
it
is
imperative
for
State
and
federal
regulatory
agencies
to
cooperate
in
making
the
best
use
of
existing
regulatory
and
statutory
authorities
to
protect
public
health
and
safety
and
the
environment.
Working
with
OSM
and
State
regulatory
agencies,
EPA
is
currently
striving
to
document
an
understanding
of
the
State­
federal
cooperative
regulatory
framework
under
which
ash
is
placed
at
mine
sites
and
whether
this
framework
assures
the
public
of
adequate
protection
of
health
and
the
environment.
Public
assurance
appears
somewhat
elusive,
perhaps
due
to
the
flexibility
and
discretion
of
regulatory
programs
and
the
complexities
of
differing
ash
and
minesite
characteristics.
EPA
is
being
strongly
encouraged
by
public
advocacy
groups
to
carefully
ensure
adequate
protection
of
health
and
the
environment.

Public
Involvement
EPA
agrees
that
opportunity
for
public
involvement
in
approval
and
oversight
of
ash
placement
in
mine
sites
is
necessary.
Through
an
enforceable
regulatory
process
in
which
they
have
a
voice,
the
public
requires
assurances
that:
°
Characteristics
of
ash
and
the
mine
site
are
compatible
for
intended
placement;
°
Placement
will
not
create
or
exacerbate
problems;
°
A
viable
mechanism
exists
to
ensure
remediation
of
problems,
should
they
occur;
and
°
If
placement
is
intended
for
a
purpose
beyond
ash
disposal
(
e.
g.,
AMD
remediation,
fire
control,
subsidence
control,
etc.),
the
intended
purposes
will
be
achieved.

Beneficial
Use
at
Minesites
EPA
acknowledges
that
ash
can
be
strategically
placed
at
minesites
so
as
to
provide
a
benefit
to
mine
operations
and/
or
reclamation.
For
example,
ash
has
been
placed
at
minesites
in
a
manner
that
has
beneficially
mitigated
mine
drainage
problems,
controlled
mine
fires,
prevented
subsidence,
achieved
approximate
original
contours,
and
fostered
revegetation.
EPA
understands
that,
where
such
beneficial
uses
are
intended,
States
examine
ash
characteristics
to
determine
whether
the
ash
is
compatible
with
the
intended
uses.
EPA
appreciates
the
value
of
these
beneficial
uses
to
mine
operations
and
reclamation,
particularly
to
mine
operators
and
regulators
charged
with
overseeing
the
operations
and
reclamation
of
mines.
EPA's
paramount
interest
extends
beyond
these
benefits
to
the
potential
adverse
impact
of
the
ash
on
the
environment.
Within
the
framework
of
this
interest,
EPA
agrees
that
it
must
be
5
determined
that
use
of
ash
or
disposal
of
ash
at
selected
sites
will
not
create
problems
or
exacerbate
existing
problems.
This
determination
is
particularly
important
because
placement
is
a
permanent
action
not
feasibly
undone.

IV.
Disposal/
Placement
at
Minesites
(
including
Beneficial
Use)

EPA
solicits
the
help
of
OSM
and
State
regulatory
agencies
in
providing
assurances
to
the
public
that
existing
SMCRA
and
RCRA
statutory
authorities
establish
a
regulatory
framework
which
adequately
ensures
protection
of
health
and
the
environment
where
ash
is
placed
at
mine
sites.
Drawing
on
the
substantial
experience
and
expertise
of
OSM
and
State
regulatory
agencies
in
overseeing
ash
placement
at
mine
sites,
EPA
expects
to
document
the
elements
of
regulation
appropriate
to
the
practice
such
that
the
public
can
have
a
better
understanding
of,
and
a
higher
level
of
comfort
in,
the
protections
afforded
by
the
regulatory
programs.
From
discussions
to
date
with
OSM
and
State
regulatory
authorities,
as
well
as
other
stakeholders,
EPA
agrees
that
potential
regulatory
program
components
would
provide
appropriate
opportunities
for
public
involvement
and
would
address:
°
Waste
(
ash)
characterization
°
Site
considerations
(
i.
e.
site
prohibitions;
operation
plans;
approximate
original
contour;
buffer
zones;
physical
hazards;
hydrologic
analyses)
°
Environmental
controls
(
i.
e.
volume
restrictions;
placement
requirements;
use
of
liners;
compaction;
state
ground
water
protection
plans;
water
quality
standards;
air
quality
standards;
monitoring;
reporting)
°
Determination
of
End
Points
(
i.
e.
active
mining
=
contemporaneous
reclamation;
abandoned
mines
=
reclamation;
disposal
=
closure)
°
Assurance
of
Project
Completion
(
i.
e.
financial
assurances
(
surety
bonds,
insurance,
etc.);
enforcement
authorities;
clean­
up
authorities
and
funds
(
CERCLA);
risk
analysis;
other
regulatory
controls
(
BMPs,
NPDES,
Waste
Regulations)).

V.
Conclusions
As
described
in
section
I,
above,
EPA's
Regulatory
Determination
categorized
several
ash
management
practices
as
"
beneficial
use"
and
explained
the
Agency's
view
that
further
regulation
of
these
practices
by
EPA
is
not
needed.
For
landfill
and
impoundment
disposal
practices,
EPA
is
developing
RCRA
Subtitle
D
regulations
for
proposal
and
public
comment.
For
minefill
practices,
EPA
continues
to
work
with
OSM
and
State
regulatory
agencies
to
identify
desirable
regulatory
enhancements
for
promulgation
under
RCRA
Subtitle
D
and/
or
SMCRA
to
increase
the
public's
comfort
6
with
the
safety
of
the
practice.
Differences
in
geology,
climate,
ash
characteristics,
and
other
factors
speak
to
the
need
for
flexibility
in
any
additional
federal
regulations,
allowing
the
States
to
build
on
their
experience
in
implementing
existing
State
and
federal
laws.
Public
availability
of
monitoring
and
inspection
data
and
information
will
be
important
to
increase
public
acceptance
of
the
permanent
placement
of
ash
at
minesites
as
a
practice
which
is
protective
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
