# 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 represente d by the National League of Cities (NLC), we appreciate the opportunity to prov ide input on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Proposed St andards 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 dire cts federal agencies to consult with elected state and local government officials, or their representative national organizations, when developing regulations and poli cies that impose substantial compliance costs on state and local governments. EP A’s preliminary estimates indicate that the cumulative state and local govern ment compliance costs for the forthcoming proposed rule to develop standards unde r 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 st ate 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 t he environmental quality of life in our communities, and we commend you for your eff orts 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 whethe r 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, S r., 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 fina ncial 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 co nstructed to serve as hazardous waste landfills. If CCRs are regulated as a hazardous waste, local g overnments will face several costly options for disposal: reconstruct existing landfills to acc ept hazardous waste, construct new landfills within their communities, or, more likely, transpor t 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 the y could handle the amount of CCRs produced nationwide that would require disposal.

With these landfills located across the country, th e transportation costs would be significant for local governments. For example, the League of Nebra ska 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 land fill, would be $7.2 million dollars annually. This estimate assumes a $45 per ton non-hazardous d isposal fee, which is based on the U.S. national average tipping fee. In reality, the dispo sal 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 m onitoring systems located at their coal fired generation facilities.

In another example, the city of Springfield, Illino is estimates that treatment, disposal and transportation costs for their estimated 70,000 ton s of CCRs could range from $8.2 million to $19.95 million annually. Additionally, they estimat e that loading the materials and handling the manifests could cost the city up to $200,000 annual ly.

Elimination of Revenue from Beneficial Uses

Most communities sell a portion of their coal ash t o third parties for beneficial uses such as road construction, cement manufacture, and wall board. I f CCRs are regulated as a hazardous waste, they could no longer be accepted for these benefici al 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 c onstruction projects, including the cost and availability of materials, increase in total projec t cost, and potential project delay.

For example, the Texas Municipal Power Agency, whos e 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 re gulating CCRs as a hazardous waste would have on local governments. With approximately 74 el ectric utility plants possibly affected by this regulation which are owned by 60 state or local jur isdictions, 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 pow er producers. While local governments share EPA’s goals for improving and protecting the enviro nment, 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 Int ergovernmental Relations, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency