Assessment of Previously Identified Proven 

Damage and Recently Alleged Damage Cases

Prepared for

U.S. EPA, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

EPA Contract No. EP-W-07-003

Work Assignment No. 3-88

October 2010

ICF International

9300 Lee Highway

Fairfax, VA 22031 USA

ICF Reference Number 026418.3.388.02
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote i

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background.................................................................................................................1

1.2 Defining Proven Damage............................................................................................2

1.3 Defining Potential Damage.........................................................................................2

2.0 Cases to Be Reviewed .................................................................................................3

2.1 Previously Identified Proven Damage Cases..............................................................3

2.2 Recently Alleged Damage Cases................................................................................3

3.0 Methodology.................................................................................................................4

4.0 Findings for Previously Identified Proven Damage Cases........................................6

5.0 Findings for Recently Alleged Damage Cases.........................................................17

6.0 References..................................................................................................................37

Appendix A: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Cases .............38

Appendix B: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases ...........................39

Appendix C: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases ..............................40

List of Figures

Figure 1: Overview Map of Cases and Determinations............................................................ 6

List of Tables

Table 1:Elements of Proven Damage Criteria .......................................................................... 5

Table 2: Summary of Previously Identified 27 Proven Damage Case Assessments................ 7

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s................................. 9

Table 4: Summary of February 2010 Alleged Damage Case Assessments............................ 17

Table 5: Summary of August 2010 Alleged Damage Case Assessments............................... 18

Table 6: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases ............................................ 19

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases............................................... 25
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 1

1.0Introduction 

This report details the data compilation, review, and analysis of previously identified proven 

damage cases and recently alleged cases of damage to human health or the environment caused 

by coal combustion residuals (CCRs). The purpose of this report is to better define the extent of 

existing damage cases in support of future federal regulations for the disposal of CCRs. This 

work was performed under EPA Contract No. EP-W-07-003 Work Assignment No. 3-88, for the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery 

(ORCR). All activities were completed in accordance with the work plan submitted to EPA on 

August 5, 2010 and technical direction of the EPA Work Assignment Manager (WAM).

1.1 Background 

In October, 1980, Congress enacted amendments to the Solid Waste Disposal Act (Public Law 

96-482), known as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Section 

3001(b)(3)(A) of RCRA, known as the Bevill Amendment, exempts certain “special wastes” 

including "fly ash waste, bottom ash waste, slag waste, and flue gas emission control waste 

generated primarily from the combustion of coal or other fossil fuels" from regulation as 

hazardous waste under Subtitle C of RCRA (Section 3001(b)(3)(A)(i). These materials, then 

referred to as Coal Combustion Wastes (CCWs), are now commonly referred to as CCRs. This 

exclusion from Subtitle C of RCRA required completion of a study, Report to Congress, and 

determination by the EPA Administrator either to promulgate regulations under Subtitle C or to 

declare such regulations unwarranted. Under RCRA Section 8002(n) EPA is statutorily required 

to examine eight study factors in this decision making. Two of the study factors the Agency was 

to examine are:

 Potential danger, if any, to human health and the environment from the disposal of such 

materials; and 

 Documented cases in which danger to human health or the environment from surface 

runoff or leachate has been proved from the disposal of CCRs.

Complete evaluation of these factors led EPA to publish Regulatory Determinations (RDs) in 

1993 and 2000 concluding that CCRs do not warrant regulation as hazardous waste under RCRA 

Subtitle C. In its May 2000 Regulatory Determination, EPA also stated that its findings would 

remain subjected to a continued review of among other factors “the extent to which [CCRs] have 

caused damage to human health or the environment; and the adequacy of existing regulation of 

the wastes.” (See 65 FR 32218) In May 2010, EPA proposed a CCR rule citing additional 

damage cases identified since the 2000 RD as one of the reasons for EPA’s decision to pursue 

federal regulation of CCR. 

Upon review of its own assessment criteria for classifying alleged damage cases as proven or 

potential, it appears that the third criterion applied towards a classification of proven damage 

case: “where there has been an administrative ruling or court decision with an explicit finding of 

specific damage to human health or the environment” may have been previously misapplied. 

Apparently, when assessing alleged damage cases in the past, administrative ruling or court 
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 2

decisions were erroneously classified as proven damage cases even though they were not 

associated with a specific finding of damage to human health or the environment.

This evaluation examines 27 sites previously determined by the EPA as proven damage cases, as 

well as 70, recently alleged damage cases brought to the attention of the EPA by citizens groups, 

to assess whether the facts of each case demonstrate proven or potential damage to human health 

or the environment.

1.2 Defining Proven Damage

The criteria used in this evaluation to determine whether danger to human health and the 

environment has been proven are: 

Proven damage case means those cases with 

(i) documented exceedances of primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or other 

health-based standards measured in groundwater at sufficient distance from the waste 

management unit to indicate that hazardous constituents have migrated to the extent 

that they could cause human health concerns, and/or 

(ii) where a scientific study provides documented evidence of another type of damage to 

human health or the environment (e.g., ecological damage), and/or 

(iii) where there has been an administrative ruling or court decision with an explicit 

finding of specific damage to human health or the environment. 

In cases of co-management of CCRs with other industrial waste types, CCRs must be clearly 

implicated in the reported damage.

1.3 Defining Potential Damage

The criterion used in this evaluation to identify potential damage cases is: 

Potential damage case (Per the May 2000 Regulatory Determination, 65 FR 32224) are those 

with (1) documented exceedances of primary MCLs or other health-based standards only directly 

beneath or in very close proximity to the waste source, and/or (2) documented exceedances of 

secondary MCLs or other health-based standards on-site or off-site1. For potential damage cases, 

while the association with CCRs has been established, the documented exceedances either were

not demonstrated at a sufficient distance from the waste management unit to indicate that waste 

constituents had migrated to the extent that they could cause human health concerns, or the 

exceedance involves constituents that are not known to cause a threat to human health and the 

environment. 

 

1 See also footnote #4 on page 3 of EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796-0015, Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case 

Assessments, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste July 9, 2007 
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 3

2.0Cases to Be Reviewed

This evaluation considers two primary categories of cases to be reviewed:

 Previously identified proven damage cases 

 Recently alleged damage cases 

Both categories use the same criteria and definitions for each category evaluated. 

2.1 Previously Identified Proven Damage Cases

With the 2007 Notice of Data Availability (NODA) and accompanying Damage Case 

Assessment2report EPA had compiled information on 135 alleged damage cases, 24 of which 

were determined by EPA to be proven damage cases, including 14 proven damage cases from the 

May 2000 Regulatory Determination. In response to the NODA, two groups of stakeholders 

submitted comments addressing the issue of damage cases. Citizen groups submitted several 

comments, with a total of 21 “new” alleged damage cases.3. Industry submitted a rebuttal to 

some of those “new” alleged damage cases.4 To verify the “new” alleged damage cases, EPA 

solicited feedback from nine state regulatory agencies as well as from EPA Region 9. In 

addition, based on the NODA-comments and on the newly reported incidents, EPA classified 

three of these recent incidents as proven damage cases, bringing the total number to 27 of proven 

damage cases reassessed in the current report.

In December 2009, EPA received a new report from the Electric Power Research Institute 

(EPRI) that addressed the 24 proven damage cases established in the 2007 NODA5. This report 

challenged EPA’s conclusions on many of the proven damage cases, often noting that there was 

not significant off-site contamination involving primary MCLs, one of EPA’s requirements for a 

damage case to be classified as proven. In addition, EPRI rejected several ecologic damage cases 

based on fish advisories in Texas on the grounds that the selenium toxicity criterion which 

triggered the fish advisories in the first place was modified by the State at a later date and 

subsequently, these advisories were rescinded. . At the time of this writing, the Agency learned 

that these reports were finalized in 2010 and are available from EPRI.6

2.2 Recently Alleged Damage Cases

In February 2010 a report authored by environmental and citizens groups identified 31 alleged 

damage cases.7 Of the 31 alleged damage cases in the report, 19 were submitted for the first time, 

 

2 EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796-0015, Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste July 9, 2007 

3 EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796. Documents 0070, 0347, 0424, 0443.1, 0443.3, 0443.6, and 0424.

4

Industry Rebuttal to Comments submitted by EarthJustice on EPA ‘s CCW Damage Case Assessment (EPA-HQRCRA-2006-0796-0446.3)

5 Evaluation of Coal Combustion Product Damage Cases (Volumes I and 2), Draft EPRI Report 1020553. 

November 2009. RCRA Docket EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0494 and EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0517.

6

 http://my.epri.com/portal/server.pt?Abstract_id=000000000001020553 and 

http://my.epri.com/portal/server.pt?Abstract_id=000000000001020554.

7 Out of Control: Mounting Damages From Coal Ash Waste Sites; Thirty-one New Damage Cases of Contamination 

from Improperly Disposed Coal Combustion Waste. Environmental Integrity Project and EarthJustice, accessible at: 

http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/Outof Control-MountingDamagesfromCoalAshWasteSites.pdf
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 4

while the remaining 12 had been previously submitted by EarthJustice as NODA comments. Of 

these 12, five were listed in the 2007 Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments. The 

previously reported cases were classified as follows: two cases (Clifty Creek and Brandywine) 

were classified as indeterminate; two cases (Big Bend and Colstrip) were not assessed although 

listed in the summary table; and one alleged case was classified as a Potential damage case (Fern 

Valley/Elrama.). All cases were fully assessed for the current report.

In August 2010 another report authored by environmental and citizens groups identified 39

alleged damage cases.8 Of the 39 alleged damage cases identified in this report eight cases were 

listed in the 2007 Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments. The previously reported 

cases were classified as follows: four cases (Muskingum River Plant, Clinch River Plant, Gavin 

Power Plant, and Cardinal Fly Ash Reservoir) were rejected as damage cases; and four cases

(Leland Olds Station, Hatfield’s Ferry Power, Columbia Energy Center, and Oak Creek Power 

Plant) were classified as indeterminate. All cases were fully assessed for the current report.

3.0Methodology

To assess these cases, ICF compiled available information in previous submittals, rebuttals, and 

relevant NODA comments. ICF also conducted internet research focusing on state regulatory 

information pertaining to the sites in question. For selected states and sites, state regulators were 

contacted to verify claims and research. All information was then evaluated against the criteria 

above. 

Affirmatively meeting any of the criteria in an assessment establishes a case as proven damage. 

However, each criterion is comprised of key elements that must be evaluated. Overall criteria 

were passed only when all elements were affirmatively present. Table 1 provides a description of 

the individual elements required for each criterion and the interpretations used in this report. 

Determinations of potential damage cases are more focused and less complex. Only those cases 

where exceedances in the groundwater of primary MCLs, secondary MCLs (SMCLs), or health 

based standards are documented without migration off site, or where exceedances of secondary

MCLs have been documented either on site or offsite are classified as potential damage. Based 

on this definition, sites may not be classified as potential damage cases using scientific studies or

administrative rulings. Evaluations of potential damage also are limited in that they may not 

consider surface water media or environmental damage.

 

8

In Harm’s Way: Lack Of Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers Americans And Their Environment, Thirty-nine 

New Damage Cases of Contamination from Improperly Disposed Coal Combustion Waste, Environmental Integrity 

Project, Earthjustice and Sierra Club, August 26, 2010, accessible at: 

http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/documents/inharmsway_final3.pdf
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 5

Table 1:Elements of Proven Damage Criteria

Criteria Element Interpretations used in this evaluation

Criterion i) 

Documented exceedances of primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or other health-based standards 

measured in groundwater at sufficient distance from the waste management unit to indicate that hazardous 

constituents have migrated to the extent that they could cause human health concerns,

Documented 

exceedances of

 Must be more than a single exceedance to indicate a possible pattern

 Exceedances must be documented and not anecdotal or from uncertain 

sources

Primary MCLs or other 

health based standards 

measured

 Excludes secondary MCLs, criteria that are not entirely health based, and 

benchmark values that are of lesser import than standards

In groundwater  Groundwater excludes all surface water including surface water used for 

drinking water or spring/seep discharges

At sufficient distance from 

the waste management 

unit

 Off-site is considered sufficient distance from the waste management unit 

even if it is within state mandated zones

 On site is not considered sufficient distance regardless of size of the site

To indicate that 

hazardous constituents 

have migrated to the 

extent that they could 

cause human health 

concerns

 Exceedances must be hazardous constituents from the CCRs, not native or 

co-managed waste materials mobilized by CCRs

 There must be an underlying human health concern from the migration; 

ecological or resource conservation concerns are not adequate to trigger 

 CCRs must be clearly implicated in the reported damage 

Criterion ii) 

where a scientific study provides documented evidence of another type of damage to human health or the 

environment (e.g., ecological damage), and/or

Scientific study provides

 Scientific studies include any studies using the scientific method in general 

but not limited to peer review or technical publications

 May include regulatory studies

Documented evidence of 

another type of damage

 The study must be documented, not anecdotal, from an uncertain source or 

underway without publication

 Such as ecologic damage in surface water

 Must provide evidence of actual damage, not just potential to cause 

damage

 CCRs must be clearly implicated in the reported damage

To human health or 

environment

 Either human health or environmental damage 

 Environmental damages include damage to mammals, amphibians, fish, 

benthic layer organisms and plants. 

Criterion iii)

where there has been an administrative ruling or court decision with an explicit finding of specific damage to human 

health or the environment.

Administrative ruling or 

court decision

 Any court decision or administrative ruling including settlements, 

addressing offsite migration

With an explicit finding of 

specific damage

 Must unambiguously state particular, actual damage, not just potential to 

cause damage

 CCRs must be clearly implicated in the reported damage

To human health or the 

environment

 Either human health or environmental damage 
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 6

4.0Findings for Previously Identified Proven Damage Cases

This evaluation verified that 13 of the 27 cases previously identified as proven damage cases met 

the criteria for proven damage cases. An additional 6 met the criteria for a potential damage case, 

while 8 did not meet the criteria for proven or potential damage cases. Figure 1 indicates the 

locations of all cases evaluated in this report along with the determination. A summary of the 

assessment for previously identified proven damage cases is provided in Table 2.

Figure 1: Overview Map of Cases and Determinations
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 7

Table 2: Summary of Previously Identified 27 Proven Damage Case Assessments

Determination

Number of 

Cases Rationale Breakdown (No. of Cases)

Proven Damage 15

Offsite primary MCL exceedance/Health-based standard only (3)

Offsite primary MCL exceedance and Administrative order indicating 

damage (4)

Proven Ecological damage only (2)

Proven ecological damage and Administrative order indicating damage (5)

Offsite primary MCL exceedance, ecological damage and Administrative 

order indicating damage (1)

Potential Damage 6 Onsite primary MCL exceedances only (6)

Not a Damage Case 6

No exceedance of MCL only (1)

Co-managed wastes without clear implication of CCR wastes in damage(2)

Co-managed wastes, No exceedance of MCL, and Administrative order 

did not contain explicit finding of specific damage. (2)

Elevated selenium in fish not adequate evidence of damage to human 

health or environment and fish consumption advisories did not contain 

explicit findings of specific damage (2)

Key considerations that resulted in previously identified proven damage cases not being verified 

include:

 Administrative Orders: Several of the previously cited court rulings and administrative 

orders did not adequately establish explicit finding of specific damage. Twenty- two of the 

previously identified cases were originally justified in part on administrative orders or 

court rulings. Of those, on review only ten were determined to provide explicit findings of 

specific damages. For example, several of the administrative orders required 

investigations to assess nature and extent of contamination of the sites due to potential 

damage or risk to human health or the environment. Others required remediation but made 

no claims as to specific damages. Orders were frequently based on site samples exceeding 

state groundwater standards or NPDES discharge limits without any claim of damage.

 Co-Management of Wastes: Two previously identified cases (Salem Acres, Vitale Fly 

Ash) were clearly impacted by co-managed wastes that were not distinguished from CCRs 

either as technical cause for damages or in administrative orders.

 Selenium in Fish: Three cases previously identified as proven damage cases were justified 

based on elevated selenium concentrations in fish exceeding the state’s technically 

accepted risk thresholds for human health along with Administrative orders for fish 

advisories. Re-evaluation by the state of safe levels of selenium in fish resulted in no 

technical basis for evidence of damage as the fish no longer exceeded the benchmark 

thresholds. While elevated, the concentrations of selenium in fish were ultimately 

determined to be acceptable and pose minimal or no risk. Subsequent analysis of 

additional fish confirmed that selenium concentrations were reduced from the previously 

elevated levels. The fish consumption advisories, which were rescinded, did not qualify as 
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 8

administrative orders that establish explicit finding of specific damage. Note however that 

one of the cases (#22 Martin Creek Lake) did have documented evidence of ecological 

impact sufficient to justify proven damage.

 Improved location information: Improved location information on groundwater wells 

containing MCL exceedances indicated that in some cases wells previously considered 

offsite were actually onsite. Without demonstrated migration to the extent that waste 

constituents could cause human health concerns, classifications were changed to potential 

damage cases.

The EPRI report9provides additional information and evaluation for the 24 proven damage cases 

established in the 2007 NODA. In their evaluation EPRI refuted several cases that were 

ultimately verified as proven damage cases or potential damage cases. EPRI’s rationale assessed 

whether through site remediation or mitigation the chance for impact to human health or the 

environment was eliminated or reduced due to subsequently reduced levels of contaminants, 

control of offsite migration, or absence of potential receptors (because the contaminated 

groundwater was not used for drinking water supplies or the remoteness of the location). 

However, the criteria established for the evaluation did not specify whether the damage or threat 

of damage needed to be ongoing. In several cases, remediation and mitigation had clearly 

minimized future risk of damage but the criteria seek to establish whether damage occurred. 

Another factor in EPRI’s analysis was whether the exceedances established a pattern that 

suggested damage to human health or the environment occurred or could occur again. For 

example, EPRI argues that exceedance of the MCL for lead in offsite groundwater at the Don 

Frame Trucking Fly Ash Landfill just twice in over 10 years of quarterly groundwater sampling 

with the exceedances more than seven years apart should not constitute a pattern likely to lead to 

“the extent that they could cause human health concerns”.

Details on the individual cases are summarized in Table 3 below with additional details provided 

in Appendix A: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Cases.

 

9 Evaluation of Coal Combustion Product Damage Cases (Volumes I and 2), Draft EPRI Report 1020553. 

November 2009.
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 9

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s No.

Name City

State

Disposal 

Unit Type Brief Description Previous Basis for Consideration Determination Rationale

1

Salem Acres 

Site Salem MA Landfill

Fly ash disposal occurred at this site -

a landfill, from at least 1952 to 1969.

The site contained a variety of wastes 

including fly ash, sewage sludge, 

tannery waste and materials from a 

landfill on the site. The site was 

assessed and remediated under the 

NPL program.

Scientific: Arsenic and chromium 

exceeded (health-based) primary MCLs; 

and Administrative: The site was 

placed on the NPL list, and EPA signed 

a Consent Order with the owner to 

clean up the lagoons.

Not a Damage 

Case

Co-managed CCR 

wastes without clear 

implication of CCR 

wastes in damage

2

Vitale Brothers 

Fly Ash Pit Beverly MA Sand and 

Gravel Pit

An abandoned gravel and sand pit 

that was used as an unpermitted 

landfill between the 1950s and the 

mid-1970s. The Vitale Brothers, the 

site owners until 1980, accepted and 

disposed saltwater-quenched fly ash 

from New England Power Company 

along with other wastes. Also, 

leaking, co-located USTs with 

petroleum products 

Scientific: (i) Selenium and arsenic 

exceeded (health-based) primary MCLs, 

and (ii) there is evidence of 

contamination of nearby wetlands and 

surface waters; and Administrative: 

the facility was the subject of several 

citations and the State has enforced 

remedial actions.

Not a Damage 

Case

Co-managed UST 

wastes were focus of 

MADEP remediation; 

No indication of 

offsite migration in 

GW of CCR specific 

contaminants; No 

explicit finding of 

specific damage in 

Administrative orders

3

Don Frame 

Trucking, Inc. 

Fly Ash Landfill

Pomfret NY Landfill

This landfill has been used for 

disposal of fly ash,, bottom ash, and 

other material, including yard 

sweepings generated by the Niagara 

Mohawk Power Corporation's Dunkirk 

Steam Station. The age of the facility 

is unknown.

Scientific: The lead levels found in 

down-gradient wells exceed the primary 

MCL Action Level; Administrative: the 

State has required remedial action as a 

result of the contamination, and the 

owner was directed, by the Supreme 

Court of the State of New York, County 

of Chautauqua (July 22, 1988), to cease 

receiving the aforementioned wastes at 

the facility no later than October 15, 

1988.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite exceedances 

of MCL (lead)

4

Virginia Electric 

Power Co. 

(VEPCO) 

Possum Point

Possum 

Point VA Surface 

Impoundment

At this site, oil ash, pyrites, boiler 

chemical cleaning wastes, coal fly 

ash, and coal bottom ash were comanaged in an unlined surface 

impoundment, with solids dredged to 

a second pond.

Damage case described in the 1999 

RTC. Administrative: action pursued 

by the State based on evidence on 

exceedances of cadmium and nickel, by 

requiring the removal of the waste.

Not a Damage 

Case

Co-Managed CCR 

wastes without clear 

implication of CCR 

wastes in damage
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 10

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s No.

Name City

State

Disposal 

Unit Type Brief Description Previous Basis for Consideration Determination Rationale

5

PEPCO 

Morgantown 

Generating 

Station 

Faulkner Offsite Disposal 

Facility

Morgantown MD Landfill

landfills at this shallow groundwater 

site managed fly ash, bottom ash, 

and pyrites from the Morgantown 

Generating Station starting in 1970. 

Unlined settling ponds also are used 

at the site to manage storm water 

runoff and leachate from the ash 

disposal area.

Scientific: Ground water contamination 

migrated off site; and Administrative:

the State required remedial action.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite exceedances 

of MCL (cadmium)

6

Virginia Power 

Yorktown 

Power Station 

Chisman Creek 

Disposal Site

Yorktown VA Sand and 

Gravel Pits

Between 1957 and 1974, abandoned 

sand and gravel pits at the site 

received fly ash from the combustion 

of coal and petroleum coke at the 

Yorktown Power Station. Disposal at 

the site ended in 1974 when Virginia 

Power began burning oil at the 

Yorktown plant. In 1980, nearby 

shallow residential wells became 

contaminated with vanadium and 

selenium.

Designated as a proven damage case 

in the 1999 RTC. Scientific: (i) Drinking 

water wells contained selenium above 

the (health-based) primary MCL, and (ii) 

there is evidence of surface water and 

sediment contamination; and 

Administrative: the site was 

remediated under CERCLA.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite exceedances 

of MCL (selenium)

7

Hyco Lake

(Roxboro 

Steam Electric 

Plant)

Roxboro NC Cooling 

Reservoir

Hyco Lake was constructed in 1964 

as a cooling water source for the 

Electric Plant. The lake received 

discharges from the plant's ashsettling ponds containing high levels 

of selenium. The selenium 

accumulated in the fish in the lake, 

affecting reproduction and causing 

declines in fish populations in the late 

1970s and 1980s.

Scientific: declines in fish populations 

were observed (1970s & 1980s). 

Administrative: the State concluded 

that the impacts were attributable to the 

ash ponds, and issued a fish 

consumption advisory as a result of the 

contamination.

Proven 

Damage

Ecological impact to 

fish populations 

documented from 

selenium

concentrations; fish 

advisory

8

Georgia Power 

Company, 

Plant Bowen

Cartersville GA Surface 

Impoundment

This unlined surface impoundment

was put in service in 1968. On July 

28, 2002, a sinkhole developed in the 

surface impoundment that ultimately 

reached four acres in area. An 

estimated 2.25 million gallons of 

ash/water mixture was released to a 

tributary of the Euharlee Creek, 

containing 281 tons of ash.

Scientific: Unpermitted discharge of 

water containing ash slurry into the 

Euharlee Creek resulting in a temporary 

degradation of public waters. 

Administrative: Georgia Department of 

Natural Resources issued a consent 

order requiring, among others, a fine 

and corrective action.

Proven 

Damage

Discharge in creek 

and subsidence; 

State fine and 

consent order for 

corrective action to 

prevent releases
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 11

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s No.

Name City

State

Disposal 

Unit Type Brief Description Previous Basis for Consideration Determination Rationale

9

DOE Oak 

Ridge Y-12 

Plant Chestnut 

Ridge Operable 

Unit 2

Oak Ridge TN Surface 

Impoundment

The filled Coal Ash Pond (FCAP) is 

an ash retention surface 

impoundment used to dispose of coal 

ash slurry from the Y-12 steam plant. 

It was constructed in 1955 by building 

an earthen dam across a northern 

tributary of Upper McCoy Branch. 

After the surface impoundment was 

filled to capacity, the slurry was 

released directly into Upper McCoy 

Branch. Erosion of both the spillway 

and the ash itself resulted in releases 

of ash into Upper McCoy Branch.

This case has been categorized as a 

proven ecological damage case based 

on scientific documentation of impacts 

to fish and other wildlife on-site. 

Scientific: Exceedances of primary and 

secondary MCLs were detected in onsite monitoring locations. 

Administrative: Federal RCRA and the 

Tennessee Department of 

Environmental Conservation (TDEC) 

requirements, including placement of 

the entire Oak Ridge Reservation on the 

NPL.

Proven 

Damage

Ecological impacts to 

biota through surface 

water included 

bioaccumulation, fish 

deformities, and biota 

population decline; 

Placed on NPL as 

separate OU

10

South Carolina 

Electric & Gas 

Canadys Plant

Walterboro, SC Surface 

Impoundment

Ash from the Canadys power plant 

was mixed with water and managed 

in a surface impoundment. The facility 

operated an unlined, 80-acre surface 

impoundment from 1974 to 1989; and 

a failed bentonite slurry-lined surface 

impoundment, in operation since 

1989.

Scientific: There are exceedances of 

the health-based standard for arsenic at 

this site. While there are no known 

human exposure points nearby, some 

recent exceedances have been 

detected outside an established 

regulatory boundary.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite exceedances 

of MCL (arsenic); No 

offsite migration 

11 Belews Lake

Stokes, 

Rockingham, 

Guilford & 

Forsyth 

Counties, 

NC Cooling 

Reservoir

This lake was impounded in the early 

1970s to serve as a cooling reservoir 

for a large coal-fired power plant. Fly 

ash was disposed in a settling basin, 

which released selenium-laden 

effluent in return flows to the lake. 

Sixteen of the 20 fish species 

originally present in the reservoir 

were entirely eliminated.

Scientific: Evidence of extensive 

impacts on fish populations due to direct 

discharge to a surface water body. 

Administrative: the State required 

changes in operating practices to 

mitigate the contamination.

Proven 

Damage

Ecological impact 

from Selenium 

discharge on fish 

population
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 12

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s No.

Name City

State

Disposal 

Unit Type Brief Description Previous Basis for Consideration Determination Rationale

12 DOE Savannah 

River Project

Aiken, 

Allendale & 

Barnwell 

Counties

SC Surface 

Impoundment

A coal-fired power plant sluices fly 

ash to a series of open settling 

basins. A continuous flow of sluice 

water exits the basins, overflows, and 

enters a swamp that in turn 

discharges to Beaver Dam Creek. 

Bullfrog tadpoles inhabiting the site 

have oral deformities and impaired 

swimming and predator avoidance 

abilities, and there also is evidence of 

metabolic impacts on water snakes

inhabiting the site.

Scientific: Evidence of impacts on 

several species in a nearby wetland 

caused by releases from the ash 

settling ponds.

Proven

Damage

Ecological impact to 

biota through surface 

water demonstrated 

in technical studies 

implicate CCRs 

13

E.J. Stoneman 

Generating 

Station Ash 

Disposal Pond

Cassville WI Surface 

Impoundment

Unlined surface impoundment, on 

permeable substrate, that managed 

ash, demineralizer regenerate, and 

sand filter backwash between the 

1950s and 1987.

Scientific: Cadmium and chromium 

exceeded (health-based) primary MCLs, 

and contamination migrated to nearby, 

private drinking water wells; and 

Administrative: The State required 

closure of the facility.

Potential 

Damage

On site exceedances 

of MCLs (cadmium, 

chromium); Offsite

migration does not 

exceed health-based 

risk standards; Order 

to close does not 

have explicit finding 

of specific damage

14

WEPCO 

Highway 59 

Landfill

Waukesha WI Sand and 

Gravel Pit

Located in an old sand and gravel pit 

that received fly ash and bottom ash 

between 1969 and 1978. At the north 

portion of the site, some of the ash 

was deposited below the water table.

Scientific: Although the boron standard 

was not health-based at the time of the 

exceedances, the boron levels reported 

for the facility would have exceeded the 

State's recently promulgated healthbased ES for boron; and contamination 

from the facility appears to have 

migrated to off-site private wells. And 

Administrative: As a result of the 

various PAL and ES exceedances, the 

State required a ground water 

investigation.

Proven 

Damage

Exceedance of 

WDNR ES (boron);

Elevated offsite 

contaminants only 

partly related to CCR 

wastes; Regulatory 

action to investigate 

has no explicit finding 

of specific damage
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 13

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s No.

Name City

State

Disposal 

Unit Type Brief Description Previous Basis for Consideration Determination Rationale

15

Nelson Dewey 

Ash Disposal 

Facility

Cassville WI

Surface 

Impoundment

, later 

converted 

into a Landfill

The landfill was originally constructed 

in the early 1960s as a series of 

settling basins for sluiced ash and 

permitted by the State in 1979. In 

1996, it was converted into a landfill.

Scientific: Although the boron standard 

was not health-based at the time of the 

exceedances, the boron levels reported 

for the facility would have exceeded the 

State's recently promulgated healthbased ES for boron; and 

Administrative: The State required a 

ground water investigation, and the 

facility took action to remediate ground 

water contamination and prevent further 

contamination.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite exceedances 

of MCLs (arsenic, 

selenium)

16

WEPCO 

Cedar-Sauk 

Landfill

Cedarburg WI Sand and 

Gravel Pit

An abandoned sand and gravel pit 

that received CCW from the WEPCO 

Port Washington Power Plant from 

1969 to 1979.

Scientific: Selenium in ground water 

exceeded the (health-based) primary 

MCL, and there was clear evidence of 

vegetative damage; and 

Administrative: The State required 

remedial action.

Proven

Damage

Ecological impact 

documented in study 

of stressed wetland 

vegetation due to site 

contamination (boron)

17

Port 

Washington 

Facility

Port 

Washington WI Sand and 

Gravel Pit

The power company placed 40- to 60-

foot-deep column of fly ash in a sand 

and gravel pit from 1948 to 1971. A 

well located ~ 250‘south of the old 

quarry was impacted.

Scientific: The off-site exceedance of a 

health-based standard for selenium.

Not a Damage 

Case

No exceedances of 

MCL or health based 

criteria indicative of 

damage

18 North Lansing 

Landfill Lansing MI Gravel Pit

The North Lansing Landfill (NLL), an 

unlined, former gravel quarry pit with 

an elevated ground water table, was 

licensed in 1974 for disposal of inert 

fill materials, including soil, concrete, 

and brick. From 1980 to 1997, the 

NLL was used for disposal of coal ash 

from the Lansing Board of Water and 

Light electric and steam generating 

plants.

Scientific: Observation of off-site 

exceedances of the State's healthbased standard for lithium.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite exceedances 

of MCL (lead, 

selenium); Exceeds 

State benchmark for 

lithium offsite; many 

contaminants with

partial contribution 

from other adjacent 

sites (including 

former landfill, 

industrial waste 

disposal sites, and a 

superfund site)
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 14

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s No.

Name City

State

Disposal 

Unit Type Brief Description Previous Basis for Consideration Determination Rationale

19

Northern 

Indiana Public 

Service Corp. 

(NIPSCO) Yard 

520 Landfill 

Site (Brown's 

Landfill)

Township of 

Pines, Porter 

County

IN Landfill and 

structural Fill

NIPSCO's Bailly and Michigan City 

power plants have deposited ~ 1 

million tons of fly ash in the Town of 

Pines since 1983. Fly ash was buried 

in the landfill and used as 

construction fill in the town. The ash 

is pervasive on site, visible in roads 

and driveways.

Scientific: Evidence for boron, 

molybdenum, arsenic, and lead 

exceeding health-based standards in 

water wells away from the Pines Yard 

520 Landfill site; and Administrative: 

Orders of consent signed between EPA 

and IDEM with responsible parties for 

continued work at the site.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite exceedances 

of MCL (arsenic,

selenium)

20 Brandy Branch 

Reservoir Marshall TX Cooling 

Reservoir

A power plant cooling reservoir built 

in 1983 for Southwestern Electric 

Power company's Pirkey Power 

Plant. The cooling reservoir received 

discharges from Sis containing 

elevated levels of selenium.

Scientific: Observations of impacts on 

fish populations were confirmed by 

scientific study, based on which the 

State concluded that the impacts were 

attributable to the ash ponds. 

Administrative: the State issued a fish 

consumption advisory as a result of the 

contamination.

Not a Damage 

Case

No indicator of 

damage due to 

elevated selenium in 

surface water and 

fish tissue

21

Southwestern 

Electric Power 

Company 

Welsh 

Reservoir

Mount 

Pleasant TX Cooling 

Reservoir

This lake was constructed in 1976 to 

serve as a cooling reservoir for a 

power plant and receives discharges 

from an open surface impoundment. 

The Texas Parks and Wildlife 

Department's monitoring documents 

elevated levels of selenium and other 

metals in fish.

Scientific: Selenium accumulation in 

fish may be attributable to the ash 

settling ponds. Administrative: The 

State has issued a fish consumption 

advisory as a result of contamination.

Not a Damage 

Case

No indicator of 

damage due to 

elevated selenium in 

surface water and 

fish tissue

22

Texas Utilities 

Electric Martin 

Lake Reservoir

Tatum TX Cooling 

Reservoir

This lake was constructed in 1974 to 

serve as a cooling reservoir for a 

power plant and was the site of a 

series of major fish kills in 1978 and 

1979. Investigations determined that 

unpermitted discharges from ash 

settling ponds resulted in elevated 

levels of selenium in the water and 

fish.

Scientific: Evidence of adverse effects 

on wildlife--impacts on fish populations 

were observed, and the State 

concluded that the impacts were 

attributable to the ash settling ponds.

Administrative: The State has issued a 

fish consumption advisory as a result of 

the contamination.

Proven 

Damage

Ecological impact on 

fish population and 

biomass reduction

due to elevated 

selenium in fish 

tissue

23

W.J. Neal 

Station Surface 

Impoundment

Velva ND Surface 

Impoundment

An unlined, 44-acre surface 

impoundment that received fly ash 

and scrubber sludge from a coal-fired 

power plant, along with other wastes 

(including ash from the combustion of 

sunflower seed hulls), between the 

1950s and the late 1980s.

Scientific: Several constituents have 

exceeded their (health-based) primary 

MCLs in down-gradient ground water, 

and the site inspection found 

documentation of releases to ground 

water and surface water from the site; 

and Administrative: the State required 

closure of the facility.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite exceedances 

of MCLs (arsenic, 

cadmium, chromium, 

lead)
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 15

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s No.

Name City

State

Disposal 

Unit Type Brief Description Previous Basis for Consideration Determination Rationale

24

Cooperative 

Power 

Association /

United Power 

Coal Creek 

Station Surface 

Impoundments

Underwood 

(near)

ND

Evap. Pond & 

Surface 

Impoundment

This site includes a number of 

evaporation ponds and surface 

impoundments that were constructed 

in 1978 and 1979. Both the surface 

impoundments and the evaporation 

ponds leaked significantly upon plant 

start-up. A ND DOH regulator was 

uncertain as to whether a liner was 

initially installed, "although the plant 

may have thought they were placing 

some sort of liner." The surficial soils 

were mostly sandy materials with a 

high water table.

Scientific: Arsenic and selenium 

exceeded (health-based primary MCLs; 

and Administrative: The State required 

remedial action.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite exceedances 

of MCLs (arsenic, 

selenium)

25

Martin's Creek 

Power Plant 

2005 Release

Mount 

Bethel 

Township

PA Surface 

Impoundment

In August 2005, a dam confining a 

40-acre CCR surface impoundment

failed. The dam failure, a violation of 

the State's solid waste disposal 

permit, resulted in the discharge of 

0.5 million cu. yds of coal-ash and 

contaminated water into the 

Oughoughton Creek and the 

Delaware River. Ground water 

monitoring found Se and Cr 

concentrations exceeding 

Pennsylvania's Statewide Health 

Standards and Federal primary 

drinking water standards, and there 

were also exceedances of the 

secondary MCL for iron.

Scientific: Exceedances of primary and 

secondary MCLs in on-site ground 

water, and exceedances of Federal 

water quality criteria in off-site surface 

water; and Administrative: PA DEP 

issued a consent order for clean up.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite exceedances 

of MCL; Ecological 

impact to river 

environment due to 

dam failure; 

administrative order 

for remediation due to 

surface water impacts
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 16

Table 3: Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Case s No.

Name City

State

Disposal 

Unit Type Brief Description Previous Basis for Consideration Determination Rationale

26 TVA Kingston 

2008 Release Kingston TN Surface 

Impoundment

On December 22, 2008, the 

northeastern dike of a surface 

impoundment failed. About 5.4 million 

cubic yards of fly ash sludge was 

released over about a 300-acre area 

and into a branch of the Emory River, 

disrupting power, rupturing a gas line, 

and destroying or damaging scores of 

homes. Sampling results for the 

contaminated residential soil showed 

arsenic, cobalt, iron, and thallium 

levels above the residential 

Superfund soil screening levels.

Administrative: On May 11, 2009, TVA 

agreed to clean up more than 5 million 

tons of spilled coal ash under an 

administrative order and agreement on 

consent under CERCLA issued by the 

USEPA, and in early January 2009, the 

Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency 

(TWRA) issued a fish advisory stating 

that until further notice, fishing should 

be avoided in the lower section of the 

Emory River.

Proven 

Damage

Ecological impact 

from large scale 

failure impacted river 

environment; 

Administrative order 

included fish advisory 

due to risk from CCR 

contaminants

27

BBBS Sand 

and Gravel 

Quarries

Gambrills MD Sand and 

Gravel Pits

As of 1995, the defendants used fly 

ash and bottom ash from two 

Maryland power plants to fill 

excavated portions of two unlined 

sand and gravel quarries. GW 

samples collected in 1006/07 from 

residential drinking water wells near 

the site indicated contaminants at or 

above GW quality standards. Testing 

of private wells in 83 homes and 

businesses in areas around the 

disposal site revealed MCL 

exceedances in 34 wells, and SMCLs 

exceedances in 63 wells.

Scientific: Documented exceedances 

of MCLs in numerous off-site drinking 

water wells; Administrative: on October 

1,2007, the Maryland Department of the 

Environment (MDE) filed a consent 

order in Anne Arundel County, Maryland 

Circuit Court to settle an environmental 

enforcement action against the owner of 

a sand and gravel quarry and the owner 

of coal-fired power plants for 

contamination of public drinking water 

wells in the vicinity of the sand and 

gravel quarry.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite exceedances 

of MCLs; 

Administrative order 

found contamination 

of offsite drinking 

water wells impacted 

public
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 17

5.0Findings for Recently Alleged Damage Cases 

In the February 2010 a report authored by environmental and citizens’ groups identified 31 

alleged damage cases.10 Of the 31 alleged damage cases in the report, seven cases are determined 

to be proven damage cases and fifteen are determined to be potential damage cases. The 

remainder are considered to be refuted or do not have adequate information to confirm or refute. 

A summary of the assessment for these recently alleged proven damage cases is provided in 

Table 4.

Table 4: Summary of February 2010 Alleged Damage Case Assessments

Determination

Number of 

Cases Rationale Breakdown (No. of Cases)

Proven Damage 6

Offsite primary MCL exceedance only (2)

Administrative order indicating damage only (1)

Offsite MCL and administrative order (1)

Proven ecological damage (2)

Potential Damage 19

Onsite primary MCL exceedance (15)

Onsite SMCL exceedance only (4)

Not a Damage Case 4

Significant non-CCR/mining wastes (2)

Surface water exceedances of criteria, but no 

documented study establishing damage(1)

Onsite SMCL exceedance of manganese only from 

landfill does not implicate CCR specifically (1)

Inadequate 

Information 2

MCL exceeded inconsistent and limited with unresolved 

questions about data quality(2)

In the August 2010 a report authored by environmental and citizens’ groups identified 39 alleged 

damage cases.11 Of the 39 alleged damage cases in the report, three (3) cases are determined to 

be proven damage cases and thirty (30) cases are determined to be potential damage cases. Three 

(3) cases are considered to be rejected and three (3) do not have adequate information to confirm 

or refute. A summary of the assessment for these recently alleged proven damage cases is 

provided in Table 5.

 

10 Out of Control: Mounting Damages From Coal Ash Waste Sites; Thirty-one New Damage Cases of 

Contamination from Improperly Disposed Coal Combustion Waste. Environmental Integrity Project and 

EarthJustice, accessible at: http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/Outof ControlMountingDamagesfromCoalAshWasteSites.pdf

11 In Harm’s Way: Lack Of Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers Americans And Their Environment, Thirtynine New Damage Cases of Contamination from Improperly Disposed Coal Combustion Waste, Environmental 

Integrity Project, Earthjustice and Sierra Club, August 26, 2010 accessible at: 

http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/documents/INHARMSWAY_FINAL.pdf
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 18

Table 5: Summary of August 2010 Alleged Damage Case Assessments

Determination

Number of 

Cases Rationale Breakdown (No. of Cases)

Proven Damage 3

Offsite primary MCL exceedance (1)

Proven ecological damage (2)

Potential Damage 30

Onsite primary MCL and SMCL exceedance (29)

State health-based standard exceedance only(1)

Not a Damage Case

3 Significant non-CCR wastes (2)

Does not implicate CCR waste(1)

Inadequate 

Information 3

Insufficient number of date points/data quality issue(2)

Pending review of ecological study (1)

One critical issue that impacts a number of determinations is establishing consistently what 

constitutes a health based standard. As states have become more sophisticated in addressing 

groundwater concerns many have implemented criteria more complex than a single set of 

standards. Most states have tiered groundwater quality systems that allow for lower comparative 

levels of contamination in residential or drinking water areas and higher levels in industrial 

areas. Deciding on which to apply can establish the classification of the assessed damage cases. 

The current criteria are unclear as to which to apply. The higher, industrial concentration 

standards are more likely to apply to the areas of industrial CCR disposal and represent the 

maximum allowable level by the state. The lower residential standard however would be more 

protective of all scenarios. In other situation, States have implemented tiered standards for 

groundwater with lower levels indicating a potential threat and requiring some lower level of 

responsiveness with the higher level requiring more immediate action at least in assessing the

nature and extent of contamination. For example, the Michigan Department of Environmental 

Quality has established Preventative Action Levels at approximately 10% of the MCL levels 

based in part on health based criteria with the intent of being an early warning of potential threats 

to groundwater. Michigan also has established Enforceable Standards which are comparable to 

the MCL concentrations. A third situation occurs with states like North Carolina whose 2L 

standards have a component of health based standard but are set at the lowest of several criteria 

including human health consumption numbers but also ecological impacts, odor threshold, 

appearance, resource protection, and other non-health based factors.

Details on the individual cases alleged in the February 2010 report are summarized in Table 6 

below with additional details provided in Appendix B: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged 

Damage Cases. Details on the individual cases alleged in the August 2010 report are summarized 

in Table 7 below with additional details provided in Appendix C: Assessment of August 2010

Alleged Damage Cases.
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 19

Table 6: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases

No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Disposal Unit 

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

1

Indian River 

Power Plant NRG Energy Millsboro DE

Surface 

Impoundment 

and Landfill

Between 1957 and 1980 coal ash from the Indian River 

plant was sluiced onto Burton Island. Coal ash berms 

were built and about 144 acres were covered to 15 ft 

with coal ash before a new mainland landfill was built. 

In 2005, erosion of the ash berms into the river was 

observed by a DNREC scientist.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedances 

(arsenic, chromium, 

thallium)

2

Curtis Stanton 

Energy Center

Orlando Utility 

Commission Orlando FL Landfill and runoff ponds

A CCR landfill (in which coal ash is initially hardened 

with lime and bottom ash is dewatered), CCR and coal 

storage area runoff ponds, a recycled water pond, and 

a plant wastewater pond – all of which are supposed to 

be lined, all operated by Curtis Stanton Energy Center. 

Site has repeatedly failed FDEP ground and surface 

water criteria and monitoring and operational 

requirements.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance (gross 

alpha)

3

Seminole 

Generating 

Station

Seminole Electric 

Cooperative Palatka FL Landfill and runoff ponds

Runoff Ponds and a Landfill for dewatered FGD sludge 

stabilized with lime and fly ash (prior to 1996, stabilized 

with process water high in TDS, chloride, and other 

chemicals).

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance (lead, 

arsenic) near landfill 

and others SMCL 

near property line

4

Big Bend 

Station

Tampa Electric 

Company

Apollo 

Beach FL

Landfill and 

Surface 

impoundments

Several CCR waste disposal areas at Big Bend Station 

including FGD wastes, ash ponds and waste 

management ponds. Contamination migrated to an 

area offsite which was subsequently purchased by the 

Tampa Electric Company.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic and 

thallium); Consent 

order to repair 

5

Rocky Acres 

Coal 

Combustion 

By-Product 

Disposal Site

Bunge Corporation Oakwood IL Structural Fill 

Around 380,000 tons of CCR mostly from the Bunge 

Milling company deposited in a ravine near the Grays 

Siding neighborhood. In 2006 the IEPA determined the 

site was an illegal dump though site owners claimed it 

was a beneficial use site and that eventually a building 

would be constructed on the site. Site owner has since 

declared bankruptcy and the Bunge corporation refuses 

liability for any damage caused by CCR disposal at this 

site.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedances 

(arsenic, barium, 

chromium, lead)
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 20

Table 6: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases

No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Disposal Unit 

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

6

Gibson 

Generating 

Station Plant

Duke Energy Princeton IN

Surface

Impoundments, 

Cooling Pond 

and Landfill

Duke Energy’s Gibson Generating Station contains the 

generating station; five surface impoundments; a 

3,490-acre lake that supplies all of the plant’s cooling 

water; and a Type II restricted waste (CCW) landfill. 

CCW generated by the Gibson Generating Station is 

sluiced into on-site impoundments. Excess water is 

discharged into the cooling pond, so the impoundments 

do not have National Pollution Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES) permits. CCW is periodically dredged

out of the impoundments and sent to an on-site CCW 

landfill.

Proven 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic); Impact to 

biota/surface water

(selenium)

7

Clifty Creek 

Station Landfill

Indiana Kentucky 

Electric, Corp. Madison IN Landfill A type 3 restricted waste CCR landfill built on top of an old ash impoundment in 1992.

Not a Damage 

Case

Onsite SMCL 

exceedance of 

Manganese only

8

Brandywine 

Coal Ash 

Landfill

Mirant Mid-Atlantic, 

LLC Brandywine MD

Landfill and 

Wastewater 

Ponds

A Coal ash landfill operated by Mirant MD ash 

Management, that receives fly and bottom ash from 

Chalk Point power plant. Most disposal pits are unlined, 

and groundwater on the site is very shallow

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(cadmium) and 

SMCL

9

Karn/

Weadock 

Generating 

Facility

Consumer Energy Saginaw MI

Surface 

Impoundments/

Landfills

Two large surface impoundments located near the 

Saginaw River and Saginaw Bay which are now 

regulated as Landfills. The sites were built in 1959 and 

1961 and cover 174 acres with a capacity of 4,175,000 

cubic yards. Ash was previously sluiced into the 

impoundments but one of the landfills is now 

transitioning to a dry ash system.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic)

10 Colstrip Power 

Plant PPL Montana Colstrip MT

Temporary and 

Permanent CCR

disposal ponds

Temporary and permanent CCR disposal ponds 

serving the Colstrip Steam Electric Station surround the 

town of Colstrip, MT. Permanent disposal ponds 

located to the northwest of Colstrip include the “closed” 

Stage I Evaporation Pond and the active 176-acre 

Stage II Evaporation Pond, which opened in the late 

1980s. The 367-acre Units 3 & 4 Effluent Holding Pond 

(EHP) is located approximately 3 miles to the southeast 

of Colstrip and was opened in 1983.

Proven 

Damage

Administrative order 

on Consent to 

remediate and 

settled lawsuit for 

previous damage to 

GW and 

environment

11 Sutton Steam 

Plant Progress Energy Wilmington NC SurfaceImpoundments

The impoundments consist of two ash ponds over 135 

acres constructed in 1949.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic)
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 21

Table 6: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases

No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Disposal Unit 

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

12 Lee Steam 

Plant Progress Energy Goldsboro NC SurfaceImpoundment

One active unlined ash impoundment covering 143 

acres at the Progress Energy Lee Coal Fired Plant 

constructed in 1951.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic, lead)

13 Cape Fear 

Steam Plant Progress Energy Moncure NC SurfaceImpoundments

The Progress Energy Cape Fear Steam Plant was 

constructed in 1923 and has 316 MW of coal fired 

capacity. The coal plant operates four unlined ash 

impoundments, one active and three inactive. The 

impoundments cover a total area of 153 acres. The one 

active impoundment has a capacity of 1764 acre-feet

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance (lead)

14

Swift Creek 

Structural Fill 

Site

ReUse 

Technology, 

Inc./Full Circle 

Solutions, Inc.

Rocky 

Mount NC

Structural 

Fill/Beneficial 

Use Fill

A 25 acre beneficial use structural fill operating 

between 1991 and 2001 accepted CCR from 6 different 

power plants. Site contained mostly fly ash which was 

placed above a shallow water table and at times placed 

directly into an onsite wetland.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite MCL 

Exceedances (lead, 

arsenic)

15 Belews Creek 

Steam Station Duke Energy Belews Creek NC

Surface

Impoundment 

and Landfill

Belews Creek Power Plant operated by Duke Energy 

has 3 landfills and a surface impoundment for CCR 

constructed in 1974. One landfill is currently closed, the 

other two remain active with one focusing on FGD 

Residue. The Impoundment is one of the state’s largest 

ash ponds, covering 512 acres.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic, lead, and 

selenium)

16

Asheville 

Steam Electric 

Plant

Progress Energy Arden NC Surface

Impoundments

The Asheville Steam Electric Plant has two coal ash 

ponds. One is actively being used for wet storage of 

coal combustion waste, while the other is being used to 

dry store material dredged from the other. The wet 

storage pond has a total capacity of 1,400 acre-feet 

and as of March, 2009 it is estimated to be storing 

1,260 acre-feet of material. The dry storage pond has a 

total capacity of 1,380 acre-feet and their actual 

storage was unreported.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite SMCL 

exceedance

17 Four Corners 

Power Plant

Arizona Public 

Service Fruitland NM

Landfill and 

Surface

Impoundment

Six inactive impoundments, 1 active impoundment and 

one active landfill at the Four Corners Power plant used 

for CCR. The facility, built in 1963, is within the Navajo 

Nation and subject to Navajo EPA regulations.

Not a Damage 

Case

Co-managed 

CCR/coal mining 

wastes does not 

specifically implicate 

CCRs as cause
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 22

Table 6: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases

No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Disposal Unit 

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

18

Reid Gardner 

Generating 

Facility

NV Energy Moapa NV

Surface 

Impoundments 

(settling and 

evaporation 

ponds)

Fly ash and flue gas desulfurization waste produced by 

the Reid Gardner Generating Station was sluiced to 

one of three unlined surface impoundments. 

Wastewater from the waste impoundments was 

discharged to one of five evaporation ponds. The 

operation is meant to be a closed system for recycling 

of the cooling water, and no surface water is 

discharged from the site.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite MCL 

Exceedances 

(arsenic); 

Administrative 

Order of Consent 

for halting GW 

migration and 

require remediation

19 Mitchell Power 

Station Allegheny Energy Courtney PA

Landfill and 

Wastewater 

Lagoons/Surface

Impoundments

Mitchell Power Plat operates a 70 acre landfill on the 

power plant site as well as 2 wastewater treatment 

lagoons over about 1 acre of the site. The landfill is 

used for a mix of fly and bottom ash, while the surface 

impoundments are for waste process water and though 

also contain some bottom ash and sludge.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic)

20 Phillips Power 

Plant

Duquesne Light, 

Co.

Crescent 

Township PA

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundment

The Phillips Power Plant has two ash ponds with 

respective capacities of 13.5 and 9 million gallons as 

well as a 157 acre landfill of which 50 acres is CCR. 

These units were used beginning in 1969 and were 

decommissioned along with the plant in the late 1990's.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite SMCL 

exceedance / TDS 

exceedance offsite

21

Seward 

Generating 

Station

RRI Energy, Inc. New 

Florence PA Ash Pit and Closed Piles

Since 1954 coal ash has been disposed of on this site 

(for many years unpermitted) not contained in either 

landfills or impoundments. There are currently two 

closed disposal sites as well as a coal ash refuse site 

on top of which the new Seward generating station was 

built in 2004.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedances 

(antimony, arsenic, 

cadmium, 

chromium, lead, 

selenium)

22 Fern Valley 

Landfill

Orion Power 

Holdings, Inc. Elrama PA Landfill

The Fern Valley landfill sits along the Monongahela 

River and accepted coal ash from Elrama Power Plant 

from 1989 to 2003. The Site is lined with a 3 foot thick 

layer of low permeability cementitous material. The 

landfill was closed in 2007.

Proven 

Damage

Onsite MCL

exceedance 

(arsenic); Impact to 

benthic 

communities at 

outfall

23 Hunlock 

Power Station

UGI Development 

Company

Hunlock 

Creek PA Surface Impoundment

Hunlock Power Station is a small power plant along the 

Susquehanna River. Onsite groundwater contamination 

led the state to require assessment monitoring to 

delineate the source and scope of contamination. 

Since 1959, most of the CCRs have been shipped offsite for placement in PA coal mines.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic)
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 23

Table 6: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases

No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Disposal Unit 

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

24

Portland 

Generating 

Station's 

Bangor Ash 

Quarry 

Disposal Site

RRI Energy, Inc. Bangor PA Landfill

The Portland Generating Station's Bangor Ash Disposal 

Site is a lined (60 mil LLDPE geomembrane over 6" fly 

ash sub base) landfill. Leachate from above the liner 

drains into a pond where it is drained into Brushy 

Meadow Creek if it meets acceptable criteria after 

analyses.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite SMCL 

exceedance

25 Wateree 

Station

South Carolina 

Electric & Gas 

Company 

(SCE&G)

Eastover SC Surface 

Impoundment

Wateree Station is an unlined 80-acre coal ash 

impoundment within the vicinity of the Wateree River. 

Contamination has been found in onsite groundwater 

and surface water biota.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

exceedance 

(arsenic)

26 Urquhart 

Station

South Carolina 

Electric & Gas 

Company 

(SCE&G)

Beech 

Island SC Landfill, settling basins

Urquhart Station coal ash is disposed in a landfill and 

two settling basins along the Savannah River. Due to 

the sporadic nature of contaminants at the Site, no 

formal assessment or offsite investigation has occurred.

Inadequate 

Information

Onsite sporadic 

MCL exceedances 

with some question 

as to well 

construction; 

ongoing 

assessment

27

Grainger 

Generating 

Station

South Carolina 

Public Service 

Authority (SCPSA)

Conway SC Surface 

Impoundments

Grainger Generating Station along the Waccamaw 

River uses two fly ash ponds to dispose of CCRs. The 

nature and extent of contamination at the Site is now 

being studied, ten years after arsenic was found in 

groundwater near the River.

Inadequate 

Information

Single MCL onsite 

exceedance in 

NPDES monitoring 

with ongoing study 

required to 

determine nature, 

extent and impacts 

due to ash ponds

28 John Sevier 

Fossil Plant

Tennessee Valley 

Authority Rogersville TN Surface Impoundment

The John Sevier Fossil Plant coal combustion waste 

impoundment is a 90 acre unlined impoundment 

located along the Holston River. Site groundwater 

discharges to off-site surface water. Groundwater 

monitoring wells are located between the impoundment 

and the River.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCLs 

(cadmium)

29

Coal 

Combustion 

Waste Landfill

Trans-Ash, Inc. Camden TN

Gravel Pit 

serving as a 

Landfill

Since 2002, Trans-Ash has used a former gravel mined 

quarry in Camden, TN to dispose of coal ash from 

Johnsonville Fossil Plant. Due to past gravel mining 

activities penetrating into groundwater, Trans-Ash was 

required to install lining throughout the landfill and 

failed to do so, putting coal ash in direct contact with 

groundwater. Trans-Ash was fined $160,000 for this.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite MCL

exceedance 

(mercury)
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 24

Table 6: Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases

No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Disposal Unit 

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

30 John Amos 

Power Plant Appalachian Power Winfield WV Surface Impoundment

The Little Scary Creek impoundment is an unlined 175 

acre fly ash impoundment owned by Appalachian 

Power. Discharge from the impoundment has 

exceeded permit criteria several times in the past, 

however the state granted variances for surface water 

criteria.

Not a Damage 

Case

Limited 

exceedances in 

SW/Fish with no 

documented 

scientific study 

establishing HH/Env 

risk

31

Mitchell 

Generating 

Station

Ohio Power 

Company

Moundsville WV Surface 

Impoundment

Mitchell Generating Station is a 71 acre, unlined fly ash 

impoundment along the Ohio river in West Virginia 

receiving ash and coal mining wastes from two plants. 

Discharge from the impoundment has exceeded permit 

criteria several times in the past.

Not a Damage 

Case

Co-managed 

CCR/mining wastes 

does not specifically 

implicate CCRs as 

cause
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 25

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

1

Flint Creek 

Power Plant

American 

Electric Power 

d/b/a SWEPCO

Gentry AR

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundments

The Flint Creek Power Plant site contains a 40-acre landfill in 

operation since 1978 and permitted in 1994. The current 

landfill permit allows for disposal of dried fly ash and dredged 

bottom ash. It is unknown whether the landfill is lined. The site 

also contains a 30-acre primary ash pond and a 3.2-acre 

secondary ash pond located south of the plant operations 

area. The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality 

(ADEQ) required the facility to start monitoring in 2005 due to 

increases in selenium, sulfate, pH, and total dissolved solids.

No offsite groundwater data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(barium, 

cadmium, 

chromium, lead, 

and selenium) 

and SMCL 

exceedances

2

Independence 

Steam Station

Entergy d/b/a 

Arkansas Power 

and Light

Newark AR

Landfill and 

Wastewater 

Recycle and 

Surge Ponds

The Independence Steam Station site contains a fly ash and 

bottom ash landfill, two wastewater recycle ponds, a surge 

pond and a coal storage pile with the landfill and surge pond. 

Landfill permit was issued in 2002 for the CCR landfill in 

operation since at least 1990. The new permit required 

establishment of baseline water quality conditions. The 

Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has 

noted proposed expansion will require a leachate collection 

system which will lead to the surge pond. Several wells are 

immediately adjacent to the plant property; however, no offsite 

groundwater monitoring data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic, 

cadmium, and 

lead) and SMCL 

exceedances

3

Montville 

Generating 

Station

NRG Energy / 

Montville Power, 

LLC

Montville CT

Impoundments, 

Settling Ponds, 

Coal and Ash 

Storage Area

Montville Generating Station is a power plant sitting on a 50-

acre site on the Thames River that began service in 1919. 

The plant operated as a coal plant until 1971 when it 

converted to oil. During the 52 years of its operation, coal ash 

and slurry was placed throughout the site including into a 

number of settling ponds. The ash disposal sites have all 

been inactive since 1971. US EPA investigations 

determined14 Areas of Concern (AOCs), some primarily be 

related to coal ash contamination. 

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic and 

beryllium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

4

C.D. 

McIntosh, Jr. 

Power Plant

City of Lakeland Lakeland FL

Landfills (One 

on top of a 

phosphate 

mine pit), 

Sludge 

Dewatering 

Area and 

Process 

Wastewater 

Ponds

The C.D. McIntosh Jr. Power Plant became operational in 

1981 on the shore of Lake Parker. Approximately The site 

contains two unlined CCR landfills, as well as a coal storage 

area, process wastewater ponds and a sludge dewatering 

area. The southern landfill was built on top of an abandoned 

phosphate mine pit which likely has some influence on 

groundwater flow under the site. The site has over 41 

monitoring wells, however not all have available data. No 

offsite monitoring data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite 

MCL(arsenic, 

cadmium, lead, 

and selenium) 

and SMCL 

exceedances
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 26

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

5

George Neal 

Station North

MidAmerican 

Energy

Sergeant 

Bluff IA

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundments

The station has placed CCRs into a monofill since 1978. The 

landfill is unlined, originally permitted in 1997, and repermitted in 2001. The landfill has 2 sections; a 32-acre west 

area which receives mostly fly ash, and a 50-acre east area 

which receives other CCRs. Permits for expansion are 

currently under review. The site also contains three surface 

impoundments, covering a total of about 116 acres. The plant 

lies in a rural area next to the Missouri River. No offsite 

monitoring data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL

(arsenic) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

6

George Neal 

Station South

MidAmerican 

Energy Salix IA Landfill

The station has placed CCRs into an onsite monofill since the 

early 1980s, but the landfill was permitted in 2000. The 

landfill covers 30 acres and is at a generally higher elevation 

than the surrounding area. The plant lies in a rural area next 

to the Missouri River, south of Sioux City. Groundwater 

monitoring around the landfill began in 2000. No offsite 

monitoring data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

7

Lansing 

Power Station

Alliant Energy 

d/b/a Interstate 

Power & Light

Lansing IA

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundments

The Lansing Power Station was first constructed in 1948, with 

additional units added in 1957 and 1976. The site contains an 

ash landfill which first received CCRs around 1985, as well as 

a nearly 15-acre main ash pond, and 0.2 acre lower ash pond. 

All the units are currently active; with groundwater monitoring 

is required for the landfill but not for the ponds. The plant is 

located in a rural area near the Mississippi River. No offsite 

monitoring data are available.

Inadequate 

Information

Only a single 

well showed 

exceedances

(arsenic); quality 

of data are in 

question

8

Joliet 9 

Generating 

Station

Edison 

International 

d/b/a Midwest 

Generations 

EME LLC

Joliet IL

Landfill 

(Former 

Quarry) and 

Impoundments

Midwest Generation operates the Joliet 9 and Joliet 29 

generating stations which since 1962 have disposed of CCRs 

in the Lincoln Quarry landfill. The quarry operates under a 

landfill permit; however the site also includes two surface 

impoundments for the slurry water used to move CCR from 

the generating stations to the landfill. Both the landfill and 

surface impoundments are unlined and most of the site 

remains active. In 1996 the landfill became exempt from 

Illinois Class 1 Groundwater Protection standards. 

Potential 

Damage

Onsite 

MCL(arsenic, 

cadmium, and 

selenium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

9 Marion Plant

Southern Illinois 

Power 

Cooperative

Marion IL

Landfill and 

Surface 

impoundments

Southern Illinois Power Cooperative (SIPC) has placed CCRs 

from the Marion Power Plant into seven ponds and a just over 

1.1 million cubic yard landfill on the plant site since 1963. 

Only one of the seven ponds, which are located all over the 

facility, is lined. The landfill, located between two forks of 

Saline Creek, is also unlined. The plant lies in a rural area. It 

began groundwater monitoring in 1994; however, no offsite 

monitoring data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite 

MCL(cadmium)

and SMCL 

exceedances
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 27

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

10 Venice Power 

Station

Ameren Energy 

d/b/a/ 

AmerenUE

Venice IL Surface

impoundments

Originally a 500-MW coal burning plant, it was converted to 

oil in 1977. A series of unlined ash ponds constructed in the 

1950’s that received sluiced CCRs from the plant until 

conversion to oil and from wastewater until 2005. A fire in 

2003 closed the original building; however, 3 additional units 

came online in 2005. The ponds have been inactive since 

2005. As part of its re-permitting in 1995, the plant was 

required to investigate the groundwater impact of the ash 

ponds, and has installed 17 monitoring wells in and around 

the ash pond system. Area groundwater use is restricted 

because of industrial facilities in the area.

Potential 

Damage

Offsite MCL 

(arsenic) 

exceedance not

attributable to 

CCRs; onsite 

exceedances of 

MCL (arsenic 

and cadmium), 

SMCL 

(manganese),

and Illinois 

Class 1 GW 

standard (boron)

11 Mill Creek 

Station

E.ON d/b/a 

Louisville Gas & 

Electric

Louisville KY

Landfill and 

surface 

Impoundments

The plant has disposed of CCRs in landfills since 1972. The 

first two phases of the landfill were unlined since they were 

permitted as “inert” by the Kentucky Division of Waste 

Management (KDWM). In 2009, a third phase was 

constructed with a clay liner and the total area of the landfill 

reached 185 acres. Additionally, there is a 79 acre ash pond 

and four flue gas desulfurization (FGD) processing ponds 

located onsite. The landfill is located approximately 175 feet 

from the Ohio River. Onsite groundwater has been monitored 

onsite since 1994. No offsite groundwater data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL

(arsenic) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

12 Shawnee 

Fossil Plant

Tennessee 

Valley Authority 

(TVA)

Paducah KY

Landfills and 

Surface 

Impoundments

The plant has disposed of CCRs in two unlined landfills and 

two unlined surface impoundments since the 1980s. Recently, 

the Kentucky Division of Waste Management (KDWM) 

permitted the expansion of the landfills. The landfills and fly 

ash impoundments are located approximately 500-700 feet 

from the Ohio River, and groundwater from the site 

discharges to surface water via Little Bayou Creek located 

onsite. Groundwater was assessed in the 1980s, but 

consistent monitoring began in 2003. No offsite groundwater 

data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL

(arsenic and 

selenium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 28

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

13 Spurlock 

Power Station

East Kentucky 

Power 

Cooperative

Maysville KY

Landfill and 

Surface 

impoundment

The station has disposed of CCRs in a landfill since the 

1970s. The landfill was permitted as an “inert landfill” in 1979 

and a construction/operation permit was issued in 1982, and 

renewed in 1996. It is unknown if a liner is present at the 

original phases, however a 389 acre expansion in 1996 was 

lined with two feet of clay. A 57 acre bottom ash pond with a 

capacity of 1,750,000 cubic yards is also present at Spurlock 

Station. The site is located approximately one mile from the 

Ohio River. 

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL

(arsenic) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

14 Big Cajun 2 

Power Plant

NRG Energy 

d/b/a Louisiana 

Generating

New Roads LA

Surface 

impoundments; 

surge and 

treatment 

ponds

The plant has disposed of CCRs in ash ponds since 1980. 

There are five ponds that span over one mile on the disposal 

site: a 175 acre fly ash pond, a 66 acre bottom ash pond, a 

surge pond, and two treatment ponds (25.4 acres and 7.1 

acres, respectively). As of 2009, the fly ash pond was 65 

percent full and the bottom ash pond - 54 percent full. The 

ash ponds are located approximately a mile from the 

Mississippi River, although groundwater may flow away from 

the river. Groundwater has been monitored onsite since 1989. 

No offsite assessment has been performed.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(selenium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

15 Dolet Hills 

Power Station Cleco Power Mansfield LA

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundments

The station has disposed of CCRs onsite since 1986. There 

are ten disposal units onsite including one landfill, three 

bottom ash ponds, three surge ponds, a metal cleaning waste 

pond, a plant discharge collection pond, and a limestone 

runoff pond. Groundwater has been monitored onsite at 36 

wells and piezometers at six of the disposal units. No offsite 

groundwater data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic, lead, 

and selenium)

and SMCL 

exceedances

16 Rodemacher 

Power Station Cleco Power Lena LA

Landfill; 

Surface 

Impoundments; 

coal pile

The station has disposed of CCRs in landfills and ash ponds 

since 1982. The site consists of a coal pile and several 

disposal units, including a 109 acre fly ash pond, a 36 acre 

bottom ash pond, a landfill, two metal cleaning waste ponds, a 

coal sedimentation pond, a landfill leachate collection pond, 

and an unpermitted clarifier sludge sedimentation pond. The 

overall disposal area extends over about 3⁄4 of a mile. Surface 

water is present approximately fifty feet offsite at Lake 

Rodemacher and the Red River and Bayou de Jean nearby. 

Groundwater has been monitored onsite since 1983. No 

offsite groundwater data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic and 

lead) and SMCL 

exceedances
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 29

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

17

J.R. Whiting 

Generating 

Plant

CMS Energy 

d/b/a 

Consumers 

Energy

Erie MI Impoundments

The plant went online in 1952 and since then has constructed 

six impoundments to receive CCRs from the plant. These 

impoundments also receive liquid wastes under the plant’s 

NPDES permit (MIO001864). These wastes include low 

volume plant wastes, treated boiler cleaning waste, and 

treated sewage waste from the plant’s sanitary sewage 

treatment facility. Impoundments 3, 4 and 5, received fly ash 

and wastewaters until 2008. Since 2008 they have only 

received fly ash and are the primary focus of the damage 

claims. Ponds 3 and 4 were built in 1959, while pond 5 was 

built in 1974, and the three cover a total of 82 acres. Final 

closure of the ponds was approved in 2005 and is still under 

way. In recent years, fly ash disposal at the plant has been 

minimal, with most being sold for reuse by cement 

manufacturers. EPA rejected this as a damage case in 2007 

for lack of evidence that CCRs were the source of 

contamination.

Inadequate 

Information

Evidence is not 

available to 

specifically 

implicate CCRs 

in ecological 

damage 

18 Dan River 

Steam Station Duke Energy Eden NC

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundments

Operation began in 1949 with the original CCR impoundment 

built in 1956. Embankment walls were raised twice, in 1967 

and 1977. A dike was also built across the impoundment to 

divide it into the two units that still exist today. The two 

impoundments cover a total of 39 acres with a storage 

capacity of 664 acre feet and are both unlined. The 

impoundments are occasionally dredged, with the dredged 

CCR stored in an unlined landfill north of the ponds. The 

landfill has been capped and is now inactive, and the rest of 

the plant is expected to be decommissioned soon. The plant 

began voluntary groundwater monitoring in 1993; however, no 

offsite monitoring data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL

(lead) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

19 Antelope 

Valley Station

Basic Electric 

Power 

Cooperative

Beulah ND

Landfill -

Reclaimed 

Coal Mine

The Antelope Valley Station, located in Beulah, North Dakota, 

has disposed of CCRs from the Basin Electric Power 

Cooperative since 1984. The landfill (Solid Waste Permit #SP02) is lined with clay and has been inactive since 1998. The 

site was constructed on a reclaimed coal mine. The Antelope 

Valley Station also contains an active coal ash landfill and two 

ash ponds; however, these were not assessed in the 

EIP/EJ/SC August 2010 Report. Groundwater has been 

evaluated onsite; however, no offsite monitoring has been 

required. There are no surface water bodies nearby.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic) and 

SMCL 

exceedances
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 30

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

20 Leland Olds 

Station

Basic Electric 

Power 

Cooperative

Stanton ND Surface 

Impoundments

CCRs disposal in clay-lined ash ponds began in 1966, when 

the first pond was commissioned. Ponds 2 and 3 followed in 

1975, pond 4 in 1985, and pond 5 - at an unspecified date. In 

1996, ponds 4 and 5 were decommissioned and capped. Prior 

to closure, fly ash from ponds 1 and 2 was moved to ponds 4 

and 5. The site holds two permits, SP-038 for onsite disposal, 

and SP-143 for offsite disposal at Glenharold Mine. The total 

permit area is 364.6 acres with a 2.7 million cubic yard 

capacity. Ponds 3 and 5 are located approximately 250 feet 

from the Missouri River and Alderin Creek connects the 

disposal sites to the River. Groundwater has been evaluated 

onsite; however, no offsite assessment has been required.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL

(arsenic and 

lead) and SMCL 

exceedances

21 Sheldon 

Station

Nebraska Public 

Power District Hallam NE Landfill

CCR disposal began in the early 1990s. After nine years of 

disposal, the landfill was closed in 1999 and is now in a postclosure groundwater monitoring phase. There are other active 

landfills onsite. The CCR landfill, Ash Pit #3, is clay-lined and 

has a total capacity of 350,000 cubic yards. Groundwater has 

been monitored onsite since 1999; however, no offsite 

assessment has been required.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(selenium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

22

Cayuga 

Generation 

Plant

AES Lansing NY

Landfill and 

CCR leachate 

pond

Since the 1980s, CCRs have been disposed of in the landfill. 

The landfill consists of two sections, Phase I and Phase II. 

Phase I was unlined and had a series of pipes to collect 

leachate in a pond, which was then discharge to Cayuga 

Lake. Phase II covers an area of 50 acres and is currently 

active. The phase II landfill is lined with leachate collection 

and leak detection systems. Cayuga Lake, located next to the 

landfill, receives discharge from the CCR leachate pond via 

Outfall 013 under SPDES permit NY-000-1333. In 2008, the

AES power plant disposed of 108,330 tons of fly ash at the 

landfill and discharged 19 million gallons of CCW leachate 

pond water from outfall 013. Groundwater has been 

monitored onsite as early as 2000. Additionally, groundwater 

had been monitored offsite in a former private residential well 

which was acquired by AES. 

Potential 

Damage

Onsite 

MCL(arsenic, 

cadmium, and 

selenium) and 

SMCL

exceedances
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 31

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

23 Cardinal Plant American 

Electric Power Brilliant OH

Landfill; 

Surface 

Impoundments

The Cardinal Fly Ash Reservoir (FAR) 1 and 2 ash ponds, are 

unlined. In 2000, FAR 1 was closed and ash was transferred 

to FAR 2. FAR 2 is still currently active and an FGD landfill 

was built on top of FAR 1. The site overlooks the Ohio River.

Water is discharged via Outfall 019 into Block House Hollow

under a NPDES permit.. Groundwater data indicates onsite 

exceedances and led to OH EPA requiring groundwater 

monitoring programs. 

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

24 Gavin Power 

Plant

American 

Electric Power 

d/b/a Ohio 

Power Company

Cheshire OH

Landfills; 

Surface 

Impoundment

The plant has disposed of CCRs in landfills since 1994. The 

landfill is approximately 255 acres and is located along the 

Ohio River and its tributaries. The original landfills included 

Phase A (80 acres), Phase B (50 acres), and Phase C (111 

acres), which are now decommissioned. Currently, Phase D, 

Phase E, and Phase F are active and all inactive/active 

landfills are lined with one foot of clay and a 30-mil 

geosynthetic liner. In addition, there is a 300 acre 

decommissioned ash pond located approximately 1500 feet 

northwest of the site. There are several NPDES permitted 

outfalls onsite discharging into surface water bodies including 

tributaries to the Ohio River. Groundwater has been 

monitored onsite and surface water from Outfalls and offsite 

has been monitored as well.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite 

MCL(gross 

alpha, arsenic, 

barium, and 

cadmium)

exceedances

25

Industrial 

Excess 

Landfill

Hyman Budoff / 

Merle & Charles 

Kittinger

Uniontown OH

Landfill - Sand 

and Gravel 

Mine

The Industrial Excess Landfill (IEL) Superfund Site located in 

Uniontown, Ohio, began receiving wastes in the early 1960s. 

The landfill area covers approximately 30 acres and was a 

sand and gravel mine prior to 1959. It is estimated that one 

million tons of CCRs were disposed of in the landfill in the 

mid-1960s, and then in the late 1960s through the 1970s, 

approximately one million gallons of industrial organic 

chemical liquid wastes were dumped into an evaporation 

lagoon constructed onsite. In addition to the industrial wastes, 

hospital wastes, septic tank wastes, and general public 

wastes were disposed of in the landfill. Chemical wastes were 

no longer dumped after 1972 and the landfill was closed in 

1980 and covered with sand and gravel. In 1986, the site was 

listed on the EPA’s National Priorities List (NPL) as a 

superfund site. Groundwater has been monitored both onsite 

and offsite.

Not a Damage 

Case

Large quantities 

of non-CCR 

wastes
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 32

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

26 Muskingum 

River Plant

American

Electric Power 

d/b/a Ohio 

Power Company

Beverly OH Surface 

Impoundment

The site consists of a fly ash reservoir along the Muskingum 

River, which eventually discharges into the Ohio River. In its 

2007 Damage Case Assessment Report, US EPA rejected 

the Muskingum Plant as a damage case with no evidence of 

onsite or offsite groundwater exceedances available at the 

time. Since that time, OH EPA required monitoring.

Groundwater and seepage water have been evaluated onsite; 

however, no offsite assessment has been required.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(gross alpha and 

barium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

27 Northeastern 

Station

American 

Electric Power 

d/b/a Public 

Service 

Company of 

Oklahoma

Oologah OK

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundment

CCRs were disposed in a landfill since 1978. There is also a 

69 acre bottom ash impoundment onsite, but it has not been 

subject to groundwater monitoring. The landfill, located 

approximately 75 feet from the Verdigris River, is 65 acres, 

unlined, and operates under Oklahoma State Department of 

Health permit FA3566010. Although CCRs have been 

disposed of onsite since 1978, site monitoring did not begin 

until 2008. Groundwater has been evaluated onsite; however, 

no offsite groundwater data are available. 

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic, barium, 

chromium, lead, 

selenium, and 

thallium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

28 Boardman 

Plant

Portland 

General Electric Boardman OR

Landfill; 

Cooling 

Reservoir; 

Wastewater 

Ponds

Since the mid-1970s, CCRs were disposed of in a lined 40 

acre landfill, a 1,500 acre closed-loop reservoir, and six 

industrial wastewater ponds, two of which are lined. The 

reservoir is approximately three miles long and also accepts 

liquid industrial wastes. Groundwater and surface water have 

been monitored onsite; however, no offsite assessment has 

been required. The location of most exceedances are distant 

from the CCR areas including across the reservoir and 

presence of other wastes (on and off-site) requires additional 

data to implicate CCRs in the reported exceedances.

Inadequate 

Information

Inadequate 

information to 

determine 

whether on-site 

exceedances 

are site- related, 

from offsite 

sources, or from 

on-site but nonCCR sources 

29

Bruce 

Mansfield 

Power Station

FirstEnergy Shippingport PA Surface 

Impoundment

The stations disposes of about 1-3 million gallons/day of coal 

ash slurry in the Little Blue Run surface impoundment via a 

7.5 mile pipe. The impoundment is unlined, covers an area of 

approximately 900-1300 acres, and spans across both 

Pennsylvania and West Virginia, with an earthen dam 

immediately across from Ohio. The 400 foot high earthen dam 

is the largest of its kind east of the Mississippi. FirstEnergy 

holds various permits for the site, including NPDES discharge 

permits (PA0027260) for the outfalls, as well as a 

Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law permit (PA0027481) and a 

Solid Waste permit (300558). Groundwater and surface water 

have been monitored both onsite and offsite. Many of the 

offsite wells have been acquired by FirstEnergy.

Proven 

Damage

Offsite and 

onsite MCL 

(arsenic, barium, 

cadmium, 

fluoride, lead) 

and SMCL 

exceedances
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 33

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

30

Hatfield's 

Ferry Power 

Station

Allegheny 

Energy Masontown PA

Landfill, 

Surface 

Impoundment, 

and a minefill

The plant began operation in 1969 and was issued a CCW 

landfill permit in 1984. The first landfill was a 40-acre unlined 

area designated as Phase 1 and Phase 2 with a leachate 

collection system and under-drain to collect groundwater in 

the coal ash. Until 2001, this leachate and wastewater were 

discharged to an earthen impoundment and then into a 

tributary of Little Whitely Creek. In 2001, the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental Protections (PADEP)

determined this was in violation of its NPDES permit. The 

operator implemented a passive wetland treatment system for 

the leachate including an equalization basin, four wetland 

cells, five rock drain cells, and a sedimentation pond. In 1998, 

the PADEP re-permitted the site allowing expansion to 187-

acres. In 2009, PADEP approved a Phase 3 expansion for a 

110 acre disposal site with a composite liner. Groundwater 

monitoring is required on site, and surface water in the 

discharge tributary and a downstream site has been analyzed. 

The Hartley strip mine, located on a neighboring property to 

the south, is also used for the disposal of CCRs.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

31 Big Stone 

Power Plant Otter Tail Power Big Stone SD

Landfill, 

Surface

impoundments, 

and Cooling 

and 

Evaporation 

ponds

The plant has a CCR landfill, a bottom ash pond, and seven 

other waste disposal ponds on the site. The landfill, which 

receives mostly dry fly ash as well as some dredged CCR, 

also has an ash pond for storm water runoff and the entire 

system is unlined. This, along with two lined brine ponds, two 

unlined lime sludge water softener ponds, and an inert 

construction debris landfill are all under the plant's solid waste 

permit. The site also has a cooling pond, an evaporation 

pond, a holding pond, and a sluiced bottom ash settling pond. 

The brine ponds, cooling ponds, evaporation pond and 

holding pond form a closed loop of water, with the post 

treatment, not suitable for the boiler, water from the holding 

pond being disposed in the brine ponds, from which 

groundwater leachate is collected and discharged into the 

cooling pond. The cooling and evaporation ponds are each 

nearly a mile wide. Groundwater monitoring on the site 

consists of 25 wells, though the lime sludge ponds are not 

monitored, nor are the northern and eastern edges of the 

cooling or evaporation ponds. No offsite groundwater data are

available.

Not a Damage 

Case

Presence of 

significant nonCCR wastes, 

CCRs not 

directly 

implicated
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 34

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

32 Cumberland 

Steam Plant

Tennessee 

Valley Authority

Cumberland 

City TN

Surface 

Impoundments 

and Ash Stack

The plant has two coal-fired generating units that began 

operating in 1973. The plant has three CCR disposal/storage 

areas on site. A gypsum storage area, which covers about 

170-acres, was built in 1996 on top of the plant’s original ash 

pond from 1969. Another ash pond, covering about 50-acres, 

was built in 1969, requiring the movement of Wells Creek. A 

dry ash stack that covers 110 acres was also started in 1969, 

has a maximum height of approximately 35 feet, and is being 

built over a sluiced ash disposal area. The plant is located in 

a rural area with approximately 440 houses within 3 miles, the 

majority of which use groundwater as a drinking source. TVA 

collects groundwater from a number of downgradient wells 

and a few upgradient sources; however, no offsite 

groundwater data are available.

Potential

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic and 

selenium) and

SMCL 

exceedances

33 Gallatin Fossil 

Plant

Tennessee 

Valley Authority 

(TVA)

Gallatin TN

Closed and 

Active Surface 

Impoundments

The plant opened in 1959. The plant has three CCR disposal 

areas onsite. The first is an unlined bottom ash impoundment 

which covers about 248 acres. The second is a fly ash 

impoundment which covers about 167 acres and is also 

unlined. The third is an unlined ash impoundment which 

covers about 73 acres and was the first of the three sites, 

opening in the late 1950s. CCRs were sluiced into this area 

until 1970 when the area was abandoned, and a closure plan 

was approved in 1997 with the work completed in 1998. 

Treated water from the Cumberland River is a common 

municipal water source in the area, including for the Gallatin 

Water Department which is located just over a mile 

downstream from the impoundments. However, no offsite 

monitoring data are available

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(cadmium and 

beryllium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

34 Johnsonville 

Fossil Plant

Tennessee 

Valley Authority 

(TVA)

New 

Johnsonville TN

Surface 

Impoundments 

and Landfills 

The Johnsonville Fossil plant opened in 1952 and currently 

has 10 coal generating units and four ash disposal areas. 

Three units, a 35-acre former pond for dredged ash, a 95-acre 

former landfill and a 45-acre unlined ash pond known as area 

A, have all been closed. The fourth area is an 87-acre unlined 

CCR disposal area known as Areas 2 & 3, located on an 

island in the Tennessee River. Groundwater monitoring 

began at the site in 1990; however, not all wells were 

monitored each year. New Johnsonville and the City of 

Camden intake their municipal water from the Tennessee 

River near the Johnsonville’s plant outfalls. However, no 

offsite groundwater data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(arsenic, 

cadmium, and 

lead) and SMCL 

exceedances
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 35

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

35 Fayette Power 

Project

Lower Colorado 

River Authority La Grange TX

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundments

The Fayette Power Project has four waste management units 

onsite which are currently active. The lined coal ash pond 

receives CCRs from units 1 and 2 since 1979 with storage 

capacity of 3.7 million cubic yards. Half the pond was closed 

down in 1988 and closure plans have been submitted and 

approved for the remainder of the pond. The site also has a 

reclaim pond, a coal ash landfill and a class 2 sanitary landfill. 

Some groundwater results (arsenic in a shallow aquifer) are 

associated with non-CCR wastes on the west side of the 

facility. Other reported contaminants (e.g. selenium in a 

deeper groundwater aquifer) are associated with the reclaim 

pond and coal ash pond. The plant is located on Lake 

Fayette. Groundwater from the site generally discharges into 

Cedar Creek or Baylor Creek nearby; however, no offsite 

groundwater data are available.

Potential 

Damage

Onsite MCL 

(selenium) and 

SMCL 

exceedances

36 Clinch River 

Plant

American 

Electric Power 

d/b/a 

Appalachian 

Power

Cleveland VA

Landfill and 

Surface 

Impoundments

The Clinch River plant has 2 ash ponds and a fly ash landfill. 

The two ash ponds were commissioned in 1964, with 

capacities of 1240 and 1332 acre-feet, respectively. Pond 

Area 1 is currently active, as is the fly ash landfill. Pond Area 

2 was closed in 1998. The plant lies in a rural area, on the 

Clinch River, to which effluent from the ponds is discharged. A

dike failure on Pond Area 1 in June 1967 released about 400 

acre-feet of ash slurry into Dump’s Creek (which joins Clinch 

River a half mile downstream) in under an hour. The spill 

equaled raised the water level by several meters, forcing 

wastes nearly a half mile upstream. Reports of fish kills and 

elimination of benthic macroinvertebrates in the area of the 

spill and longer term recovery processes are documented.

Proven 

Damage

Proven 

Ecological 

Damage; dike 

failure led to 

severe 

ecological

damage 

downstream of 

the spill.

37 Glen Lyn 

Plant

American 

Electric Power 

d/b/a 

Appalachian 

Power

Glen Lyn VA Surface 

Impoundments

The Glen Lyn Power Plant has two onsite ponds for 

management of CCRs. One is a fly ash pond, commissioned 

in 1965 and covering 7.6 acres, while the other is a multi-unit 

bottom ash pond, commissioned in 1963 and covering 5.1 

acres. Some other wastewaters are treated in contiguous 

units of the bottom ash pond. Effluent was discharged from 

these ponds into a receiving stream which then flowed into 

the New River, until discharges stopped in 1980. The ponds 

remain active. Studies in the late 1970’s and 1980’s 

concluded that effluent discharge (both thermal discharge and 

CCR contaminants) may have impacted the diversity of 

macroinvertebrate, mayfly, and bacterial populations.

Not a Damage 

Case

Studies 

implicate 

thermal 

discharge which 

while related to 

coal power 

plants are not a 

constituent of 

CCRs
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 36

Table 7: Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases No.

Name

Owner/

Operator City

State

Type Brief Description Determination Rationale

38 Columbia 

Energy Center

Alliant Energy 

d/b/a Wisconsin 

Power & Light

Pardeeville WI Surface 

Impoundments

The Columbia Power Station has three ash impoundments on 

site, all officially commissioned in 1975, though plant 

operations and CCR storage and discharge began in 1974. 

The three ponds consist of an 8.5-acre primary ash pond, a 

16-acre secondary ash pond, and a 1-acre polishing pond, all 

of which are currently active. Since the plant’s opening in 

1975, CCRs have been slurried into this series of 

impoundments and sulfuric acid added to reduce the 

alkalinity. The effluent was then discharged into a stream 

which subsequently flowed into Rocky Run Creek. Discharges 

are covered by Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (WPDES) permits. Studies undertaken in the late 

1970s determined that effluent discharge from the CCR 

impoundments had an impact on downstream habitats and 

caused considerable damage to populations of 

macroinvertebrates.

Proven 

Damage

Proven 

Ecological 

Damage; 

damage to biota 

specifically 

implicate CCR 

constituents

39

Oak Creek 

Power Plant 

(Caledonia)

Wisconsin 

Energy(WE 

Energies) d/b/a 

Wisconsin 

Electric Power 

Co.

Oak Creek WI Landfills

The Oak Creek Power plant has been in operation since the 

1950s. It has onsite the active Caledonia landfill as well as 

two inactive landfills, Oak Creek North and South. Oak Creek 

North began operating in the mid 1960s and closed in the late 

1970s. Oak Creek south opened in 1974 and was capped and 

closed with a gravity leachate collection drain in 1992. The 

active Caledonia landfill is approximately 45 acres with a clay 

liner and leachate collection system. Caledonia receives 

CCRs and wastewater treatment solids from five power plants 

operated by Wisconsin Energy. 

Potential 

Damage

Onsite 

exceedances of 

WDNR 

Enforcement 

Standards

(molybdenum)
Assessment of Damage Cases October 2010

Do Not Cite or Quote 37

6.0References

Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of 

Solid Waste July 9, 2007 EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796-0015.

Comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s July 2007 Coal Combustion Waste Damage 

Case Assessment, August 29, 2007, RCRA Docket No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796, Submitted by 

Earthjustice, Clean Air Task Force et al

Evaluation of Coal Combustion Product Damage Cases (Volumes I and 2), Draft EPRI Reports 1020553

and 1020554. November 2009.

In Harm’s Way: Lack Of Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers Americans And Their Environment, 

Thirty-nine New Damage Cases of Contamination from Improperly Disposed Coal Combustion Waste, 

Environmental Integrity Project, Earthjustice and Sierra Club, August 26, 2010, accessible at: 

http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/documents/inharmsway_final3.pdf

Industry Rebuttal to Comments submitted by EarthJustice on EPA ‘s CCW Damage Case Assessment 

(EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796-0446.3)

Memorandum on Preliminary Review of Out of Control: Mounting Damages From Coal Ash 

Waste Sites; Thirty-one New Damage Cases of Contamination from Improperly Disposed Coal 

Combustion Waste, Alexander Livnat, US EPA, March 3, 2010.

Notice of Regulatory Determination on Wastes From the Combustion of Fossil Fuels, Federal Register,

Vol. 65, No. 99, Monday, May 22, 2000, Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 261 

Out of Control: Mounting Damages From Coal Ash Waste Sites; Thirty-one New Damage Cases of 

Contamination from Improperly Disposed Coal Combustion Waste. Environmental Integrity Project and 

EarthJustice, accessible at: http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/Outof ControlMountingDamagesfromCoalAshWasteSites.pdf

Relevant Docket Comments, EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796. Documents 0070, 0347, 0424, 0443.1, 0443.3, 

0443.6, and 0424.

Supplementary Information to Earthjustice Allegations of Additional CCW Damage Cases, Docket ID 

No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796-0468, Utility Solid Waste Activity Group Submittal

Technical Background Document For The Report To Congress On Remaining Wastes From Fossil Fuel 

Combustion: Potential Damage Cases March 15, 1999
Do Not Cite or Quote

Appendix A: 

Reassessment of Previously Identified Proven Damage Cases
Do Not Cite or Quote

Appendix B: 

Assessment of February 2010 Alleged Damage Cases
Do Not Cite or Quote

Appendix C: 

Assessment of August 2010 Alleged Damage Cases