The American Coal Ash Association 

15200 East Girard Avenue, Suite 3050 

Aurora, Colorado 80014-3955 

720 870 7897 Phone 720 870 7889 Fax 

info@acaa-usa.org www.acaa-usa.org 

 

April 9, 2009 

 

The Honorable Lisa Jackson 

Administrator 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Room 3000 

Ariel Rios Building 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Dear Administrator Jackson: 

The American Coal Ash Association (ACAA) is strongly opposed to possible actions by 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that would regulate fly ash and bottom 

ash as hazardous wastes. 

Fly ash, bottom ash, and air emission control residues are generally referred to by the 

electric utility industry as coal combustion products (CCPs); however, some states call 

them coal combustion by-products (CCBs) or coal combustion residues (CCRs). They 

are, for the purpose of our discussion, the same. Any designation of these materials as 

hazardous wastes would have significant and long-lasting effects upon this nation’s 

willingness to beneficially use or reuse fly ash or bottom ash in sustainable construction 

applications. Even a “contingent” Subtitle C approach would have the same effect, as 

the industry would consider a contingent classification the equivalent to full Subtitle C. 

If EPA determines that national standards for fly ash and bottom ash disposal must be 

enacted, EPA’s action can and should be accomplished without designating CCPs as 

hazardous or contingent hazardous wastes. Either designation would unnecessarily 

stigmatize CCPs. These materials have safe beneficial uses which EPA should 

continue to promote, allowing our society to move closer to zero waste, reducing 

consumption of natural resources, and assisting with climate change. 

ACAA believes that a recent letter from the Association of State and Territorial Solid 

Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO) to Matt Hale dated April 1, 2009, is most 

pertinent when it states, “...it is critical that all relevant factors be considered in deciding 

an appropriate course of action.” Furthermore, “...the vast State experience with testing 

CCBs shows that they are generally not characteristically hazardous. Coal combustion 

byproducts rarely, if ever, fail the criteria by which materials are determined to be 

hazardous. To artificially classify them as hazardous will needlessly limit the 

management options for both the CCBs and other wastes legitimately classified as 
To: EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson 

From: American Coal Ash Association 

Date: 9 April 2009 

Page: 2 of 3 

hazardous, which will be competing with CCBs for limited hazardous waste disposal 

capacity while not producing any greater degree of environmental protection. 

Transportation, manifesting, and licensing requirements for CCBs as a listed hazardous 

waste are excessively burdensome without sufficient evidence of a benefit.” 

In two previous determinations in 1993 and 2000, EPA found fly ash and bottom ash 

to be safe when properly managed, and there was no requirement to manage them 

under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). In President 

Obama’s March 9, 2009, Order on Scientific Integrity, he stated, “Science and the 

scientific process must inform and guide decisions of my Administration...” Extensive 

scientific study under the direction of both Democrat and Republican administrations 

has concluded that beneficial use of CCPs is safe for public health and has determined 

these materials should not be considered hazardous. 

Based on these previous decisions, beneficial use of these materials has grown to be 

a multibillion-dollar industry. Our fragile economy would suffer another significant blow 

if the beneficial use of fly ash and bottom ash ceased, which would be the direct 

consequence of a hazardous waste designation. Job losses related to beneficial use 

would be measured in the tens of thousands and substantial environmental benefits 

would be forfeited. In a recent 2009 report by the Freedonia Group, it was reported that 

recycled-content (e.g., fly ash, blast furnace slag) concrete sales reached $9.5 billion in 

2008, representing 15% of green building material demand. Demand for recycledcontent concrete is forecast to grow 8.4% per year to $14.3 billion in 2013, accounting 

for an increasing share of total concrete used. Loss of these valuable mineral resources 

to this sector of our green economy would be severe if they were to be designated by 

EPA as hazardous or contingent hazardous wastes.

 

Each year, significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are achieved worldwide 

by fly ash reuse. As a nation, we need to take advantage of real and quantifiable 

greenhouse gas reductions related to the use of fly ash as a partial replacement for 

portland cement in concrete products. The international community, EPA, and individual 

states have recognized the value fly ash reuse has to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions. We need to be ardent in ensuring that actions to address permanent 

disposal of coal ash in appropriate facilities do not damage legitimate green economy 

uses that allow our economy and society to move toward lower carbon dioxide 

emissions and significantly reduce waste disposal activities. 

EPA actions should seek to reinvigorate safe and environmentally sound beneficial 

reuse. Current EPA programs include the Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines and 

Environmentally Preferable Purchasing practices, which require federal agencies to 

purchase green products and services, including recycled-content products. For 

example, federal concrete projects used an estimated 5.3 million metric tons of coal fly 

ash in 2004 and 2005 combined. Greater focus by EPA on these guidelines could drive 

these numbers much higher. Federal purchasing and procurement guidelines also set a 

model for green supply chain activities. Architects, builders, and project owners follow 

federal leadership, and they also adhere to construction recommendations like 
To: EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson

From: American Coal Ash Association

Date: 9 April 2009 

Page: 3 of 3 

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and the Green Building 

Initiative to promote more sustainable construction. 

We believe EPA should not classify CCPs as hazardous wastes but rather: 

• Work with other federal agencies like the U.S. Department of Transportation and 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to increase fly ash utilization in concrete and other 

proven applications that support a growing green supply chain. 

• Develop monetary and regulatory incentives to promote CCP reuse in order to 

reduce volumes of materials that would otherwise need disposal. 

• Encourage research that demonstrates the advantages of using CCPs as 

sustainable construction materials that help conserve natural resources. 

• Develop regulatory schemes that credit the use of fly ash in concrete as a 

greenhouse gas offset, building upon state models in existence today. 

The passage of the recent economic stimulus package related to infrastructure 

construction provides numerous opportunities to launch these types of efforts, as will 

upcoming legislative efforts designed to further define our nation’s green economy. 

We would like to work with you and the Agency to minimize CCP disposal. EPA efforts 

to designate these materials as hazardous wastes for purposes of disposal will not have 

the desired effect, but rather will have a significant negative impact on beneficial use. 

Similarly, a hybrid approach wherein they might be considered safe for beneficial use 

but would require disposal under RCRA Subtitle C for disposal would have the same 

negative impact on reuse. A hazardous waste designation for disposal will cripple the 

ability to use CCPs productively – potentially creating 130 million tons of “waste” 

annually and eliminating millions of tons of greenhouse gas emission reductions. 

Disposal standards can and should be addressed without unnecessarily stigmatizing 

resources that support sustainability through beneficial use and are preferred 

alternatives to disposal. A hazardous determination is not supported by science or three 

decades of experience where proper management activities have been protective of 

public health and the environment. 

Sincerely, Sincerely, 

 Thomas H. Adams Mark M. Bryant 

Executive Director Chair 

American Coal Ash Association American Coal Ash Association 

cc: Robert Sussman, EPA - AA; Matt Hale, EPA - ORCR; Maria Vickers, EPA - ORCR