October 9, 2009 

Mr. Mathy Stanislaus 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Dear Mr. Stanislaus: 

On behalf of the 19,000 cities and towns represented by the National League of 

Cities (NLC), we appreciate the opportunity to provide input on the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Proposed Standards for the Management 

of Coal Combustion Residuals Generated by Electric Power Producers pursuant to 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA). 

As you know, Executive Order 13132: Federalism directs federal agencies to consult 

with elected state and local government officials, or their representative national 

organizations, when developing regulations and policies that impose substantial 

compliance costs on state and local governments. EPA’s preliminary estimates 

indicate that the cumulative state and local government compliance costs for the 

forthcoming proposed rule to develop standards under the Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (RCRA) for the management of coal combustion residuals 

(CCRs) generated by electric power producers could well exceed EPA’s $25 million 

threshold that triggers formal consultation with state and local elected officials. 

EPA’s consultation with state and local governments on this matter represents the 

first time EPA regulations have met the $25 million threshold triggering a federalism 

and unfunded mandates review. Local governments and EPA have a long and 

productive history of working together to improve the environmental quality of life 

in our communities, and we commend you for your efforts on early consultation 

with state and local government leaders. 

Since 2000, the disposal of CCRs has been regulated under RCRA as a nonhazardous waste. NLC does not have policy on whether CCRs should be regulated 

as a hazardous or non-hazardous waste, however, we urge you to consider the 

financial impact a future regulation of CCRs under RCRA as a hazardous waste 

To strengthen 

and promote 

cities as centers 

of opportunity, 

leadership, and 

governance. 

National League 

of Cities

1301 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20004-1763 

202-626-3000 

Fax: 202-626-3043 

www.nlc.org 

2009 Officers 

President 

Kathleen M. Novak 

Mayor 

Northglenn, Colorado 

First Vice President

Ronald O. Loveridge 

Mayor 

Riverside, California 

Second Vice President 

James E. Mitchell, Jr. 

Council Member 

Charlotte, North Carolina 

Immediate Past President 

James C. Hunt 

Councilmember 

Clarksburg, West Virginia 

Executive Director 

Donald J. Borut 

Past Presidents: John DeStefano, Jr., Mayor, New Haven, Connecticut • Brian J. O'Neill, Councilman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Directors: John S. Brenner, Mayor, York, Pennsylvania • Carl 

Brewer, Mayor, Wichita, Kansas • William G. “Bill” Brooks, Mayor, Belle Isle, Florida • Jim Byard, Jr., Mayor, Prattville, Alabama • Malcom Chapman, Alderman, Rapid City, South Dakota • Miguel M. 

Chavez, Councilor/Mayor Pro Tem, Santa Fe, New Mexico • Brad Cole, Mayor, Carbondale, Illinois • Mildred C. Crump, Councilwoman at-Large, Newark, New Jersey • Joseph A. Curtatone, Mayor, 

Somerville, Massachusetts • Joe Davis, Sr., Alderman, Milwaukee, Wisconsin • Gretchen Driskell, Mayor, Saline, Michigan • Doug Echols, Mayor, Rock Hill, South Carolina • James J. Finley, Jr., 

Executive Director and CEO, Connecticut Conference of Municipalities • Larry G. Frang, Executive Director, Illinois Municipal League • J. David Fraser, Executive Director, Nevada League of Cities and 

Municipalities • Dan Furtado, Councilmember, Campbell, California • Miriam Hair, Executive Director, Municipal Association of South Carolina • Rap Hankins, Council Member, Trotwood, Ohio • Deborah A. 

Hill, Councilwoman, Warrensville Heights, Ohio • Edna Branch Jackson, Mayor Pro-Tem/Alderman at-Large, Savannah, Georgia • Bobby G. Kilgore, Mayor, Monroe, North Carolina • George Lewis,

Executive Director, Mississippi Municipal League • Sylvia L. Lovely, Executive Director, Kentucky League of Cities, Inc. • Myron Lowery, Council Member, Memphis, Tennessee • Sam Mamet, Executive 

Director, Colorado Municipal League • James F. Miller, Executive Director, League of Minnesota Cities • Mark Mitchell, Council Member, Tempe, Arizona • Garret L. Nancolas, Mayor, Caldwell, Idaho •

Frank C. Ortis, Mayor, Pembroke Pines, Florida • Tzeitel Paras-Caracci, Council Member, Duarte, California • Elizabeth C. Paterson, Mayor, Mansfield, Connecticut • Randall W. B. Purvis, Council 

Member, Colorado Springs, Colorado • Debbie W. Quinn, Councilmember, Fairhope, Alabama • Sonja Reece, Mayor Pro Tem, Normal, Illinois • Ed P. Reyes, Councilmember, Los Angeles, California •

Sergio Rodriguez, Alderman, New Haven, Connecticut • Steve Salazar, Councilmember, Dallas, Texas • Audwin M. Samuel, Mayor Pro Tem, Beaumont, Texas • Sharyn T. Tallman, Councilor, 

Parkersburg, West Virginia • James Taylor, Councilman, Littleton, Colorado
Mathy Stanislaus 

October 9, 2009 

Page Two 

would have on local governments. This two-fold financial impact on local governments—an 

increase in the cost of disposal and an elimination of revenue from beneficial uses—will 

ultimately result in higher rates for taxpayers. 

Increase in Cost of Disposal

Existing municipal landfills are not designed or constructed to serve as hazardous waste landfills. 

If CCRs are regulated as a hazardous waste, local governments will face several costly options 

for disposal: reconstruct existing landfills to accept hazardous waste, construct new landfills 

within their communities, or, more likely, transport the material to one of the 21 landfills in the 

United States designated as a commercial hazardous waste landfill. These 21 landfills have 

limited capacity and it is questionable whether they could handle the amount of CCRs produced 

nationwide that would require disposal. 

With these landfills located across the country, the transportation costs would be significant for 

local governments. For example, the League of Nebraska Municipalities estimates that the cost 

to the cities of Fremont, Grand Island and Hastings for disposal fees and transportation to 

Denver, the nearest commercial hazardous waste landfill, would be $7.2 million dollars annually. 

This estimate assumes a $45 per ton non-hazardous disposal fee, which is based on the U.S. 

national average tipping fee. In reality, the disposal fee for hazardous material may be 

significantly higher. Additionally, each city would need to abandon its permitted monofill 

landfill, which is lined and contains groundwater monitoring systems located at their coal fired 

generation facilities. 

In another example, the city of Springfield, Illinois estimates that treatment, disposal and 

transportation costs for their estimated 70,000 tons of CCRs could range from $8.2 million to 

$19.95 million annually. Additionally, they estimate that loading the materials and handling the 

manifests could cost the city up to $200,000 annually. 

Elimination of Revenue from Beneficial Uses

Most communities sell a portion of their coal ash to third parties for beneficial uses such as road 

construction, cement manufacture, and wall board. If CCRs are regulated as a hazardous waste, 

they could no longer be accepted for these beneficial uses and local governments would be 

forced to cancel contracts and purchase agreements, thereby losing the revenue generated from 

the sale. This would result in a direct impact on construction projects, including the cost and 

availability of materials, increase in total project cost, and potential project delay. 

For example, the Texas Municipal Power Agency, whose member cities include Bryan, Denton, 

Greenville and Garland, estimates that the loss of local revenue would be approximately $1 

million annually. 
Mathy Stanislaus 

October 9, 2009 

Page Three 

These are a few examples of the financial impact regulating CCRs as a hazardous waste would 

have on local governments. With approximately 74 electric utility plants possibly affected by this 

regulation which are owned by 60 state or local jurisdictions, the cumulative financial impact on 

local governments nationwide would be significant. 

Thank you for considering the perspective of cites and towns as you gather input for regulating 

coal combustion residuals generated by electric power producers. While local governments share 

EPA’s goals for improving and protecting the environment, we continue to be deeply concerned 

about the high and growing costs of complying with federal regulations. Together we can reach 

our mutal goals of improving the quality of life in communities we both aim to serve while 

considering the fiscal impact of those decisions. 

Sincerely, 

Donald J. Borut 

Executive Director 

CC: Andrew Hanson, Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, U.S. 

 Environmental Protection Agency