June 23, 2010 

VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION & U.S. MAIL

Mr. Steve Souders 

Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Mail Code: 5304P 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

Email: souders.steve@epa.gov 

Re: Request for Extension of Comment Period 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the Identification and Listing of Special 

Wastes: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities 

75 Fed. Reg. 35128 (June 21, 2010) 

 Docket No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640

Dear Mr. Souders: 

 The Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (“USWAG”)1 hereby requests a 120-day 

extension to the comment period on EPA’s Proposed Rulemaking for the “Identification 

and Listing of Special Wastes: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric 

Utilities.” 75 Fed. Reg.35128 (June 21, 2010). 

 As the Agency is well aware, this is not the run-of-the-mill proposed rule. The 

proposal contains at least four major components, all of which involve multifaceted policy, 

legal, and technical issues, including (1) EPA's proposed reversal of its 2000 Final 

Regulatory Determination for coal combustion residuals (“CCRs”), (2) detailed and highly 

complex proposed Subtitle C regulations for CCRs, (3) detailed and equally complex 

proposed Subtitle D regulations for CCRs, and (4) a range of possible regulatory controls 

for the beneficial use of CCRs. In addition, EPA seeks comment on a voluminous and 

complex regulatory impact analysis ("RIA"), as well as on a myriad of additional issues 

including, EPA's compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act and EPA's proposed 

findings under Executive Order 13211 for “Actions that Significantly Affect Energy 

Supply, Distribution, or Use.” USWAG respectfully suggests that a 90-day comment 

period is not adequate to allow members of the public, including USWAG’s members, to 

 

1

 USWAG was formed in 1978, and is a trade association of power generation, transmission, and 

distribution companies. USWAG’s members include over 110 individual electric companies and 

three trade associations: the Edison Electric Institute, the National Rural Electric Cooperative 

Association, and the American Public Power Association. 
Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery 

June 23, 2010 

Page 2 of 2 

2

respond to the literally hundreds of detailed policy, technical, legal, and other substantive 

issues raised in this far-reaching co-proposal. 

 As EPA correctly acknowledges, the magnitude and significance of this rulemaking 

initiative demand that any final rule be based on sound science and that EPA's decisionmaking processes “are transparent and encourage the greatest degree of public 

participation.” 73 Fed. Reg. at 35133. Given the breadth of options presented in the 

proposal and the detailed issues associated with each option, a final rule based on the 

greatest degree of public participation and sound science will require more time for the 

public to evaluate and properly respond to the co-proposal. For example, in responding to 

the RIA alone, it will be necessary to develop technical economic reports evaluating the 

cost impacts of the various regulatory scenarios, including some cost impacts that EPA 

readily acknowledges are not included in the current RIA (i.e., compliance costs under the 

Subtitle C option for CCR management units located upstream of CCR disposal units). In 

addition, the collection, compilation and analysis of market data on the adverse impacts to 

CCR beneficial use that would result under the Subtitle C option will take more than the 90 

days currently allowed for under the proposal. 

 It is imperative that EPA allow adequate time for the public to fully analyze, 

understand and respond to this multifaceted proposal which has enormous environmental, 

energy, and policy implications. An extension is especially appropriate where, as here, the 

Agency is not under any statutory or court-ordered deadline to complete this rulemaking 

initiative by a specified date. USWAG therefore respectfully requests that EPA extend the 

comment period on the co-proposal by an additional 120 days to provide our membership 

and the public at large with adequate time to respond. 

 If you need further information about this request, please contact me or USWAG 

counsel Douglas Green (202-344-4483; dhgreen@venable.com). 

 Sincerely, 

 

 James R. Roewer 

 Executive Director 

 Utility Solid Waste Activities Group 

cc: Robert Dellinger, EPA; dellinger.robert@epa.gov 

 Betsy Devlin, EPA; devlin.betsy@epa.gov