UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE

OFFICE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY

 PUBLIC HEARING ON EPA'S PROPOSED RULE ON

 Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System;

Identification and Listing of Special Wastes;

 Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from

 Electric Utilities

 DOCKET ID NO. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640

 Knoxville, Tennessee

 Wednesday, October 27, 2010
 2

 1 PARTICIPANTS:

 2 EPA Hearing Panel:

 3 Morning Session:

 4 ROBERT DELLINGER, Chair

 Director of Materials Recovery and Waste

 5 Management Division

 Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

 6

 LAUREL CELESTE

 7

 FRANK NAY

 8

 STEVE HOFFMAN

 9

 Afternoon Session:

 10

 BETSY DEVLIN, Chair

 11 Associate Director of Materials Recovery and Waste

 Management Division

 12 Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

 13 RICH KINCH

 14 BONNIE ROBINSON

 15 STEVE SOUDERS

 16 Evening Session:

 17 ROBERT DELLINGER, Chair

 Director of Materials Recovery and Waste

 18 Management Division

 Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

 19

 FRANK NEY

 20

 ALEXANDER LIVNAT

 21

 STEVE HOFFMAN

 22

 * * * * *
 3

 1 P R O C E E D I N G S

 2 (10:00 a.m.)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Good morning and thank

 4 you for attending today's public hearing on the

 5 Environmental Protection Agency's proposed rule

 6 regarding the regulation of coal combustion

 7 residuals that are disposed of in landfills and

 8 surface impoundments. Before we begin, I'd like

 9 to thank you for taking time out of your busy

 10 schedules to address our proposed rule, and we

 11 look forward to receiving your comments.

 12 This is the last of eight public

 13 hearings that we will be conducted -- conducting.

 14 We had seven very successful hearings in

 15 Washington D.C., Denver, Dallas, Charlotte,

 16 Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Louisville. Well over a

 17 thousand people provided testimony.

 18 My name is Bob Dellinger. I'm the

 19 director of the Materials Recovery and Waste

 20 Management Division in the EPA's Office of

 21 Resource Conservation and Recovery. I'll be

 22 chairing this session of today's public hearing.
 4

 1 With me on the panel, to my right in order, Laurel

 2 Celeste of our Office of General -- General

 3 Counsel, Frank Nay of our Atlanta regional office,

 4 and Steve Hoffman who works with me at EPA

 5 headquarters.

 6 Before we begin the public hearing, I'd

 7 like to provide a brief description of the

 8 proposed rule, as well as the -- describe the

 9 logistics on how we plan to run today's public

 10 hearing. Coal combustion residuals, or CCRs, are

 11 residues from the combustion of coal at electric

 12 utilities and include fly ash, bottom ash, boiler

 13 slag and flue gas desulphurization materials.

 14 Coal combustion residuals contain problematic

 15 contaminants such as mercury, cadmium, selenium,

 16 and arsenic.

 17 In 2008, 136 million tons of coal

 18 combustion residuals were generated by electric

 19 utilities and independent power producers.

 20 Of that total, approximately 46 million

 21 tons were landfilled, 30 million tons were

 22 disposed in surface impoundments, 50 million tons
 5

 1 were beneficially used, and 11 million tons were

 2 used in mine fill operations. EPA estimates that

 3 there are approximately 300 landfills and more

 4 than 600 surface impoundments where coal

 5 combustion residuals are placed.

 6 We have proposed to regulate these coal

 7 combustion residuals to insure their safe

 8 management when they are disposed of in landfills

 9 and surface impoundments. Without proper

 10 protection, the contaminants in these residuals

 11 can leach into groundwater and migrate the

 12 drinking water sources posing public health

 13 concerns.

 14 In addition, the structural failure of a

 15 surface impoundment in -- at the Tennessee Valley

 16 Authority's plant in Kingston, Tennessee in

 17 December 2008 released more than 5 million cubic

 18 yards of coal -- coal ash over approximately 300

 19 acres of land and contaminated portions of the

 20 Emory and Clinch Rivers. With this proposal, EPA

 21 has opened a national dialogue by calling for

 22 public comment on two different regulatory
 6

 1 approaches available under the Resource

 2 Conservation and Recovery Act that would address

 3 the risks from disposal of CCRs.

 4 One option presented in the proposed

 5 rule draws from the authorities available under

 6 Subtitle C of RCRA. This will create a

 7 comprehensive program of federally-enforceable

 8 cradle to grave requirements for waste management

 9 and disposal. The other option is based on the

 10 authorities of Subtitle D of RCRA which gives the

 11 EPA the authority to set minimum federal criteria

 12 for waste management facilities that must be met

 13 under a schedule established in the regulation

 14 where it can be finalized. The regulation would

 15 be enforced through citizen suits. Under this

 16 scenario, states qualify as citizens.

 17 The EPA decided to co-propose these two

 18 rules to encourage a robust dialogue on how to

 19 address the human health concerns and structural

 20 integrity associated with the disposal of coal

 21 combustion residuals in landfills and surface

 22 impoundments. EPA wants to ensure that our
 7

 1 ultimate decision is based on the best available

 2 data and is made with the substantial input of all

 3 stakeholders. Therefore, we ask that you provide

 4 us your comments not only at today's hearing but

 5 any other comments and supporting information that

 6 you want to provide in writing.

 7 I'd like to say a few words about the

 8 beneficial use of coal combustion residuals. The

 9 proposed rule maintains the Bevill exemption for

 10 coal combustion residuals that are beneficially

 11 used, and therefore, would not alter the

 12 regulatory status of these residuals when used

 13 properly. The EPA continues to strongly support

 14 the safe and protective beneficial use of CCRs.

 15 However, the proposal also indicates that concerns

 16 have been raised with some coal combustion

 17 residuals, particularly when used in an

 18 unencapsulated form. Therefore, we request

 19 comments, information and data on specific aspects

 20 of beneficial use, particularly those activities

 21 that deal with unencapsulated applications.

 22 We also make clear in the proposal that
 8

 1 coal combustion residuals that are placed in sand

 2 and gravel pits, quarries and other large-scale

 3 fill operations are not examples of beneficial

 4 use. EPA views this placement as akin to disposal

 5 and would regulate these sites as disposal sites

 6 under either of these regulatory options.

 7 Now I'm going to switch over to covering

 8 some logistics for the comment portion of today's

 9 public hearing. Today's public hearing will work

 10 as follows: Speakers, if you pre-registered, you

 11 were given a 15-minute slot -- time slot when you

 12 were scheduled to give your three minutes of

 13 testimony. To guarantee that slot, we have asked

 14 that you sign in 10 minutes before your 15-minute

 15 slot at the registration desk.

 16 All speakers who have pre-registered and

 17 walk-ins were given a number when you signed in

 18 today, and this is the order in which you will

 19 speak: I will call speakers to the front of the

 20 room by number four or five at a time. There are

 21 chairs behind the speaker's podium for those

 22 speakers who are waiting to provide testimony.
 9

 1 And that's over on my right side of the room, your

 2 left side of the room.

 3 When your number is called, please move

 4 to the microphone and state your name and your

 5 affiliation. We may ask you to spell your name

 6 for the court reporters who are transcribing your

 7 comments for the official record. Because there

 8 are many people who have signed up to provide

 9 testimony today and to be fair to every one,

 10 testimony is limited to three minutes.

 11 We will be using an electronic

 12 timekeeping system and will also hold up cards to

 13 let you know when your time is getting low. When

 14 we hold up the first cards, this means that you

 15 have two minutes left. When we hold up the second

 16 card, you will have one minute left. When the

 17 third card is held up, you have 30 seconds left.

 18 And when the red card is held up, you're out of

 19 time and you should not continue with your

 20 remarks.

 21 Remember you can provide any written

 22 material to our court reporters and the material
 10

 1 will be entered into the rule-making record. We

 2 will not be answering questions on the proposal;

 3 however, from time to time, any of us on the

 4 hearing panel may ask questions of you to clarify

 5 your testimony.

 6 As I just mentioned, if you have brought

 7 a written copy of your testimony, please leave a

 8 copy in the box by our court reporters on my left,

 9 your right. If you are only submitting written

 10 comments today, please put those in the box at the

 11 registration desk. If you have additional

 12 comments after today, please follow the

 13 instructions on the yellow handout and submit

 14 comments by November 19th, 2010, which is the

 15 close of the comment period.

 16 Our goal is to ensure that everyone who

 17 was come today to present testimony is given an

 18 opportunity to provide comment. To the extent

 19 allowable by time constraints, we'll do our best

 20 to accommodate speakers who have not pre-

 21 registered.

 22 Today's hearing is scheduled to close at
 11

 1 10:00 p.m., but we will stay later if necessary.

 2 If, however, time does not allow you to present

 3 your comments orally, we have prepared a table in

 4 the lobby where you can provide a written

 5 statement in lieu of oral testimony. These

 6 written statements will be collected and entered

 7 into the docket for the proposed rule and will be

 8 considered the same as if you presented them

 9 orally. If you would like to testify but have not

 10 registered to do so, please sign up at the

 11 registration table.

 12 We are likely to take occasional breaks,

 13 but we are prepared to eliminate or shorten the

 14 breaks in order to allow as many people as

 15 possible to provide their oral testimony.

 16 Finally, if you have a cell phone, we would

 17 appreciate it if you would turn it off or turn it

 18 to vibrate. If you need to use your phone at any

 19 time during the hearing, please move to the lobby.

 20 We ask for your patience as we proceed.

 21 We may need to make some minor adjustments as the

 22 day progresses. Thanks again for participating
 12

 1 today. Let's get started.

 2 And with that, I'd like to call Numbers

 3 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 to the front. Go ahead.

 4 MR. SCARBOROUGH: My name is Steve

 5 Scarborough. I live in Roane County, Tennessee.

 6 First, I want to thank the folks at the

 7 Environmental Protection Agency for having this

 8 meeting and taking comments on the results of

 9 their hard work. The work they produced has

 10 produced a regulation that is reasonable and

 11 effective in handling coal waste. And you guys

 12 have scheduled a 13-hour meeting today and, you

 13 know, that's a tough job. I appreciate it.

 14 As I read the proposed regulations, one

 15 thought kept coming back to me. Why is anyone

 16 opposed to this? Particularly after the disaster

 17 that we in Roane County are suffering through and

 18 are trying to recover from. It's a result of

 19 improperly handled and stored coal ash.

 20 Why would anyone not want -- an industry

 21 not want a level playing field for all of the

 22 businesses that make money from coal and coal ash?
 13

 1 Why would these corporations and their lobbyists

 2 not willingly accept oversight that would

 3 guarantee to the public that they are operating

 4 safely and that the health and welfare of the

 5 people living near coal sites is being watched out

 6 for?

 7 This army of hired corporate spokesmen

 8 has come before you and whined that adequately

 9 protecting the public will cost too much or cost

 10 jobs or make coal ash seem like a bad -- bad

 11 thing. We even heard the word "stigma" on coal

 12 ash as a result of this regulation. Well, if you

 13 want to see stigma, just come out to Roane County

 14 and see what it's like trying to put your life,

 15 business and property values back together when --

 16 after you get hit by the mother of all stigmas.

 17 All of their testimony against doing the

 18 right thing will boil down to five words: It will

 19 cost too much. The corporations opposed to Option

 20 C argue against having solid federal oversight

 21 saying they can be trusted to do the right thing.

 22 They can't.
 14

 1 I come here to speak as strongly as I

 2 can for Option C. The -- when I read the EPA cost

 3 benefit analysis, I thought, of course. Why not?

 4 Why is anyone opposed to this? The reason it is

 5 is that it makes the people who make the money

 6 creating coal ash waste and processing coal ash

 7 waste will have to pay more of the true cost of

 8 coal power instead of as it is now, they shift it

 9 to the people who live on the shores of Watts Bar

 10 Lake in rural Alabama, and even in your personal

 11 neighborhood. Nobody in this room or anywhere in

 12 America can escape the consequences of this

 13 decision. This stuff is everywhere.

 14 Roane County is my home. It's the most

 15 beautiful part of America. And it's also the

 16 site of the largest disaster -- coal disaster in

 17 American history. This disaster was caused by

 18 incompetency, willful negligence at mul --

 19 multiple levels, but mainly in the financial

 20 decisions of a corporate bureaucracy focusing on

 21 short-sided cost savings and a complicit state

 22 agency that allowed it to operate a massive coal
 15

 1 storage facility without adequate oversight.

 2 For a savings of $20 million, they now

 3 have a 1.2 billion-dollar clean-up mess. And the

 4 people in -- in our area can never be made whole.

 5 They have taken 2 to 7 years out of their lives,

 6 200 hundred homes plus sit empty. But this --

 7 MR. HOFFMAN: Excuse me. Your -- your

 8 time is up.

 9 MR. SCARBOROUGH: I'm sorry. Thank you.

 10 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 11 MR. SMITH: Good morning. My name is

 12 Steven Smith, and I'm the executive director of

 13 the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. And I

 14 wanted to first thank you all for coming and

 15 having the meeting here in Knoxville. We were

 16 very pleased that you-all decided to come close to

 17 where the largest coal ash disaster has ever been

 18 and actually hear from the people in the area.

 19 Back in December of 2008 as I was

 20 getting ready for Christmas with my -- my family,

 21 and as untold other people in our area were, we

 22 experienced the largest coal ash disaster and one
 16

 1 of the largest disasters in the history of the

 2 United States out in Harriman County (sic) in

 3 Kingston. When I came out there and saw the

 4 devastation that was unleashed on the communities

 5 out there, it was -- it was devastating. It was

 6 really quite -- quite amazing what had happened.

 7 And it -- it reminded me that we have got to

 8 protect human health and the environment first and

 9 foremost, and that is -- should be our highest

 10 priority in this country. We should not allow

 11 this kind of devastation to be unleashed.

 12 So what we did was we engaged -- I was

 13 asked to come up and speak before the

 14 Environmental Public Works Committee the first

 15 week of January. Talking to that committee, we --

 16 and the chairman, Chairman Barbara Boxer, she

 17 basically said, "Look, Lisa Jackson is going to be

 18 up. We're going to talk to her during her

 19 confirmation hearing." And sure enough, two weeks

 20 later she was up there, made a commitment to

 21 actually do something about coal ash once and for

 22 all.
 17

 1 And it's been long in coming, because we

 2 came very close to regulating coal ash back in the

 3 late 1990s. And O & B, at that time, held it up.

 4 O & B this time has delayed the proceedings now

 5 for over six months as they've wrangled with and

 6 been lobbied by those who have a financial

 7 interest and are willing to put that financial

 8 interest above and beyond the health and -- and

 9 safety of citizens.

 10 So what we did was, now that the new ash

 11 rules are out, we've actually written a report

 12 where we've taken a look at what the state of

 13 Tennessee, which has basically been ground zero

 14 for coal ash. And what we did was we saw, what

 15 are they doing in the regulations. I want to

 16 submit this as part of the record. But the bottom

 17 line is that under Subtitle D, you defer

 18 tremendously to the states. And what we're seeing

 19 is the states aren't stepping up.

 20 EPA has a role, has a responsibility to

 21 be a backstop. And that's why we are strongly in

 22 support of Subtitle C, because we need that
 18

 1 backstop, we need that agency to make sure that

 2 the rules are enforced. And if they're not

 3 enforced, then what -- what we see is we see these

 4 kind of devastation that we saw in Oak Ridge -- I

 5 mean, in Harriman.

 6 So we'll submit this as part of the

 7 record. My colleague Josh Galperin is going to

 8 get into the specifics on the report, but I'm here

 9 to strongly encourage that Subtitle C be the

 10 course. That is the only way that we can protect

 11 public health and the environment. That's the

 12 only way that we can assure that the kind of

 13 accidents that happened in Harriman will not

 14 happen again. And I appreciate your time and

 15 opportunity to speak. Thank you very much.

 16 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 17 MR. GALPERIN: Thank you, ladies and

 18 gentlemen. My name is Josh Galperin and I am a,

 19 as Dr. Smith said, a policy analyst and research

 20 attorney with the Southern Alliance for Clean

 21 Energy.

 22 The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy
 19

 1 strongly supports Subtitle C as the means of

 2 regulating coal ash because the fed --

 3 federally-enforceable backstop provided by the

 4 special waste designation is the only way to

 5 assure that people and the environment are

 6 protected from the physical and toxic dangers of

 7 coal ash.

 8 Now, as Dr. Smith said, we've compiled

 9 this report on the state of coal ash regulation in

 10 Tennessee. It's important to understand how

 11 states regulate coal ash in order to understand

 12 the differences between what will happen --

 13 whether Subtitle C or Subtitle D is ultimately

 14 promulgated.

 15 This report shows a surprising lack of

 16 oversight in Tennessee, a state that should be

 17 very proactive on coal ash regulation because of

 18 the Kingston disaster. So I want to just point

 19 out a few specifics that I've found in researching

 20 Tennessee's laws in some depth.

 21 First, the laws only specifically

 22 address coal ash in two instances. The first
 20

 1 instance happens to also be the only -- the one

 2 and only change that has been made to Tennessee's

 3 coal ash regulations since the Kingston disaster.

 4 And as it happens, this particular change has

 5 nothing to do with the disaster itself.

 6 The change that I'm talking about, the

 7 first time that coal ash is mentioned in

 8 Kingston's law -- excuse me, in Tennessee's laws

 9 is a provision in the solid waste laws which

 10 requires a liner and final cap on coal ash

 11 landfills. Sounds great. It's a very important

 12 provision, except unlike much of the rest of the

 13 solid waste laws, the exemptions contained therein

 14 swallow the entire rule. The liner and cap is not

 15 required for structural fill; it's not required

 16 for agricultural uses or engineered uses; and most

 17 importantly, the "new safeguard" -- I'm putting

 18 quotes around that for the record -- the "new

 19 safeguard" doesn't apply to surface impoundments,

 20 which are the type of ash storage that is clearly

 21 the most dangerous.

 22 The second specific mention of coal ash
 21

 1 in Tennessee's law is with regards to permits by

 2 rule. Certain uses of coal ash are allowed

 3 without a true permit in Tennessee, without being

 4 subject to public scrutiny, and without the more

 5 stringent provisions of the normal permit by

 6 application process. So this is two instances

 7 only where Tennessee's laws actually address coal

 8 ash specifically, and both provide for broad

 9 exemptions over permissive uses of coal ash

 10 without substantial safeguards.

 11 Moreover, Tennessee does not regulate

 12 ash at all when it's stored in surface

 13 impoundments. So, to be clear, surface

 14 impoundments like the one in Kingston, the ash

 15 that's stored in those impoundments and those

 16 impoundments themselves are completely

 17 unregulated. The Safe Dam Act does not regulate

 18 these impoundments, the solid waste laws exempt

 19 impoundments, and NPDES permits only regulate the

 20 discharges of wastewater from those impoundments.

 21 So there is no requirement for

 22 structural stability, groundwater monitoring, unit
 22

 1 citing, leachate collection, closure, post-closure

 2 care, financial assurances on impoundments like

 3 the one at Kingston.

 4 So, rather than going into further

 5 details, Dr. Smith submitted a copy of this

 6 report. If you have any further questions on it,

 7 please feel free to contact me at the Southern

 8 Alliance for Clean Energy. And please understand

 9 that --

 10 MR. HOFFMAN: Your time is up.

 11 MR. GALPERIN: -- Subtitle C is the only

 12 effective option. Thank you.

 13 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 14 MR. WARD: Good morning. My name is

 15 John Ward, and I'm chairman of Citizens for

 16 Recycling First, an organization of more than 1500

 17 individuals who believe that the best solution for

 18 coal ash disposal problems is to quit throwing

 19 coal ash away.

 20 I've attended all eight of EPA public

 21 hearings on the proposed coal ash disposal

 22 regulations, and I'd like to thank EPA for
 23

 1 providing such ample opportunity for citizens to

 2 speak out. In all of these hearings, one point of

 3 consensus stands out. Coal ash disposal

 4 regulations should be improved and incidents like

 5 the Kingston coal ash spill should never be

 6 allowed to happen again.

 7 Beyond that, the citizen comments have

 8 been divided. One group of citizens has been

 9 vocal in calling for Subtitle C, hazardous waste

 10 designation for coal ash. This group, for the

 11 most part, has gained its knowledge of coal ash

 12 from large, well-funded anti-coal environmental

 13 groups. These well-meaning citizens end up being

 14 only partially informed, because those major

 15 environmental groups completely ignore options for

 16 the safe and responsible recycling of coal ash. I

 17 challenge you to find even a mention of coal ash

 18 recycling in any of their publications.

 19 The other group of citizens you've heard

 20 from is comprised of people who have spent decades

 21 doing what's right for the environment creating

 22 safe and environmentally beneficial uses for coal
 24

 1 ash that keep it out of landfills in the first

 2 place. These people are recyclers, architects,

 3 engineers, concrete producers, farmers, and more.

 4 Most of them are small business people, and all of

 5 them consider themselves to be environmentalists,

 6 too, because they're working every day to conserve

 7 energy and materials and reduce greenhouse gas

 8 emissions.

 9 This group of citizens has been

 10 unanimous in stating that Subtitle C hazardous

 11 designation for coal ash will wreck recycling of

 12 the material in this country, and possibly

 13 worldwide. I urge you to remember these facts:

 14 Coal ash does not qualify as a hazardous waste

 15 based on its toxicity. And its toxicity is

 16 similar to that of the materials it replaces when

 17 it's recycled.

 18 The landfill engineering standards being

 19 proposed by EPA are essentially the same under

 20 both EPA's hazardous and non-hazardous approaches.

 21 So you're not giving the environment more

 22 protection with a hazardous label.
 25

 1 Finally, EPA's non-hazard approach can

 2 be implemented years sooner giving greater

 3 protection to our environment now instead of

 4 later. It is absurd to state that people will

 5 want to use more of a material in their homes and

 6 communities if EPA considers it's hazardous waste

 7 on the property of the people who produced it.

 8 Hundreds of citizens who actually work

 9 to recycle coal ash have told you at these

 10 hearings that Subtitle C will not work. Please

 11 listen to the citizens who have working knowledge

 12 of this subject and remember that they care about

 13 environmental protection just as much as people

 14 who issue scary press releases and fundraising

 15 appeals that improperly label coal ash as toxic

 16 waste. Thank you.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you. While

 19 speaker Number 5 is moving forward, could Speakers

 20 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 move forward?

 21 MR. MELLON: Good morning. My name is

 22 Paul Mellon. I'm with Novetas Solutions. We
 26

 1 manufacture new age blast media, which is an

 2 industrial abrasive for grit blasting.

 3 This is the fourth time I've had the

 4 opportunity to come to these EPA hearings, in

 5 addition to a meeting that I had in January in

 6 Washington D.C. And much of my comments have

 7 centered around the beneficial use program and

 8 specifically that the beneficial use program,

 9 while it has many merits, unfortunately contains

 10 products that, in fact, do not meet the criteria

 11 of the EPA and should not be included in the

 12 program. I've tried to lay -- lay out a factual

 13 documented case as to why that is.

 14 In coming to this meeting today, I

 15 intended to recap Novetas' position on the

 16 beneficial use program and why coal slag abrasives

 17 should not be in it. But ironically, two weeks

 18 ago today the Office of Inspector General of the

 19 EPA issued an early warning report which in many

 20 ways mirrors almost exactly our arguments about

 21 the beneficial use program and how it has been

 22 misused by certain companies with their products
 27

 1 in the program.

 2 Specifically, the OIG found two major

 3 issues with the C2P website, which is the

 4 partnership program between the coal industry and

 5 the EPA to come up with the beneficial use

 6 program. The report basically states that the

 7 website contained an incomplete picture regarding

 8 potential damage as a result of unencapsulated

 9 coal slag prod -- coal -- coal products.

 10 And secondly, that you cannot use the

 11 logo or the seal of the EPA to promote commercial

 12 products. Specifically you see on Page 3 of the

 13 report the OIG talks about the -- the hazards of

 14 unencapsulated uses and how these unencapsulated

 15 uses can leach contaminants into the groundwater,

 16 drinking water, and obviously are not good for

 17 human health or the environment.

 18 Well, if you look at the next page, you

 19 can see that Harsco Corporation is currently, as

 20 of this Monday, on their website sending chain

 21 e-mails, or they're asking people to click on

 22 e-mails to send to the EPA.
 28

 1 And then one of the e-mails makes a very

 2 curious statement. It says that the EPA has

 3 confirmed in 2000 and 2009 no change in the

 4 science -- that there is no change in the science

 5 that would require boiler slag regulation, no

 6 scientific data exists. Well, the fact is that

 7 the EPA in 1997 has already labeled Black Beauty

 8 Abrasives as a hazardous airborne pollutant.

 9 There are several studies by OSHA and NIOSH that

 10 all say that these products are in fact hazardous.

 11 Second major issue is the EPA logo.

 12 Again, I'll quickly kind of get through this.

 13 Specifically it says the EPA logo is prohibited to

 14 be used to sell commercial products. Well, again,

 15 on the same Harsco website that you can click on

 16 today, you can see that they have the prominently

 17 seal of the EPA next to Black Beauty Abrasives and

 18 they're basically allowing people to think that

 19 the EPA is, in fact, promoting Black Beauty

 20 Abrasives.

 21 I guess the question is: If the EPA

 22 cannot stop Harsco Corporation after the OIG told
 29

 1 you that you can't allow companies to use the logo

 2 to sell products, what kind of faith are people

 3 going to have in the beneficial use program when

 4 you finally issue your -- your -- your public

 5 ruling? Do the right thing. Tell companies that

 6 they can't use your logo to -- to sell products.

 7 And I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you

 8 today.

 9 MR. HOFFMAN: Time is up.

 10 MR. WARD: Thanks.

 11 MR. WALLACE: My name is Craig Wallace.

 12 I'm a fly ash marketer.

 13 The best coal ash plan for the

 14 environment is recycling, keeping coal ash out of

 15 the landfills. The EPA and others have studied

 16 coal ash for 30 years determining a hazardous

 17 waste designation is not warranted. A hazardous

 18 waste designation unnecessarily puts all coal ash

 19 recycling at great risk.

 20 In 2008, 144 million tons of coal ash

 21 was produced. 44% of the coal ash was used safely

 22 in beneficial applications equating the 63 million
 30

 1 tons of coal ash recycled.

 2 There are 495 coal-burning power plants

 3 depositing coal ash into 194 landfills and 161

 4 ponds. According to the National Science Academy

 5 and the EPA, only 24 landfills are problematic or

 6 proven to compromise water supplies. This is only

 7 6.7% of the landfills currently accepting coal

 8 ash.

 9 The majority of the problematic coal ash

 10 ponds -- or coal ash sites are ponds, which are

 11 being phased out with Subtitle D. Under Subtitle

 12 D, the EPA will specify and design criteria and

 13 standards for all coal ash storage in the U.S.

 14 Any state not in compliance with Subtitle D

 15 standards will be subject to litigation. Clearly,

 16 Subtitle D addresses the engineering failures of

 17 problematic coal ash deposit sites and gives the

 18 federal government the teeth to enforce the new

 19 standards.

 20 Coal ash recycling is the number one

 21 recycling success program in the U.S.

 22 Stigmatizing coal ash as a hazardous material will
 31

 1 expose everyone using the product to liabilities

 2 from less than ethical attorneys. We are already

 3 experiencing the stigma as a result of these

 4 hearings. In addition, the mere cost of defending

 5 oneself in court is enough to discourage future

 6 beneficial use of coal ash.

 7 This discussion is not about burning

 8 coal or the toxicity of coal ash. This discussion

 9 has determined the best way to engineer and

 10 standardize coal ash landfills to protect the

 11 public safety. Subtitle D accomplishes this end

 12 goal without putting coal ash beneficial use at

 13 risk. If it did not address the issue, the Office

 14 of Management and Budget would not state it has a

 15 coal equal option to Subtitle C. Thank you.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MR. SCOGGAN: Thank you for this

 18 opportunity to address the EPA. My name is John

 19 Scoggan. I work for Boral Material Technologies

 20 where I've been employed for 29 years. We manage

 21 coal combustion products, principally fly ash for

 22 use in concrete and have been in business for over
 32

 1 50 years.

 2 We support the EPA's effort to protect

 3 the human health and the environment. We don't

 4 want another disaster like TVA Kingston spill. We

 5 support regulation to ensure responsible disposal,

 6 but don't want to kill recycling in the process.

 7 Therefore, we support EPA's ruling for RCRA

 8 Subtitle D. The Kingston problem was a result of

 9 an engineering failure that can be addressed with

 10 a Subtitle D non-hazardous regulation.

 11 Fly ash has been used in concrete since

 12 the 1920s. The federal government and the EPA

 13 have encouraged and supported the use of fly ash

 14 in concrete for over two decades. The

 15 environmental benefits of using fly ash in

 16 concrete have been detailed by others at previous

 17 hearings and include: the reduction of CO2

 18 estimated to be 11 million tons annually; the

 19 reduction of waste placed in landfills estimated

 20 to be 51 million cubic yards of landfill space

 21 saved annually; the red -- reduce requirement for

 22 excavation or quarrying of an equal amount of
 33

 1 virgin raw material. Other benefits include

 2 substantial water and energy savings.

 3 The recycling of coal combustion

 4 products is a suc -- is a success story with

 5 utilization growing from 30% in the year 2000 to

 6 44% in 2008, representing the use of over 60

 7 million tons of material annually. The EPA's

 8 strategic plan calls for a further increase of

 9 beneficial use of coal combustion products up to

 10 50% by the year 2015.

 11 The EPA has already reviewed coal waste

 12 several times and in 1993 and 2000 formed a

 13 conclusion that it did not warrant a hazardous

 14 label. Nothing has changed. The EPA believes

 15 that recycling won't be hurt with a Subtitle C for

 16 disposal and that there is no stigma. We believe

 17 the EPA is wrong in this assumption.

 18 A significant number of speakers

 19 presenting at previous hearings have indicated

 20 that coal ash was responsible for health issues,

 21 disease and even death. If engaged people feel

 22 this way, imagine how uninformed the general
 34

 1 public will react to having a product labeled by

 2 the EPA as hazardous in their homes, schools,

 3 churches, and offices. The stigma is real and

 4 will cripple the recycling of coal ash.

 5 The EPA's own scientific data shows that

 6 coal ash is non -- non-hazardous. By EPA's own

 7 admission, a RCRA Subtitle D non-hazardous

 8 designation will provide an equal amount of

 9 protection to the public health and the

 10 environment. Please regulate coal combustion

 11 waste under RCRA Subtitle D and avoid any

 12 reference to a hazardous waste. Thank you for

 13 your time.

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MR. PETERSON: Good morning. My name is

 17 Terry Peterson. I also work for Boral Material

 18 Technologies. I've been employed in the coal

 19 combustion product industry for the past 27 years.

 20 BMTI is a company dedicated to finding

 21 environmentally-acceptable beneficial reuses for

 22 coal combustion products, as well as proper
 35

 1 landfill management services. We have 161

 2 employees working at 22 sites across 18 states.

 3 I'd like to open my statement by

 4 commending the EPA for maintaining their position

 5 concerning CCRs since enactment of the Bevill

 6 amendment in 1980 and reconfirming that position

 7 through regulatory determinations of 1993 and

 8 2000. EPA's longstanding position has underpinned

 9 the establishment and development of arguably the

 10 most successful recycling program in U.S. history.

 11 BMTI alone has been able to place in

 12 excess of 53 million tons of coal combustion

 13 products into beneficial uses over at the past 20

 14 years. Obviously, that's 53 million tons that

 15 avoided landfills. But, just as importantly,

 16 that's 53 million tons of CO2 emissions that would

 17 have resulted if natural materials had been used

 18 in lieu of CCPs. I argue that this would never

 19 have occurred if CCRs were classified as hazardous

 20 or under Subtitle C.

 21 Further benefit of the EPA's

 22 longstanding position is reflected in BMTIs R & D
 36

 1 program. For the past ten years, we've invested

 2 in excess of $30 million developing new coal

 3 combustion product applications outside of Ready

 4 Mix and cement. Additionally, we've developed

 5 three beneficiation processes that enable coal

 6 combustion products to meet performance

 7 specification when environmental modifications to

 8 plants are put in place for clean air.

 9 This is important, and the only reason

 10 it did take place is because it is not -- it is

 11 classified as a non-hazardous material. If it

 12 were classified as hazardous or under Subtitle C,

 13 I argue again that these investments would never

 14 take place. Again, I speak just on behalf of

 15 BMTI, but obviously, there are many other people

 16 in this room who have had the same -- have the

 17 same success stories.

 18 I recognize during these hearings the

 19 undercurrent associated with generating power

 20 without burning coal as well as citizens' concern

 21 over inadequate state regulation. Obviously,

 22 generating power by burning coal has been an
 37

 1 integral part of U.S. society and will remain so

 2 for many years. So I think it's important that we

 3 deal with this process by maintaining or recycling

 4 efforts in coal combustion residues. I suggest

 5 that as long as we are burning coal, the right

 6 thing to do is to encourage continuation and

 7 expansion of current recycling efforts.

 8 Supporting Subtitle D is a way to maintain this

 9 momentum.

 10 Just importantly, creating confidence

 11 among citizens that government agencies, whether

 12 federal or state, are protecting their interests

 13 is critical. I suggest that we can gain public

 14 confidence and achieve the necessary safeguards

 15 for proper landfilling -- properly landfilling

 16 CCRs through cooperation between the EPA and state

 17 regulators using a Subtitle D classification.

 18 In closing, I recommend that the best

 19 option going forward for U.S. citizens is for the

 20 EPA to continue support by designating CCRs under

 21 a Subtitle D classification. Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 38

 1 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 2 MR. ADAMS: Good morning. My name is

 3 Thomas Adams. I'm the executive director of the

 4 American Coal Ash Association of Rural Colorado.

 5 I want to thank you for the opportunity to

 6 participate in today's hearing.

 7 The Environmental Protection Agency's

 8 proposal for regulating the coal -- disposal of

 9 coal combustion products, or CCP, provides two

 10 basic paths creating rules which will improve the

 11 protection of human health and the environment.

 12 Under the provisions of the Resource Conservation and

 13 Recovery Act, the agency has suggested that CCP be

 14 regulated as a hazardous waste under Subtitle C,

 15 or as a non-hazardous waste under Subtitle D.

 16 The level of protection provided under

 17 either disposal scenario is virtually identical.

 18 The distinction between describing CCP as

 19 hazardous waste or non-hazardous waste has very

 20 serious implications for the continued beneficial

 21 use. The stigma of being associated with

 22 hazardous waste is real and is already affecting
 39

 1 markets. The safe recycling of CCP is a major

 2 environmental success story that is in serious

 3 jeopardy with a looming threat of a Subtitle C

 4 rule.

 5 When faced with the choice of purchasing

 6 a product containing a hazardous waste or

 7 purchasing a product without this stigma

 8 associated with it, the rational consumer will

 9 choose the non-hazardous option. The EPA claims

 10 it can construct a rule exempting favored

 11 beneficial uses, and under this construct,

 12 recycling will actually increase. After all, the

 13 agency has 13 examples of such a scheme

 14 demonstrating this result.

 15 We've continually pointed to the

 16 difference between these 13 processed industrial

 17 materials and the unprocessed CCP used in consumer

 18 products such as carpet, wallboards, shingles,

 19 concrete foundations, and concrete slabs.

 20 Hazardous waste is not something consumers invite

 21 into their homes, schools, healthcare facilities,

 22 or workplaces. In an effort to regulate disposal,
 40

 1 the EPA is threatening to destroy an industry

 2 which provides the only rational solution to

 3 disposal, which is recycling.

 4 I'd like to pose a final question for

 5 your consideration. What if you are wrong about

 6 beneficial use under Subtitle C regulation? The

 7 following are some of the outcomes: Millions of

 8 tons of coal combustion products currently safely

 9 consumed in a broad range of applications will be

 10 diverted to disposal. Since the year 2000 alone,

 11 over 400 million tons of CCP have been recycled.

 12 Current landfills will have to be expanded where

 13 possible, and new landfills will be required where

 14 capacity cannot be increased.

 15 Another impact, 15,000 green jobs will

 16 be eliminated. The vast majority of these jobs

 17 are in small businesses, not large utilities.

 18 Another impact would be the industry which

 19 contributes as much as $25 billion directly and

 20 indirectly to the U.S. economy will be lost, and

 21 millions of tons of greenhouse gas emissions

 22 currently being avoided through the use of fly ash
 41

 1 in concrete mixtures will be released into the

 2 atmosphere. Since the year 2000, this beneficial

 3 use has accounted for over 125 million tons of

 4 greenhouse gas avoidance.

 5 These are just some of the impacts of a

 6 Subtitle C hazardous waste rule in the continued

 7 recycling of CCP. So I repeat the question: What

 8 if you're wrong about beneficial use under

 9 Subtitle C rules? How do you restore decades of

 10 recycling success? How do you remediate the

 11 environmental damage of increased disposal? How

 12 do you remediate the damage of millions of tons --

 13 MR. HOFFMAN: Sorry. Your time is up.

 14 MR. ADAMS: -- of greenhouse gas

 15 reduction? The citizens deserve a -- a

 16 responsible and thoughtful answer.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 19 MR. HOFFMAN: Thank you.

 20 MR. BROWNHILL: Good morning. My name

 21 is Ryan Brownhill, operations manager for Sphere

 22 One, Incorporated. We are the largest marketer of
 42

 1 domestically sourced cenospheres in the United

 2 States.

 3 I work in an industry that is based

 4 solely on taking a waste stream that would

 5 otherwise go to a landfill, reduces the need for

 6 other natural resources, lowers CO2 emissions,

 7 create jobs, and makes the products that we go

 8 into better. I'm proud to work in an industry

 9 that does all that. That seems like the kind of

 10 industry that the EPA and environmental groups

 11 would support.

 12 This hearing is not about whether coal

 13 should or should not be used to generate power.

 14 The reality is that coal is used to generate power

 15 and will be for the foreseeable future. The

 16 question in front of us is: How can the waste

 17 best be handled?

 18 If the 76 million tons of ash that is

 19 currently landfilled is as big a problem as is

 20 advertised, do we really want to landfill 136

 21 million tons annually? And what about the 12

 22 million tons of CO2 emissions that are avoided by
 43

 1 the use of fly ash? Does anyone here really

 2 support a proposal that could increase the amount

 3 of landfilled material by 60 million tons and CO2

 4 emissions by 12 million tons annually?

 5 I have attached letters from several of

 6 our customers expressing their concerns in laying

 7 out their plans to evaluate other materials. I've

 8 talked to numerous other customers saying the same

 9 thing. Every company that is involved in

 10 recycling these byproducts has said that a

 11 Subtitle C ruling would be extremely detrimental

 12 to continued recycling. Why would we lie about

 13 that? If there's no potential impact on our

 14 business, we wouldn't spend the time and money to

 15 be here. We're here because we are very concerned

 16 about the huge negative economic and environmental

 17 impact of a Subtitle C ruling.

 18 We're not arguing against new

 19 engineering standards. My heart goes out to the

 20 people whose lives and health have been affected

 21 by the improper storage of CCRs. The EPA must

 22 take action to protect them and the environment.
 44

 1 The fact is that the engineering requirements for

 2 Subtitle D and Subtitle C are the same. So the

 3 protections provided to those people would be the

 4 same. The states all have programs that are

 5 effective in hand -- handling solid waste and

 6 monitoring solid waste landfills which have

 7 significantly higher concentrations of known

 8 carcinogens than CCRs.

 9 Once we acknowledge that coal ash is

 10 going to be generated, what's the best way to make

 11 sure that people aren't harmed? Recycle

 12 everything we can. If we could recycle 100% of

 13 the ash that is generated, no one would ever have

 14 to worry about how a landfill might affect their

 15 health. I know a Subtitle C ruling will seriously

 16 diminish recycling. I have the letters from our

 17 customers telling us exactly that. If you don't

 18 want to listen to me, listen to them.

 19 A Subtitle D ruling protects people in

 20 the same way as Subtitle C. A Subtitle D ruling

 21 will have no effect on the continued efforts to

 22 find new, innovative, safe uses for CCRs. The
 45

 1 protections are the same. The ability to recycle

 2 as much of this waste stream as possible is only

 3 viable with a Subtitle D ruling.

 4 I'm proud to work in an industry that

 5 recycles, conserves natural resources, reduces CO2

 6 emissions, and create jobs. My sincere hope is

 7 that the EP -- EPA does exactly what it has set

 8 out to do: protect people from improper storage of

 9 CCRs and maintain the beneficial use that exists

 10 today. Subtitle D is the only solution that does

 11 both. Thank you for your time.

 12 (Applause)

 13 MR. DELLINGER: What --

 14 MS. CELESTE: Sir?

 15 MR. DELLINGER: We're -- we've got out

 16 of order here. Tom Adams must have spoken for

 17 Bill Gehrmann, Number 9. Is that right? And then

 18 --

 19 MR. BROWNHILL: For Melissa Hendricks.

 20 MR. DELLINGER: Okay. And your name --

 21 I missed your name at the beginning.

 22 MR. BROWNHILL: My name is Ryan, R-y-
 46

 1 a-n --

 2 MR. DELLINGER: Okay.

 3 MR. BROWNHILL: -- Brownhill.

 4 MR. DELLINGER: All right. Thank you.

 5 All right. Could we have Numbers 11, 12, 13, 14,

 6 and 15 to come to the front, please?

 7 MR. EDENS: My name is Tom Edens. I am

 8 the administrative Coal Combustion Products

 9 Utilization at Santee Cooper, South Carolina's

 10 state-owned electric and water utility serving

 11 over 2 million South Carolinians. Santee Cooper's

 12 most successful environmental stewardship program

 13 has been the marketing of coal combustion

 14 byproducts.

 15 The Subtitle C option represents the

 16 most extreme, costly and burdensome option without

 17 proportional environmental benefit. Regulating

 18 CCRs under RCRA hazardous waste controls would

 19 have an impact on beneficial use. FGD gypsum,

 20 which is predominantly calcium sulfate, can be

 21 safely used in production of drywall and indust --

 22 and in agricultural soil amendment.
 47

 1 Gypsum does not meet the criteria set

 2 forth under RCRA as being a hazardous waste. Why

 3 should an environmental friendly recycling program

 4 be unfairly stigmatized? Santee Cooper also

 5 successfully recycles coal ash, both fly ash and

 6 bottom ash to minimize the use of ash ponds and

 7 landfills as much as possible. When ash is

 8 encapsulated in concrete, it is one of the most

 9 responsible reuse programs.

 10 EPA awarded Santee Cooper under the

 11 EPA's Coal Combustion Partnership Enhanced

 12 Utilization Award in 2006. Despite of the rules

 13 claiming to the contrary, the labeling gypsum and

 14 other CCRs as a hazardous waste will impact sales.

 15 Negative results have already been seen as

 16 lightweight aggregate market -- market is already

 17 touting their prod -- product as non-hazardous.

 18 The Subtitle C option would overwhelm

 19 existing Subtitle C disposal facilities,

 20 especially in South Carolina where there are no

 21 facilities. This would cause an undue economic

 22 burden without beneficial use. It will impact the
 48

 1 cost of power, and this cost will be transferred

 2 to those customers who buy electricity.

 3 The Subtitle D option appears to be the

 4 most reasonable way to reduce the cost burden

 5 while still being protective of the environment.

 6 We request EPA to consider the comments from

 7 industry in regard to the actual pro --

 8 projections of cost. South Carolina DHEC has a re

 9 -- robust program that is protective of the

 10 environment. They already require groundwater

 11 monitoring around our ponds and our ash landfills,

 12 groundwater is monitored by Santee Cooper by a

 13 professional geologist and analysis are sent to

 14 DHEC semi-annually.

 15 Santee Cooper urges EPA to consider the

 16 Subtitle D option. and we appreciate the

 17 opportunity we had to speak. Thank you very much.

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MR. JOHNSON: Good morning. My name is

 21 Kris Johnson, owner of AspenGold Consulting

 22 Company out of Woodland Park, Colorado. Our
 49

 1 company specializes in assisting utilities and

 2 research -- for the research and implementation of

 3 beneficial uses in programs for all coal

 4 combustion products: fly ash, bottom ash and FGD

 5 gypsum.

 6 I oppose any form of Subtitle C

 7 designation for coal combustion products. I've

 8 been in the CCP industry for 21 years and been re

 9 -- and been responsible for the successful

 10 completion of a multitude of beneficial projects

 11 constructed entirely of CCPs. All these projects

 12 utilize millions of tons of CCPs diverting them

 13 from municipal landfill disposal. All these

 14 projects I have been involved in and numerous

 15 other mentions today and at other public hearings

 16 across the country would not have been possible

 17 without the current regulations allowing industry

 18 to recycle CCPs and beneficial in many -- many

 19 methods.

 20 Subtitle D, as it stands today, allows

 21 industry to willingly participate in beneficial

 22 projects as a way of diverting portions of their
 50

 1 CCPs into projects which contribute significantly

 2 to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and

 3 the preservation of our natural resources by

 4 conserving virgin materials otherwise used for

 5 construction and other product purposes. Any

 6 change to the -- to the current CCP regulation

 7 such as a proposal for Subtitle C designation will

 8 cripple the CCP industry by eliminating the useful

 9 and beneficial utilization of CCPs in many

 10 applications.

 11 During my career, I've been involved in

 12 the marketing of CCPs, explaining their benefits,

 13 their engineering properties, and the actual

 14 dollar savings compared to other construction

 15 materials on the market. With the designation of

 16 Subtitle C, hazardous waste, or even a special

 17 waste designation, the marketing of these CCPs

 18 will be extremely difficult, if not next to

 19 impossible.

 20 In my business, I have seen utilities

 21 delay or cease specific CCP projects for fear the

 22 Subtitle C designation becoming implemented. My
 51

 1 clients are holding back projects where CCPs would

 2 be beneficially used outside of their property due

 3 to the possibilities of long-term litigation from

 4 customers who have used CCPs in beneficial

 5 projects only to find out the material that they

 6 purchased is now designated as a hazardous waste

 7 under Subtitle C. The stigma could be

 8 insurmountable to maximize utilities of CCPs.

 9 Some have said Subtitle C designation

 10 will increase the utilization of CCPs, forcing

 11 utilities to increase their utilization efforts

 12 due to the increased cost of disposal. Those of

 13 us who market CCPs daily disagree and see the

 14 demand decreased to a point where utilization will

 15 cease. Utilities will have little incentive to

 16 release CCPs into beneficial applications

 17 incurring -- incurring the increased disposal

 18 costs and passing this cost on to the consumer,

 19 you and me. Currently, the United States has

 20 insuf -- insufficient hazardous waste landfill

 21 space to accommodate the amounts of CCPs generated

 22 on an annual basis.
 52

 1 I sincerely hope the EPA will digest the

 2 science which has been presented to it by

 3 industry, academia, government, and even the EPA's

 4 own staff finding Subtitle C as inappropriate for

 5 future promotion and beneficial utilization of

 6 CCPs. Thank you for this opportunity.

 7 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 8 MR. RHODES: Good morning. I'd like to

 9 thank you for the time you've allotted us to

 10 convey our position on the subtitle change for

 11 coal ash this morning. For the record, my name is

 12 Doug Rhodes. I've worked with -- I've worked in

 13 research and development for Headwaters Resources

 14 for the past 16 years.

 15 And I wanted to take the time allotted

 16 me to discuss the positive effects of fly ash as a

 17 replacement for Portland cement in concrete. The

 18 beneficial use will be negatively impacted, as

 19 you've been informed by the stigma already

 20 occurring. The belief that fly ash can have a

 21 dual designation as hazardous for disposal and

 22 non- hazardous for beneficial use is absolutely
 53

 1 untrue. Years of work has gone into establishing

 2 the technical data, relationships, distribution

 3 and product development that validates beneficial

 4 use.

 5 The stigma of hazardous designation

 6 would simply destroy the marketability of the

 7 environmental, financial and technical use of fly

 8 ash in concrete. The positive technical

 9 attributes of fly ash in concrete construction are

 10 very well documented by private industry,

 11 universities, as well as local and federal

 12 agencies.

 13 The beneficial use of fly ash in

 14 concrete construction has been used in the United

 15 States since the early 30s. The use of fly ash

 16 as a cement replacement in concrete has benefit to

 17 both the fresh and hardened properties. The fly

 18 ash affects the fresh properties of concrete by

 19 improving workability, reducing water demand,

 20 reducing segregation and bleeding, and lowering

 21 heat of hydration.

 22 Fly ash increases strength -- excuse me.
 54

 1 Fly ash in -- fly ash increases strength, reduces

 2 permeability, reduces corrosion of reinforcing

 3 steel, increases sulfate resistance, and reduces

 4 alkali aggregate reaction. The only solution for

 5 the concrete producer will be to increase the use

 6 of cement and chemical add mixtures to fill the

 7 beneficial void that -- which will be left by the

 8 absence of fly ash.

 9 Not only does fly ash improve the

 10 performance and quality of concrete, it offers

 11 environmental advantages. Just the use of 1 ton

 12 of fly ash in concrete conserves enough landfill

 13 space for 455 days of solid waste for the average

 14 American, reduces a -- reduction of CO2 emissions

 15 is equal two months of emissions from an

 16 automobile, energy savings is enough to provide

 17 electricity to the average American home for 24

 18 days.

 19 The stigma placed on fly ash by

 20 hazardous designation will negate the use and this

 21 benefit will be lost. I will take this

 22 opportunity to remind you of the negative impacts
 55

 1 on marketing, technical, financial, and the legal

 2 implications for the beneficial use of fly ash.

 3 So, in closing, I urge you to maintain

 4 the past technical findings that CCR regulation

 5 under Subtitle C is unnecessary and unwarranted.

 6 Thank you for your time and attention.

 7 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 8 (Applause)

 9 MR. BLEVINS: Morning. I'm John Blevins

 10 with Sphere One. I've been there about 29 years

 11 in maintenance at the Chattanooga plant. And we

 12 process the cen -- the sale of cenospheres for the

 13 entire time I've worked there. I've had -- I've

 14 worked -- I've come to work and been around

 15 cenospheres every day, tell -- and I've been

 16 regularly tested over the years and around

 17 hazardous materials.

 18 Like I say, I've worked in there --

 19 material for 29 years and I don't have any medical

 20 problems that the EPA has talked about. The stuff

 21 is -- if the stuff is so bad as the EPA says it

 22 is, how come I'm not sick?
 56

 1 I also have enough common sense to know

 2 that if the -- that if it's called hazardous

 3 waste, no one is going to buy it. Our products go

 4 -- go into a lot of building materials. Who is

 5 going to put something in their house that the EPA

 6 says is hazardous?

 7 As far as I can tell, the biggest

 8 problem with the coal ash is the storage. The

 9 spill at the Kingston plant is about -- is a prime

 10 case of the problem with storage. These questions

 11 is: Why should I lose my job because of a failure

 12 at an ash pond? Just because the dock failed

 13 doesn't make the material automatically hazardous.

 14 We will continue to sell our products

 15 like it is -- have for the 29 years. The people

 16 have live near the storage sites get the same

 17 protection in either case. So I will ask again:

 18 Why should I lose my job so the EPA can have

 19 control over the sites?

 20 Thank you for letting me speak today.

 21 (Applause)

 22 MR. BARGAHEISER: My name is Keith
 57

 1 Bargaheiser. I'm with Headwaters Resources.

 2 And my comments today are related to the

 3 observations while reading the document and its

 4 definitions. One has to be puzzled as to why the

 5 EPA has created the term "coal combustion

 6 residue." By EPA's definition, the CCR means

 7 bottom ash, fly ash, boiler slag and flue gas

 8 desulphurization materials that are destined for

 9 disposal. CCRs are also known as coal combustion

 10 waste and fossil fuel combustion waste when

 11 destined for disposal.

 12 The commonly accepted terms of CCWs and

 13 FFC definitions are clear and concise on what is

 14 happening to the material and have existed for

 15 many years. So, again I ask: Why add to the

 16 confusion with this new term?

 17 By the EPA's definition, the term "coal

 18 combustion products" means fly ash, bottom ash,

 19 boiler slag and flue gas desulphurization

 20 materials that are beneficially used. This def --

 21 this definition is in no way interchangeable with

 22 the term "CCR."
 58

 1 As I reviewed the EPA document, it

 2 became clear the writers of the document did not

 3 grasp the meaning of the CCR, for throughout they

 4 used the term "CCR" for both beneficial use and

 5 disposal. The EPA has stated they have seen no

 6 evidence of damages from beneficial uses of CCRs.

 7 I ask you: How am I to characterize the term

 8 "CCR" in this sentence?

 9 If we use the EPA's definition

 10 previously discussed, then the CCRs are destined

 11 for disposal and beneficial use cannot occur. The

 12 correct terminology would be "CCPs" rather than

 13 "CCRs." This is just one example of the confusion

 14 caused by the misuse of terms within this

 15 documentation.

 16 If recycling is truly the national

 17 priority, I challenge you to embrace the use of

 18 CCPs for what they are: a national resource. We

 19 can start by opening a dialogue between the EPA,

 20 environmentalists and industry with a committee of

 21 stakeholders to resolve the issues. Under the

 22 existing draft, there will be no winners. We can
 59

 1 only expect lawsuits and years of confrontation.

 2 If preventing disposal of CCPs and

 3 elimination of landfill ashes, everyone's goal,

 4 this can be done. Today technologies exist where

 5 we can take landfill ash and process it for

 6 beneficial use. With everyone's cooperation, our

 7 tomorrows can be giving back these sites to the

 8 public so they can enjoy it as nature intended it.

 9 The only true sustainable answer to this

 10 issue is Subtitle D. Thank you.

 11 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 12 (Applause)

 13 MR. DELLINGER: Could we have Numbers

 14 215, 17, 18, 19, and 20 come forward?

 15 If you have written notes, can you put

 16 them in the -- in the box over here? Thank you.

 17 Number 215.

 18 MS. EVANS: Thank you for this

 19 opportunity. My name is Barbara Evans. I

 20 represent a group of people that live right in the

 21 mouth of the Perry County dump, the Black Belt

 22 Citizens Fighting for Health and Justice. I'm a
 60

 1 community organizer that lives one county over in

 2 Lownsdes County. I'm the deputy coroner. I

 3 brought the respirator, because you're killing us

 4 with the coal ash.

 5 We are poor people. And we tried to get

 6 you- all to have the hearing where we could get to

 7 it. But -- because our folks are -- are -- are

 8 poor, they've got a bunch of part-time jobs, they

 9 could not afford to come here today, so I'm

 10 representing them. I'm representing the vast

 11 majority of the people that live all around this

 12 landfill in Perry County that's taken the coal ash

 13 from the Tennessee spill.

 14 They have small houses and trailers on

 15 the road that surrounds that dump. Most of them

 16 get their acreage, they got it from family. It's

 17 all they own. And now it's worthless. They plant

 18 gardens for survival and fruit trees. And they're

 19 afraid to eat the crops now because coal ash is

 20 everywhere. It covers the -- the cars, and it

 21 covers their little houses. It's everywhere.

 22 Children are kept away from the fruit trees, and
 61

 1 grandparents worry that the people will -- that

 2 the kids will cross the road to the dump, because

 3 that dump is as close to a residential area as

 4 that wall over there.

 5 You know, these are good people. They

 6 -- they work hard to survive and they have strong

 7 faith. The only thing they have is their land.

 8 And this is the area where people fought and died

 9 to give all Americans the right to vote and the

 10 civil rights movement. And even that is being

 11 jeopardized by the huge amount of absentee ballots

 12 manipulated by the power structure, the same power

 13 structure that invited this coal ash in. You

 14 can't even have a fair election in the black belt.

 15 Local county government, the ones that

 16 begged for the coal ash to get the money, is run

 17 like a gang. If you cross them, none of your

 18 family and friends will ever get a job in Perry

 19 County. If you cross them, you'll get ostracized.

 20 If you cross them, you can bet the police

 21 departments will be on your back. People are

 22 afraid, and I can tell you it's with good reason.
 62

 1 People are threatened with arrest if they speak

 2 out even at public meetings. And right now it's

 3 being litigated because the Perry County

 4 Commission has violated the Alabama Open Meetings

 5 Act.

 6 The state -- the Alabama Department of

 7 Environmental Management is weak and underfunded.

 8 It's a permit machine. It's political. They

 9 never should have issued a permit for that

 10 landfill in the first place. Already the landfill

 11 owners have filed for bankruptcy. Already there's

 12 been illegal dumping of the leachate. We can't

 13 count on them.

 14 And so what I'm saying to you today,

 15 like -- just like in the civil rights movement, we

 16 need --

 17 MR. HOFFMAN: Sorry, ma'am, your time is

 18 up.

 19 MS. EVANS: -- federal intervention.

 20 Thank you.

 21 (Applause)

 22 MR. CROSSLIN: Good morning. And I
 63

 1 thank you for the opportunity to come this morning

 2 and speak on behalf of recycling.

 3 Recycling, what would this country be

 4 and what kind of shape would it be in if we didn't

 5 have recycling?

 6 MR. DELLINGER: Could you state your

 7 name and affiliation, please?

 8 MR. CROSSLIN: Yes. My name is Jerry

 9 Crosslin, and I'm an employee at Sphere One,

 10 Incorporated in Chattanooga, Tennessee. We

 11 manufacture by a product -- a byproduct from the

 12 coal-fired power plants that we sell to our

 13 customers.

 14 Currently, we're buying products, the

 15 floating ash off the ponds at the power plants.

 16 And if the Environmental Protection Agency

 17 classifies what we call the cenosphere as a

 18 hazardous material, we will lose our customers

 19 because they have said that they will not use a

 20 hazardous product in their products. So they will

 21 write out their formulas and not use the

 22 cenospheres.
 64

 1 We will be forced to shut our doors, our

 2 jobs will be lost. And this is not just the

 3 company that I work for, that I have been working

 4 with in this company for 30 years, working with

 5 the floating ash off of these ponds. I do not

 6 have health problems. I have not been to the

 7 doctor for any problems concerning fly ash,

 8 cenospheres. I've been to the power plants, I've

 9 worked at the power plants, and I've got 30 years

 10 in the plant with this floating ash. So, if this

 11 -- this would also force us to cut back

 12 economically, lose our jobs, and none of us can

 13 afford to lose our jobs in this day and time.

 14 But recycling is a benefit to the whole

 15 world. It -- it makes money. It helps keep the

 16 environment going. The EPA has to have rules and

 17 regulations. They have to make these rules and

 18 regulations for me and you to go by. But some of

 19 them does not need to be classified as a hazardous

 20 product.

 21 So let me urge upon you today, please do

 22 not classify this as a hazardous product, because
 65

 1 it's going to cost jobs. And like I say, I've

 2 been in this business daily for 30 years and the

 3 doctors say that my lungs are good, I'm good -- in

 4 good health and have no health problems at all.

 5 Thank you.

 6 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MR. MINKARA: Good morning. My name is

 9 Rafic Minkara. I'm an environmental engineer. My

 10 past experience includes hazardous waste

 11 treatment, disposal and remediation. In the last

 12 18 years, I've been involved in almost all aspects

 13 of CCP management from generation to disposal and

 14 beneficial use at Headwaters.

 15 The TVA at Kingston spill was a bad

 16 event that caused damage to property and the

 17 environment. It is unacceptable. I applaud EPA

 18 response to the spill and the prompt survey of

 19 other ash impoundments. I also understand the

 20 need to do something to prevent similar spills.

 21 Hazardous waste designation is not the answer.

 22 Good engineering practices are.
 66

 1 Even prior to regulatory changes, some

 2 utilities have taken notice of the risks and

 3 potential liabilities involved in operating a

 4 Kingston-like ash management operation. Utilities

 5 are risk averse. Many are planning dry

 6 conversation projects and to do away with ponds.

 7 The EPA should work with the utilities and the

 8 beneficial use industry to increase utilization.

 9 C2P2 was a good start. EPA and the

 10 federal government can do more, a lot more to

 11 increase beneficial use. For example, power

 12 plants air regulation should minimize the impact

 13 on CCP quality. Another example, Congress can

 14 provide tax and other financial incentives for

 15 resource conservation and recovery. Carrots are

 16 more effective than sticks.

 17 In my review of the regulatory impact

 18 analysis, I noticed that EPA has not taken the

 19 impact of stigma too seriously. EPA's own

 20 analysis show the impact of the stigma at 51%

 21 reduction in beneficial use in 2012. This is the

 22 wrong time to wipe out half of an industry as we
 67

 1 try to recover from this near depression.

 2 Regaining beneficial use volume is not

 3 as simple as driving the ash delivery truck an

 4 extra hundred miles to the next town. EPA's logic

 5 on increased beneficial use under RCRA C is

 6 archaic. It is obvious that industry expert was

 7 not involved on this part of the analysis.

 8 The analogy to waste oil is also

 9 irrelevant. When waste oil is burnt, the stigma

 10 goes up in smoke. In the case of fly ash, the

 11 stigma stays in that concrete driveway and home

 12 carpeting. There's also the real risk of consumer

 13 product liability lawsuits that would discourage

 14 the use of CCPs.

 15 RCRA C will destroy an indus -- an

 16 industry that should be applauded by EPA for

 17 making a real difference in reducing the amount of

 18 CCPs going to landfills and proving durability of

 19 infrastructures and reducing the amount of

 20 manufactured Portland cement with its related

 21 environmental impact. RCRA C makes no scientific

 22 or engineering sense. Subtitle D will provide the
 68

 1 same level of protection as C.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. MCCAMEY: Good morning and thank

 4 you. My name is Wayne McCamey, and in the Ready

 5 Mix concrete business, producer in Morristown,

 6 Tennessee.

 7 I started working this industry in the

 8 early 70s, and at that time in this part of the

 9 country not too people used fly ash. Not too many

 10 knew very much about the product at all.

 11 In today's market, almost everybody uses

 12 fly ash. My question is: Why? And that's pretty

 13 easy. Fly ash makes our products better, makes it

 14 more durable, easier to place, whether we're doing

 15 so physically or with a concrete pump or any other

 16 mechanical method.

 17 Concrete with fly ash has better

 18 workability, it's easier to pump, it's easier to

 19 get in place, and we can make far higher strength

 20 concrete when fly ash is used. Yes, all this can

 21 be done with fly ash, and every yard of concrete

 22 containing fly ash is produced at a cost savings
 69

 1 of approximately 2 to $3 a cubic yard compared to

 2 a lower quality non-fly ash mix.

 3 The Tennessee Department of

 4 Transportation, as well as the Federal Highway

 5 Authority, they saw the benefits and began

 6 incorporating fly ash into their concrete they

 7 were using. In fact, fly ash today is used in

 8 about 98% of the concrete being used in this area

 9 of the country.

 10 In a normal year, about 7 million cubic

 11 yards of concrete is produced in Tennessee.

 12 That's about 525,000 tons of fly ash being used in

 13 concrete in Tennessee alone. That equates to

 14 about 21,000 tractor-trailer loads of ash that

 15 never goes to a landfill anywhere.

 16 If fly ash receives a designation as

 17 hazardous, can our companies assume the

 18 responsibility of hauling, handling and using this

 19 product? Could our em -- could our employees who

 20 develop cancer, the same cancer that they received

 21 50 years ago, could that be tied to a problem of

 22 us using a hazardous material? Our customers
 70

 1 could start saying, "Your concrete contains

 2 hazardous waste and has made me sick." Is it

 3 possible lawyers looking or pursuing business

 4 would go after a case such as this?

 5 I'm concerned that my company will be

 6 forced to stop using fly ash if it is labeled

 7 hazardous. Technology in our industry would back

 8 up 30 years. Yes, it's a problem to dispose of

 9 fly ash. Kingston is a perfect example. I

 10 suggest we learn how to properly store and keep

 11 our landfills intact and put regulations in place

 12 to make this happen.

 13 But please do not pass regulations that

 14 will be extremely detrimental to our industry, as

 15 well as the coal industry and utilities across the

 16 nation. How much more will all of us be paying

 17 for electricity when coal cannot be burned? Thank

 18 you.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you. While Number

 21 20 -- while Number 20 is coming to the microphone,

 22 could we have Numbers 21, 22, 24, 250, and 251
 71

 1 move forward?

 2 MR. CLAYTON: My name Kip Clayton, and I

 3 have worked in the byproducts industry for -- as a

 4 marketer of ash, basically cenospheres, for over

 5 eight years.

 6 I would like to address the issues of

 7 stigma impact and give a statement regarding what

 8 I really feel like is going on. A quote from

 9 Politico: "I do very much believe that it's time

 10 for us to get past this tired dance where folks

 11 inside this beltway get paid a lot of money to say

 12 things that aren't true about public health

 13 initiatives that this agency is charged by law

 14 with undertaking."

 15 This quote bothers me because we keep

 16 seeing propaganda touting that these materials are

 17 hazardous but with no scientific data to back it

 18 up. We are an industry keep taking -- we, as an

 19 industry, keep taking it on the chin by scare

 20 tactics that these materials will kill you. Like

 21 many things, plain old mud can kill you. I do

 22 think better regulations on impoundments are
 72

 1 necessary, but don't slate it hazardous material

 2 because of engineering issues and inspection

 3 issues. Fix the problem, not the sum of it.

 4 The second quote, EPA spokesman Brandon

 5 Gilfillan said, "Jackson's comment to open this

 6 compares particularly well to the lack of

 7 transparency during the previous administration."

 8 Well, for years the EPA was working well in

 9 utilization of byproducts, even creating a

 10 website-based group called C2P2 which promoted the

 11 use of these materials. They even gave out awards

 12 for innovations for usage in projects that were a

 13 tremendous success. Then one day the site was

 14 taken down without any notice to -- to its members

 15 whatsoever.

 16 The science has not changed, the

 17 material is the same, and when we work together on

 18 recycling these materials, it's better for

 19 everybody. Just by shutting down the site, it has

 20 caused stigma among -- amongst the industry.

 21 Because of my time in the industry, I have seen

 22 many impoundment ponds and I have marketed this
 73

 1 material across the U.S. and abroad. One of the

 2 things I look at is how our neighbors are

 3 handling such issues. It appears that most of the

 4 countries that are next to us and -- and aboard

 5 market this material and market it well.

 6 I work in all sectors of the industry

 7 that market materials from coal-fired plants. We

 8 take waste material and utilize it in various

 9 products. It is the des -- if it's designated as

 10 hazardous waste and it's assigned to our material,

 11 it will kill the marketability, it will increase

 12 and have more taxing effect on our natural

 13 resources, and by doing this, will have an adverse

 14 effect on the carbon footprint just by the

 15 equipment used to mine these natural resources.

 16 All this is simply an attack on coal in general,

 17 and by doing this, will only hurt the common rate

 18 payer and probably do more damage to the

 19 environment than what is taking place now.

 20 As we move forward to alternative power

 21 solutions, we will still need coal to power us.

 22 Let's be good stewards and reuse as much of the
 74

 1 material as we can regulated on a state level, and

 2 let us recycle the material without a stigma of

 3 hazardous waste. Thank you.

 4 (Applause)

 5 MR. DELLINGER: Number 21.

 6 MR. WALTERS: My name is Nick Walters,

 7 and I work for the Choctaw County Mississippi

 8 Economic Development Foundation, and we're here to

 9 talk about the disastrous effects that could

 10 happen with this rule change.

 11 Many of you probably will never have the

 12 opportunity to meet Ms. Willie May Guidry. Ms.

 13 Willie May is a person who dreamed for the longest

 14 time of owning her own business. And recently

 15 this -- earlier this year our foundation and the

 16 local county NAACP sponsored a small and

 17 minority-owned business seminar to help small

 18 business people learn how to start their own

 19 business.

 20 Ms. Willie May attended, and now has not

 21 only this dream been realized, but she's starting

 22 to employ more people. She actually has figured
 75

 1 out a way to produce some very tasty meals that

 2 help diabetics and so that diabetics can come to

 3 conferences and to events and to meetings and be

 4 able to eat a meal that is good for them and does

 5 not harm them in their -- in their cases with

 6 diabetes. Because of what she learned at our

 7 conference and because of what she learned about

 8 how to market herself -- she didn't know how to

 9 fill out an invoice, she didn't know how to create

 10 one, she didn't know how to participate in these

 11 -- in these projects like this and how to do

 12 things that most business people know how to do.

 13 She now has a contract with the

 14 Mississippi State Department of Health to provide

 15 meals in a 15-county area for diabetics. This

 16 would not have happened if she had not come to our

 17 seminar. We are able to keep our doors open at

 18 our foundation because of the sale of this very

 19 productive use of fly ash. And fly ash enables us

 20 to do many things in our county, many things in

 21 our community that we would not be able to do

 22 otherwise.
 76

 1 So Ms. -- Ms. Willie May is not part of

 2 the power industry, Ms. Willie May is not -- does

 3 not work for the coal industry, Ms. Willie May

 4 does not work for the fly ash industry. Ms.

 5 Willie May works for herself. And she is able to

 6 work for herself and be able to provide a valuable

 7 service because of things that we at our

 8 foundation are able to do. We are able to keep

 9 our lights on and be able to provide services for

 10 people like Ms. Willie May because of the

 11 revenues that we generate by the great use of fly

 12 ash.

 13 So, when you take into consideration

 14 changing things of regulations like this, you're

 15 not just only hurting the direct jobs and the rate

 16 payers and other entities like this, you're

 17 hurting people like Ms. Willie May. And we hope

 18 that you will give that strong consideration as

 19 you deliberate on this. Thank you.

 20 (Applause)

 21 MR. BERGMAN: Good morning. I'm Robert

 22 Bergman. I'm a chemist, and I'm concerned because
 77

 1 I've analyzed a lot of samples of coal combustion

 2 materials.

 3 And I want to ask the audience today:

 4 Who here wants to have coal combustion residuals

 5 regulated in a lined landfill with groundwater

 6 monitoring?

 7 (Applause)

 8 MR. BERGMAN: Okay. Who wants to have

 9 the CCRs landfilled starting tomorrow? Okay.

 10 Well, who wants a new Subtitle C waste landfill

 11 next to their property? I don't think anybody

 12 does.

 13 Those of you who are asking for CCRs to

 14 be disposed in Subtitle C think the battle just to

 15 get CCRs in a lined landfill has been difficult,

 16 just wait until the power companies have to

 17 acquire permits to dispose of one of the largest

 18 industrial waste streams in America. And the

 19 groups represented here today will gladly take up

 20 your battle with your money.

 21 According to the EPA, the amount of all

 22 listed and characteristic hazardous waste disposed
 78

 1 across the country in 2007 was just under 50

 2 million tons. How much CCRs are produced each

 3 year? Two and a half times that amount, over 125

 4 million tons annually.

 5 Imagine what is going to have to happen

 6 to dispose of all that material? Not only will

 7 land be -- have to be permitted, but the material

 8 may have to be transported on highways and

 9 railways through your towns in order to get to a

 10 qualified landfill. Do you want to start

 11 tomorrow?

 12 Even EPA admits that qualifications for

 13 permitting a Subtitle C landfill will take at

 14 least twice as long or longer to complete than it

 15 would a Subtitle D landfill which is constructed

 16 to the same liner and groundwater monitoring

 17 standards. The difference between -- the

 18 difference being the cost that power companies

 19 will pass on to you in order to meet whatever

 20 requirements the EPA puts on them.

 21 You say industry is not listening.

 22 Industry is listening. Industry is asking for the
 79

 1 same construction standards as a Subtitle C

 2 landfill. They are just asking for administration

 3 of the program that will not use the same language

 4 that is applied to hazardous waste.

 5 Industry is just money -- money hungry?

 6 Every person here works to make a profit to live.

 7 Polluting our lands. Every coal ash marketer here

 8 considers themselves an environmentalist because

 9 their business is keeping coal ash out of

 10 landfills and into durable, sustainable products

 11 that are used every day.

 12 I'm asking everyone here today to take

 13 the opportunity to educate yourselves on what

 14 industry is asking the EPA for and why it believes

 15 that Subtitle D is the best option. Please visit

 16 the hospitality room for the American Coal Ash

 17 Association and Citizens for Recycling First which

 18 is located behind the conference room down the

 19 hallway to learn how your desires for a safe

 20 landfill can be met --

 21 MR. HOFFMAN: Your time is up.

 22 MR. BERGMAN: -- in a quicker fashion by
 80

 1 asking for Subtitle D.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Number 24.

 4 MR. HUNT: Good morning. I'm Reverend

 5 Douglas Hunt, executive director of Tennessee

 6 Interfaith Power and Light. We work with

 7 congregations across the state of Tennessee on

 8 issues of faith and sustainability. I want to

 9 thank EPA for being here and being such good hosts

 10 for this hearing.

 11 I'm really pleased to be here to support

 12 implem -- implementation of Subtitle C of the

 13 proposed regulations as a critical first step to

 14 meet our moral and ethical responsibilities to

 15 protect people and our planet from the hazardous

 16 contents of coal ash. I'm here this morning not

 17 to talk about technical issues, not to talk about

 18 economic issues, but to talk about moral and

 19 justice issues that have to do with disposal of

 20 this product.

 21 The Kingston spill itself was a grave

 22 injustice to the people of Roane County and
 81

 1 surrounding communities. The people of Perry

 2 County, Alabama where 30% of residents live below

 3 the poverty line are now recipients of this toxic

 4 laden mess. This disaster and dramatically

 5 expanding -- expanding the issues of justice and

 6 morality that surround the disaster.

 7 People of all faiths have always been

 8 among the first to respond to a disaster such as

 9 created by the Kingston spill and its relocation

 10 to Alabama. We are also called to speak loudly

 11 and clearly on the moral, ethical and justice

 12 issues raised by the decisions which led to the

 13 ash being transported and stored in ways that led

 14 to this tragedy and will probably continue without

 15 Subtitle C.

 16 Children, family and nature are at the

 17 center of spiritual teachings around the world.

 18 They are what people value most. The handling of

 19 coal ash as a non-hazardous waste puts all of

 20 these at terrible risk needing implementation of

 21 Subtitle C as a first step to protect these.

 22 Regarding the issue of stigma, those
 82

 1 from Muslim, Jewish and Christian traditions know

 2 the story of the two sons of Adam. But like Cain,

 3 if the coal industry bears a stigma, it is one

 4 marking lives lost, futures destroyed and creation

 5 poisoned. People of faith also know how important

 6 it is to name what we encounter. The people of

 7 Kingston and elsewhere know that "hazardous" is

 8 the name for coal ash.

 9 What we can do now is to treat coal

 10 combustion residues and the wastes they contain as

 11 the hazard they are to people's lives and futures.

 12 Subtitle C is a first and critical step to making

 13 policy reflect our values and meeting our moral

 14 and ethical responsibilities to protect the people

 15 and our planet --

 16 MR. HOFFMAN: Your --

 17 MR. HUNT: -- from more coal ash

 18 disasters. Thank you so much.

 19 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 20 (Applause)

 21 MR. DELLINGER: Number 250.

 22 MR. HARDIN: My name is Chris Hardin.
 83

 1 I'm from North Carolina -- Huntersville, North

 2 Carolina. I'm a private citizen and part-time

 3 sustainable ag farmer from Huntersville.

 4 I'm a registered professional engineer

 5 in the states of North Carolina, Tennessee, and

 6 five of the neighboring state. I work full time

 7 as an engineer for Haley & Aldrich, and I'm

 8 provide my comments on behalf of Haley & Aldrich,

 9 as well as myself, a technically-minded engineer,

 10 common sense sustainable ag farmer, and a

 11 concerned citizen.

 12 Haley & Aldrich supports development of

 13 federal regulations for CCRs. And that's defined

 14 as coal combustion residuals, or in many cases

 15 products, under RCRA Subtitle D, non-hazardous

 16 waste program. We agree with the EPA substantive

 17 standards in Subtitle D and Subtitle C are

 18 essentially the same. They both provide for safe

 19 management of coal ash through the use of liner

 20 systems, groundwater monitoring and corrective

 21 action.

 22 However, Subtitle D will provide a
 84

 1 regulatory platform that would accomplish these

 2 goals without severely impacting CCR beneficial

 3 reuse, threatening jobs, and increasing

 4 electricity costs for customers by imposing

 5 unnecessary costs on the utility industry.

 6 We agree with the EPA that CCR units

 7 that are not fully protected must be updated,

 8 upgraded, or closed. However, CCR impoundments

 9 that can be demonstrated to be safe and protective

 10 of the environment should be allowed to continue

 11 operating. We believe that the Subtitle D prime

 12 option with appropriate adjustments is the best

 13 pass forward and will enable EPA to establish an

 14 environmentally-protective program that meets the

 15 objectives of EPA, namely enforceable standards of

 16 CCRs, that are protective of human health and the

 17 environment.

 18 We oppose the Subtitle C option, a

 19 position which we believe is consistent with the

 20 views of virtually all states and the regulatory

 21 agencies, CCR marketers, beneficial users who feel

 22 that regulating CCRs under a record hazardous
 85

 1 waste program does not provide the additional

 2 protection to human health and the environment

 3 than a Subtitle D option. In fact, Subtitle C

 4 regulations would cripple the CCR reuse industry

 5 that already has a strong rack -- track record of

 6 successfully recycling coal combustion products

 7 for beneficial reuse.

 8 In closing, Haley & Aldrich and this

 9 common sense sustainable ag farmer, and concerned

 10 citizen feels that a reasonable and protective

 11 path forward for the EPA is to move forward with a

 12 Subtitle D option that ensures the safe disposal

 13 of CCPs and CCRs that is protective of human

 14 health and the environment. Thank you.

 15 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MR. DELLINGER: While Number 251 is

 18 moving forward, could we have Numbers 26, 27, 29,

 19 30, and 121?

 20 MR. TODD: My name is Sean Todd. I'm

 21 speaking on behalf of the Boiler Slag Consortium,

 22 and this is my fourth EPA meeting. I'd like to
 86

 1 thank you for the opportunity.

 2 It's very heartening, Mr. Dellinger, to

 3 hear you open up each meeting by saying the EPA

 4 will consider the best available data in making

 5 its rule -- in determining its rule-making,

 6 because science is the best friend that boiler

 7 slag has in this process.

 8 It is essential for EPA and others to

 9 understand that there are different types of coal

 10 combustion residuals. Boiler slag is only one of

 11 them. It is, however, only 1% by volume of CCRs,

 12 but over 90% is reused and recycled. Over 90% is

 13 used in abrasive applications, roofing shingles,

 14 roads, and building materials.

 15 No slag is stored in impoundment ponds

 16 such as the one in Kingston that was breached in

 17 that terrible tragedy. Boiler slag is collected

 18 and used in the economy, over 90%. How is it

 19 made? Boiler slag is made at the bottom of the

 20 furnace in wet bottom ash boilers. It's vitrified

 21 when it's quashed with water. So it's bound at

 22 the molecular level. All of it is inert material
 87

 1 -- it is inert, environmentally benign material.

 2 Again, those heavy metals are bound at the

 3 molecular level.

 4 We have three third-party laboratory

 5 independent analytical studies which we have been

 6 submitted for the record. By way of example,

 7 mercury has found to have in our finds the

 8 smallest particle size, less than.01 milligram per

 9 liter mercury concentration. The threshold level

 10 for -- or action level for EPA action is.1

 11 milligram per liter. So that's an order of

 12 magnitude lower than your threshold level. That's

 13 just from mercury.

 14 So our science is our best friend in

 15 this rule- making for boiler slag. We're being

 16 lumped in with other types of CCRs. We believe

 17 that, you know, for structural integrity and

 18 engineering requirements -- are a good thing for

 19 impoundment ponds. Our product is not in any

 20 impoundment ponds. But the chemical constituents

 21 and the physical characteristics of boiler slag do

 22 not require at le -- in the least, Subtitle C RCRA
 88

 1 regulation. In fact, boiler slag should be exempt

 2 as a protective status for -- for its beneficial

 3 reuse.

 4 This is an apples and oranges case.

 5 Good public policy uses the right and appropriate

 6 tool for its goals and objectives. Do not use a

 7 sledgehammer when a surgical knife is -- is a

 8 better tool. Thank you for your time. Thank you

 9 for the extensive opportunities for comments.

 10 And we do encourage the protective status

 11 exemption for boiler slag for beneficial reuse.

 12 Thank you.

 13 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you. Number 26.

 14 MS. BIRD: My name is Cathie Bird. I am

 15 chair of the Energy, Ecology and Environmental

 16 Justice Committee of Statewide Organizing for

 17 Community Empowerment.

 18 Coal ash is a dangerous, toxic material

 19 that should be regulated under Subtitle C of RCRA

 20 as a special waste with all safeguards that apply.

 21 Since many qualified people will testify to the

 22 scientific and the legal and technical data that
 89

 1 support this claim, I'd like to speak more to coal

 2 ash as a matter of human experience and

 3 environmental justice for those who live near coal

 4 mines and near power plants and ash dumps.

 5 From mountaintop removal mining to

 6 disposal of coal ash, power generated from coal

 7 exacts a terrible price in terms of the

 8 environmental integrity, human health, and the

 9 unspeakable psychological loss that happens when

 10 the natural bond between people and a place on

 11 earth that is meaningful to them is broken. When

 12 we experience the disruption that such events

 13 bring into personal and community life, most of us

 14 do whatever we need to heal and get our lives back

 15 in order. But in some cases, this process may

 16 take years. In other cases, we may enjoy brief

 17 success only to be re-traumatized by new projects,

 18 chronic pollution, or discoveries that toxic

 19 material has moved beyond the boundaries of safe

 20 containment.

 21 For me it's been unbelievably hard to

 22 see friends, neighbors and colleagues getting
 90

 1 tired, getting sick, giving up, or moving away

 2 from their homes. I'll never forget the first

 3 time I heard a friend describing her experience of

 4 life near a mountaintop removal mine with the same

 5 words that people from other countries use to tell

 6 what it's like living in a war zone. That's when

 7 it really hit me that mountaintop removal mines at

 8 one end and coal ash dumps at the other end of

 9 power generation represent nothing less than a

 10 breach of homeland security aimed at the very

 11 infrastructure of land, air and water on which

 12 human life depends.

 13 So would corporate spokespeople offer to

 14 drink water from a coal ash pond or say it's okay

 15 to sprinkle coal ash on their Cheerios or

 16 otherwise assure us that coal ash is harmless?

 17 We're not fooled. When people start to feel like

 18 they're collateral damage, their community is

 19 becoming a national sacrifice zone, it's harder to

 20 sell the idea that there's really such a thing as

 21 an acceptable level of poison.

 22 I'm very grateful that the EPA is
 91

 1 looking at environmental justice. What we need,

 2 though, right now is to see some evidence that

 3 you're hearing what we say. And I think your

 4 decision to regulate coal ash as a hazardous waste

 5 might be a welcome sign that we're finally being

 6 heard. Thanks.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 9 MS. MILLER: I'm Cheri Miller with

 10 Gypsum Parameters. I'm also the proud recipient

 11 of a 2008 C2P2 lifetime achievement award from EPA

 12 recognizing my 30 years of work in coal combustion

 13 product recycling.

 14 My company, Gypsum Parameters, is a

 15 small woman-owned business which specializes in

 16 working with electric utilities that produce FGD

 17 gypsum and ash and with manufacturers such as

 18 wallboard and cement companies that use these

 19 materials in their manufacturing processes. Since

 20 EPA published its proposed rule-making earlier

 21 this year, I've seen my business significantly

 22 decline as the stigma of a potential hazardous
 92

 1 waste determination has caused clients to delay or

 2 cancel projects.

 3 You will no doubt hear many passionate

 4 but ill-informed testimonials at these hearings

 5 urging you to regulate these materials as

 6 hazardous wastes. EPA administrator Lisa Jackson

 7 has repeatedly stated that it is EPA's policy to

 8 make, quote, "science-based decisions," unquote.

 9 I challenge you now to do that.

 10 These materials are neither toxic nor

 11 hazardous, which is the conclusion that EPA itself

 12 has reached in all of its previous regulatory

 13 determinations. Please do the right thing and

 14 stand by your own past analyses of the sound

 15 science surrounding these materials which should

 16 be regulated as Subtitle D. Thank you.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. SCHMALTZ: Thank you for the

 19 opportunity to address you today. My name is Tom

 20 Schmaltz. I'm the environmental director of

 21 Headwaters, Incorporated, the largest manager of

 22 coal combustion products in the United States.
 93

 1 Today EPA is asking whether coal

 2 combustion residual wastes should be regulated as

 3 Subtitle C, hazardous waste, or Subtitle D,

 4 non-hazardous waste. Over the past 30 years, this

 5 question has been answered by the federal

 6 government over and over again. First it was

 7 answered by Congress with the Bevill amendment to

 8 RCRA in 1980. For a second and third time it was

 9 answered by EPA in 1993 and 2000 with a regulatory

 10 determination stating that coal ash wastes do not

 11 warrant Subtitle C regulation.

 12 The question has been answered thousands

 13 of times by the results of EPA tests that

 14 routinely show that CCRs failed to meet the

 15 hazardous waste toxicity thresholds established by

 16 EPA. There's little question then, based on the

 17 instincts of Congress, based on previous EPA

 18 determinations, and based on EPA tests, that CCRs

 19 destined for disposal should be a Subtitle D

 20 waste.

 21 But we can't ignore the damage cases

 22 that EPA cites as a potential need for Subtitle C
 94

 1 regulation. No one can downplay the tragedy of

 2 the Kingston impoundment failure. But the

 3 Kingston impoundment failure and other damage

 4 cases cited are engineering failures, and we must

 5 distinguish between engineering failures and the

 6 nature of a waste. This is particularly true

 7 since the current Subtitle D disposal facility

 8 standards can be just as protective of the

 9 environmental as Subtitle C standards.

 10 It seems counterproductive to mislabel a

 11 waste in order to gain enforcement and permitting

 12 authority no matter how convenient. Such an

 13 action for convenience sets a dangerous precedent

 14 and may be considered an unwise use of EPA's

 15 authority. It prepares a slippery slope towards

 16 negative outcomes and unintended consequences,

 17 especially in creating a stigma towards CCP

 18 utilizations.

 19 The chasm between hazardous waste

 20 designation and encouraging beneficial use only

 21 creates this stigma -- not only creates this

 22 stigma but also raises uncertainty and confusion
 95

 1 around issues of worker safety, transportation,

 2 liability, public perception, sustainability

 3 goals, alleged -- allied industry jobs, product

 4 quality, the list goes on. EPA's asking the wrong

 5 question. If it wishes to gain enforcement and

 6 permit authority -- permitting authority under

 7 Subtitle D, why doesn't it ask Congress to change

 8 RCRA?

 9 We need to feel confident that our

 10 federal agencies wield their authority properly

 11 under well-crafted laws. We need

 12 properly-engineered landfills, we need to

 13 encourage safe utilization, and all this can be

 14 done under Subtitle D.

 15 MR. DELLINGER: Your -- your time is up.

 16 Thank you.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. REYNOLDS: Good morning. My name is

 19 Rob Reynolds. I am responsible for management of

 20 coal byproducts for Progress Energy, an

 21 investor-owned electric utility holding company

 22 headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina.
 96

 1 Progress Energy owns and operates nine

 2 facilities located in North Carolina, South

 3 Carolina and Florida. We have a combined electric

 4 power generating capacity of over 7400 megawatts

 5 that would be impacted by the proposed

 6 regulations. In our service territories, we

 7 provide retail service to over 3 million customers

 8 who could see their monthly electric bills

 9 adversely affected by the costs incurred as -- as

 10 a result of this proposed regulation.

 11 Progress Energy supports the development

 12 of federal regulations for CCRs under Subtitle D.

 13 The development of rules under this approach will

 14 establish a federal standard for all CCR

 15 facilities to meet. Many states already have

 16 effective solid waste statutes and regulatory

 17 programs that will provide an additional layer of

 18 regulatory oversight for management, reuse and

 19 disposal of CCRs.

 20 Progress Energy strongly opposes the

 21 regulations of CCRs under Subtitle C. The

 22 comparatively stringent and costly Subtitle C
 97

 1 program is not necessary to manage the relatively

 2 low toxicity of CCRs. An important aspect of the

 3 CCR regulation issue in terms of both cost and

 4 effective disposal is the availability of adequate

 5 infrastructure, specifically landfills that can

 6 and will accept hazardous waste.

 7 There are 21 commercial hazardous waste

 8 landfills currently operating nationwide and the

 9 last one was permitted many years ago. The

 10 remaining capacity of these facilities would

 11 quickly be consumed if use of such a landfill was

 12 required. In addition, transportation and

 13 infrastructure requirements would see unparalleled

 14 changes due to increased volumes of material

 15 movement to such facilities.

 16 Nonetheless, reliable and nearby

 17 hazardous waste landfills must be available if

 18 Subtitle C is applied to CCRs. The EPA's proposal

 19 to not regulate CCRs that are beneficially used is

 20 appropriate for a regulatory program under

 21 Subtitle D. Most utilities endeavor to market as

 22 much of their CCRs as possible. This is better
 98

 1 for the environment than land or pond disposal and

 2 provides unique and valued materials for many

 3 manufactured products, including high quality

 4 cement and wallboard.

 5 The EPA should be aware that the

 6 beneficial use market for CCRs is susceptible to

 7 market variations which limit reliance on

 8 beneficial uses. Today the supply for fly ash for

 9 cement and concrete and the supply of synthetic

 10 gypsum for wallboard far exceeds market demand.

 11 We need to find ways to increase the consumption

 12 of CCRs in these markets. Over the past couple of

 13 decades, CCR uses in markets other than these have

 14 been key drivers to increasing reuse volumes.

 15 In 2008, over 30% of the nearly 61

 16 million tons of CCRs used were in other market

 17 applications.

 18 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm sorry. Your time is

 19 up.

 20 MR. REYNOLDS: Thank you.

 21 (Applause)

 22 MR. REYNOLDS: With the proper
 99

 1 engineering design, controls and quality assurance

 2 programs in place, Progress Energy supports other

 3 market applications. While we are working

 4 diligently to beneficially use CCRs, there will

 5 remain a significant quality of CCRs that must be

 6 disposed of in landfills. It should be considered

 7 that even with strong efforts to beneficially use

 8 CCRs, a permanent disposal option at a reasonable

 9 cost will still be needed.

 10 MR. RAMSEY: Ladies and gentlemen, my

 11 name is Boyd Ramsey of GSE Lining Technology, LLC,

 12 a company based in Houston, Texas.

 13 Today I am representing the Geosynthetic

 14 Materials Association, a trade group of 80

 15 companies that manufactures, distributes and

 16 installs geosynthetic materials, including liner

 17 systems. We're the liner guys. Our industry

 18 employs about 12,000 people throughout the United

 19 States.

 20 Our comment to the EPA is very simple.

 21 We request that EPA mandate the geosynthetic

 22 lining of coal ash facilities using composite
 100

 1 lining systems. In the shortest terms, use liners

 2 because they work. The concerns of safety

 3 regarding coal combustion residuals are mitigated

 4 if landfill storage sites are lined with a

 5 composite liner system consisting of a geomembrane

 6 and a geosynthetic clay liner.

 7 The American Society of Civil Engineers

 8 does a regular report card on America's

 9 infrastructure. The last three report cards

 10 represent over a decade and solid waste has

 11 received the highest grade of any category. My

 12 industry does a good job of taking care of

 13 America's waste and properly storing it to protect

 14 the environment. The materials, technology and

 15 people exist, the engineers, engineering

 16 techniques and standards, general contractors and

 17 installers that can build the proper facilities,

 18 and regulators and inspectors to ensure that the

 19 work is done correctly. We urge EPA to use what

 20 exists and is working today.

 21 Further, our industry has continually

 22 improved over time, and EPA has been a part of
 101

 1 that effort. Over the years, EPA has commissioned

 2 nearly 80 studies in the design and performance of

 3 lining systems. We call your attention to a 2002

 4 EPA study titled "Assessment and Recommendations

 5 for Optimal Performance of Waste Containment

 6 Systems."

 7 Most illustrated for today is a graph

 8 from that study illustrating the leakage rate of

 9 different designs over the life cycle of nearly

 10 200 facilities. The composite system of

 11 geomembrane and geosynthetic clay liner was

 12 demonstrated to have the lowest leakage rate over

 13 all life cycles, including a near zero leakage

 14 rate after the facilities are closed and final

 15 cover placed. Our materials work. The use of

 16 composite liners will achieve the EPA mission to

 17 protect human health and environment for all

 18 Americans.

 19 A brief word on the hazardous,

 20 non-hazardous question. While coal ash does

 21 contain heavy metals, it lacks the traditional

 22 characteristics of hazardous materials,
 102

 1 radioactivity, the presence of infectious medical

 2 waste, et cetera. In the opinion of our trade

 3 organization, coal ash can be properly stored

 4 using Subtitle D regulations, a non- hazardous

 5 solid waste with composite lining systems.

 6 I've done four of these, folks. I'm

 7 going to add a personal note. As a result of my

 8 career path, I arguably know more about our

 9 country's waste than almost anyone. The Kingston

 10 coal ash spill was tragic. However, the potential

 11 for far more serious and more damaging incidents

 12 at dozens of Superfund sites contaminated with

 13 truly hazardous materials that are currently

 14 seeing zero mitigation activity is a gross error

 15 in our collective national judgement. Thank you,

 16 sir.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Can Numbers 31, 32, 33,

 19 34, and 252 come forward?

 20 MR. KNOWLES: Hello. My name is Jimmy

 21 Knowles. I am the vice president of research and

 22 market development for the SEFA Group. We are a
 103

 1 small family-owned and operated business with 154

 2 employees operating in Tennessee and throughout

 3 the southeast and mid Atlantic states.

 4 Managing and marketing coal combustion

 5 residues is out only business. We market over 1

 6 million tons of coal fly ash annually which

 7 recycle into concrete. We analyze and

 8 characterize fly ash in a number of different

 9 ways, including the quantification of trace

 10 elements and the determination of toxicity

 11 characteristics.

 12 Over the last 33 years, I have developed

 13 an intimate understanding of coal fly ash. The

 14 facts are clear. Fly ash is not hazardous, and

 15 therefore, the disposal of fly ash should not be

 16 regulated under Subtitle C. Fly ash is very

 17 similar to other competitive materials. It is not

 18 more hazardous than these other materials.

 19 Listing and regulating the disposal of fly ash

 20 under Subtitle C will reduce the volume of fly ash

 21 that is beneficially used in the United States.

 22 Now I'm going to give three examples of
 104

 1 -- of how this is -- the Subtitle C proposal is

 2 currently damaging our -- our -- our industry.

 3 And I'm just going to summarize them. They're in

 4 -- the full information is in my written comments

 5 that I'll submit.

 6 But first off, I want to mention that

 7 importation of coal ash into the United States is

 8 actually increasing and people are beefing up

 9 their infrastructure to import more coal ash to

 10 the United States. Now, specifically, this is

 11 high value functional fillers that would be used

 12 in plastics, paints, rubbers, and other

 13 composites. And it's typically being done by

 14 mineral processing companies.

 15 So they'll take coal ash, in the example

 16 one company prominent in the industry right now

 17 from the United Kingdom, they're processing the

 18 ash over in the United Kingdom and then importing

 19 it to the United States for these markets. And

 20 they recognize that the companies that have

 21 traditionally done this type of thing in the

 22 United States are backing off. They recognize
 105

 1 that Subtitle C is going to hurt their opportunity

 2 to continue being competitive in the marketplace,

 3 mainly not due to stigma, because most people

 4 don't even know that coal ash is being in these

 5 products already, but because of the legal

 6 liability associated with it.

 7 Funding for that research came from U.S.

 8 Taxpayers, and it does -- also, I would mention

 9 that our company, our in-house R & D has atrophied

 10 to practically non-existent. But thirdly, I'd

 11 like to mention that some interesting research at

 12 Pacific Northwest Laboratories, which our company

 13 and another other U.S. companies co- funded along

 14 with DOE money and other federal money that went

 15 into the research, but basically what they came up

 16 with is taking ash and they got -- through

 17 carbothermal nitridation of the fly ash, they were

 18 able to make a slow-release fertilizer that is

 19 very environmentally-friendly relative to the

 20 other -- more -- more environmentally-friendly

 21 than the other fertilizers that are being used.

 22 Basically, the bottom line is American
 106

 1 companies are not going to do that. However,

 2 other companies, Australia specifically, is trying

 3 to take that research and continue funding it with

 4 federal money from the United States at Pacific

 5 Northwest Laboratories to --

 6 MR. HOFFMAN: Your time -- I'm sorry.

 7 Your time is up.

 8 MR. RAMSEY: Oh, okay. I only had 30

 9 seconds. All right. Thank you.

 10 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 11 (Applause)

 12 MR. SIMON: My name is Don Simon. I

 13 retired and moved to Tennessee approximately five

 14 years ago.

 15 I'm not here to thank the EPA. I'm

 16 basically here to chastise them. I would like

 17 them to give our community -- our -- our community

 18 back our natural resources. But their oversight

 19 has let the -- the largest natural disaster before

 20 the Gulf oil spill and other situations.

 21 My concern is the trust and confidence

 22 in the EPA. The river -- the river dredging
 107

 1 information, there's no 3 million cubic yards came

 2 out of that river. That's a combination of dirt

 3 and ash. How much ash is left in that river yet

 4 today? There's an arbitrary figure arrived at by

 5 the EPA. Tell us from zero to how many cubic

 6 yards is left in that river. The quantity dredged

 7 from the river which I said is not complete,

 8 that's because they had three different mapping

 9 systems. Each time it's another lip service

 10 excuse why it's not accurate.

 11 In communication or trying to

 12 communicate with EPA officials, Lisa Jackson snuck

 13 in here, had a quick meeting, said she didn't want

 14 to meet with the press, she wanted to meet with us

 15 as residents. After calling her five times and

 16 being told I had to call another number so I could

 17 be put on a list so she would call me back, I

 18 haven't heard from her.

 19 Stanley Meiberg never returned a phone

 20 call, three calls. The only one that called me

 21 back was Franklin Hill from the Superfund. Dana

 22 Tulis, whoever she is, transferred or no response.
 108

 1 Debbie Dietrich, no response or transferred.

 2 You know, it -- it -- it's really

 3 surprising. At your home, you don't put gas next

 4 to your furnace. We're sitting here today, some

 5 are going to go dry ash, we're going to go gypsum,

 6 we're going to put the gypsum next to the Clinch

 7 River. That's like putting gas next to a fire.

 8 They've already had a leak they call a storm water

 9 retention pond. They learned that they must line

 10 it after it leaked.

 11 It gets a little disappointing. I'm

 12 living in that valley of the spill. It's Russian

 13 roulette leaving my neighborhood every day. The

 14 errors are so numerous, if I tried to repeat how

 15 many things have been so poorly handled by the

 16 EPA, it would be shocking to you people, the

 17 newspapers articles that EPA doesn't regulate the

 18 stuff properly.

 19 The different examples across the United

 20 States of EPA results is an absolute tragedy for

 21 the people we pay to do the job for us. I don't

 22 have the expertise. I have no business
 109

 1 relationship whatsoever. I'm just a citizen that

 2 wants my community back. Thank you.

 3 (Applause)

 4 MR. DELLINGER: 252.

 5 MR. LAUDEMAN: I'm Paul Laudeman. I

 6 live here in Knoxville.

 7 The billions of tons of ash that spilled

 8 and now goes in landfills is not being recycled.

 9 It poses a huge environmental and economic danger.

 10 The spill in Roane County destroyed tourism jobs.

 11 This economic damage is personal to me.

 12 I grew up swimming, boating and hiking in Roane

 13 County, and I will not do any of these things

 14 until the -- the dust from this spill settles. In

 15 Knoxville, the University of Tennessee heats its

 16 buildings with a coal-fired plant. The ash is

 17 thrown in the dumpster with the garbage. It is

 18 not recycled.

 19 If profit and money were the highest

 20 good to Anderson County where I grew up in the

 21 shadow of the dangerous Bull Run steam plant,

 22 Roane County, Perry County and other sites of coal
 110

 1 plants and ash ponds would all be economically

 2 stable. They are not. The longstanding failure

 3 of industry and government to safely deal with

 4 this ash requires decisive action by the EPA to

 5 prevent further damages.

 6 The proposed Title C is a start, but it

 7 is inadequate because it does not require rapid

 8 closure of dangerous ash ponds such as the one in

 9 Roane County. It does not require timely

 10 investigation of all toxic coal ash dumps. Title

 11 C does not require clean-up of all contaminated

 12 coal ash sites. It does not require polluters to

 13 ensure the healthy air and water of communities

 14 such as Roane County near coal ash ponds.

 15 I ask the EPA to regulate coal ash more

 16 strongly than Title C and require more oversight.

 17 Thank you.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MR. DELLINGER: We -- we had called

 20 Numbers 32 and 33 to come forward. Have they? 32

 21 and 33, are they in the room?

 22 MR. HOFFMAN: Are they coming up right
 111

 1 now?

 2 MR. DELLINGER: Okay. You can start --

 3 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay. Thank you.

 4 MR. DELLINGER: -- and -- so we don't

 5 lose any more time.

 6 MS. LEAGUE: Okay. Thank you. My name

 7 is Ann League. I represent Statewide Organizing

 8 for Community Empowerment, a 2500 member statewide

 9 organization in Tennessee. I also represent the

 10 Alliance for Appalachia, which has approximately

 11 14,000 members across central Appalachia.

 12 And I would like to thank the EPA for

 13 finally coming to Knoxville and having a public

 14 hearing on the coal ash. I also want to say that

 15 three minutes is not a long time to discuss an

 16 issue that can have an impact on people and

 17 communities for a lifetime.

 18 I would like to ask that the EPA

 19 remember Executive Order 12898 from 1984,

 20 President Clinton, that to take the environmental

 21 justice concerns into all accounts and to all of

 22 the EPA's considerations. I would also to say --
 112

 1 like to say that this is about people and

 2 communities. It's about protecting families from

 3 the present and future impacts of a material that

 4 is composed of toxic heavy metals and that sound

 5 science has said these heavy metals are very

 6 dangerous when they accumulate.

 7 I'd also like to address some of the

 8 things that industry has said and to let -- ask

 9 people to remember what the lead paint industry

 10 said when we were -- they were trying to take lead

 11 paint off the market. They said the paint

 12 industry was going to die. But I'd like to say

 13 now that the paint industry is one of the fourth

 14 bearers going on and getting sustainable

 15 emission-free products, and the paint industry is

 16 going strong.

 17 I'll make it very quick. I would like

 18 you to choose Subtitle C, but please, it needs to

 19 be made stronger. And please take people,

 20 families and communities into account. This is an

 21 environmental justice issue. And please take the

 22 sound science into account. Thank you.
 113

 1 (Applause)

 2 MR. DELLINGER: Number 32.

 3 MS. GEPPI: Hi. My name is Erica Geppi,

 4 and I'm regional conservation organizer for the

 5 Sierra Club.

 6 As a native east Tennessean, I would

 7 like to thank the EPA for adding this eighth and

 8 final hearing here in Knoxville, Tennessee. It

 9 seems only fitting that we stand here today

 10 discussing the need for stronger regulations that

 11 will protect our communities from the impacts of

 12 toxic coal ash in a town just miles away from

 13 ground zero for coal ash, the site of the 2008 TVA

 14 coal ash spill in Roane County.

 15 After seeing close family, friends have

 16 their homes destroyed, their health threatened,

 17 and their lives changed forever, coal ash became

 18 an issue on the forefront of everyone's minds in

 19 this region and across the country. While the

 20 Harriman community affected by the catastrophic

 21 spill will never be the same, we can look ahead to

 22 the future to ensure that safeguards and
 114

 1 regulations are put in place to address the

 2 threats that toxic coal ash pose all around the

 3 country. If the BP oil disaster and the Tennessee

 4 coal ash tragedy have taught us anything, it is

 5 that we cannot just take the polluter's word for

 6 it anymore.

 7 At the seven previous hearings, and

 8 undoubtedly throughout the day today, you will

 9 hear comments from various industry

 10 representatives and lobbyists that will speak to

 11 the stigmas created by designating coal ash as a

 12 hazardous or special waste and how it might hurt

 13 their bottom line. I strongly urge you to have

 14 the courage to do the right thing by regulating

 15 coal ash based on what it truly is, a hazardous

 16 waste. In a state with over 17 unlined ponds and

 17 over 3.8 million -- million tons of coal ash

 18 generated each year, it is of particular interest

 19 that strong regulations are put in place to

 20 regulate coal ash from cradle to grave.

 21 On behalf of the over 1.2 million

 22 members and supporters of the Sierra Club, we
 115

 1 realize that coal ash is an issue that impacts us

 2 all. The public hearings and public comment

 3 period on these proposed regulations have allowed

 4 hundreds of thousands of people across the country

 5 to make their voices heard on this pivotal issue.

 6 On behalf of the Sierra Club and over

 7 6,000 concerned citizens, I would like to present

 8 the EPA with these boxes of over 6,000 public

 9 comments in support of Subtitle C, Subtitle C to

 10 regulate coal ash as a hazardous toxic waste, and

 11 please protect our communities from the threats

 12 that it presents. Thank you so much.

 13 (Applause)

 14 MS. MOSELEY: My name is Lyndsay

 15 Moseley, and I am also speaking on behalf of the

 16 1.2 million members and supporters of Sierra Club.

 17 I also speak as a native Tennessean who grew up

 18 not far from the community devastated by coal ash

 19 in December 2008.

 20 Coal ash disposal sites across the

 21 country pose a clear and increasing threat to

 22 communities around them. The risk of cancer from
 116

 1 arsenic alone, which is only one of the many heavy

 2 metals in coal ash, can be as high as 1 in 50 for

 3 people living near an unlined coal ash pond. We

 4 join with citizens from more than 30 states who

 5 have traveled to public hearings to urge you to

 6 adopt Subtitle C safeguards. We also urge you to

 7 resist pressure to weaken the rule any further.

 8 You've heard concerns from coal ash

 9 recyclers worried that a hazardous designation

 10 would create a stigma on their products. These

 11 continuing claims are actually puzzling to me,

 12 because they deny or are ignorant of steps that

 13 EPA has already taken to protect coal ash

 14 recycling.

 15 Before the rule was even proposed, EPA

 16 eliminated the option to designate coal ash as a

 17 hazardous waste and instead created a Subtitle C

 18 special waste designation. More importantly, all

 19 of the options in the proposed rule exempt coal

 20 ash from regulation when it is recycled in

 21 encapsulated uses like concrete, drywall, et

 22 cetera. What more could they want? And if their
 117

 1 products are safe, what are they afraid of?

 2 Sierra Club is not opposed to safe and

 3 legitimate coal ash recycling when there's

 4 scientific evidence to prove such practices are

 5 safe, but it is critically important that EPA keep

 6 in mind the vast majority of the 140 million tons

 7 of coal ash generated every year don't end up as a

 8 replacement for Portland cement in concrete or in

 9 bricks or roofing materials, but as a dangerous

 10 threat to drinking water because of lax state

 11 regulations across the country that allow coal ash

 12 to be dumped or reused carelessly in communities.

 13 This must end.

 14 Sierra Club supports EPA -- the EPA

 15 proposal to permanently phase out wet storage

 16 impoundments, to require groundwater monitoring at

 17 all landfills -- existing landfills so that

 18 communities can be confident that they're not

 19 exposed to heavy metals in their water. We

 20 support federally-enforceable safeguards at every

 21 new site. Safeguards like composite liners to

 22 prevent coal ash contamination in the first place,
 118

 1 leachate collection systems to capture toxic

 2 runoff, groundwater monitoring to detect problems

 3 early, and financial assurance to ensure polluters

 4 clean up in the case of accidents.

 5 We urge you to adopt these safeguards,

 6 we urge you to hold polluters accountable and

 7 protect people living near coal ash disposal

 8 sites. This will take courage and leadership and

 9 commitment to the people. Please don't let the

 10 people down. Thank you.

 11 (Applause)

 12 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you. Can Numbers

 13 37, 46, 48, 49, and 51 come forward? That's 37,

 14 46, 48, 49, and 51.

 15 MR. HOFFMAN: 49. That's 49.

 16 MR. DELLINGER: All right. Number 49 is

 17 speaking now.

 18 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay.

 19 MR. ENGLAND: Thank you for this

 20 opportunity to address the EPA. My name is Gary

 21 England. I'm a concerned citizen and a utility

 22 rate payer.
 119

 1 I would like to address a couple of

 2 issues that have been presented and discussed in

 3 public hearings prior to this. The first is

 4 whether or not coal ash can even be considered a

 5 hazardous waste and be regulated as such. Since

 6 the Kingston accident, coal ash is continually

 7 referred to as a toxic waste.

 8 The metals that are consistently

 9 referred to that many feel make coal ash toxic are

 10 also present in most everyday products that we all

 11 use. We have arsenic in treated lumber. Mercury

 12 is in lightbulbs and in fillings in our teeth.

 13 Selenium is in a multivitamin that most of us

 14 probably took this morning.

 15 Under the toxicity characteristic

 16 leaching procedure, or more commonly referred to

 17 as the TCLP test, which is the standard tests that

 18 EPA uses to determine whether a substance is toxic

 19 or not, coal ash does not meet that toxic material

 20 classification. EPA does not claim that coal ash

 21 is tox -- qualifies as a hazardous waste based

 22 upon its toxicity. Their justification for a
 120

 1 hazardous waste regulatory approach is based upon

 2 damage cases related to failed disposal

 3 impoundments, not on the toxic nature of the

 4 material.

 5 There have been other catastrophic

 6 failures in releases of material that have

 7 resulted in much greater damage and death than

 8 those experienced at Kingston, but the EPA never

 9 considered to labeling material released as

 10 hazardous based upon damage claims. In 1976, the

 11 Teton Dam failed and killed 11 and damaged most of

 12 the town of Rexburg -- Rexburg, Idaho. The water

 13 that -- that was behind the dam was never

 14 considered hazardous.

 15 In 1919, a storage tank containing 2.3

 16 million tons of molasses ruptured in Boston. It

 17 claimed 21 lives and destroyed an entire portion

 18 of lower Boston. The EPA never considered making

 19 molasses a hazardous waste. These are extreme

 20 illustrations, and I don't want to in any way

 21 discount or minimize the impact of the Kingston ac

 22 -- Kingston accident. My point is: Let's address
 121

 1 the disposal standards, not the material.

 2 In 2008, the industry recycled over 10

 3 million tons of coal ash, reducing over 10 million

 4 tons of CO2, saving almost 160 trillion BTUs of

 5 energy, and generating over $7 billion in economic

 6 benefit. If coal ash is classified as a hazardous

 7 waste, these benefits will be lost.

 8 The unified school district of Los

 9 Angeles has already removed coal ash from many of

 10 their projects. A major block manufacturer is

 11 advertising their block as 100% free of coal ash.

 12 The stigma is real, and a hazardous classification

 13 will stop most of the beneficial use of coal ash.

 14 So there's no question that we need to

 15 protect --

 16 MR. HOFFMAN: Excuse me. Your time --

 17 your time is up. I'm sorry.

 18 MR. ENGLAND: Thank you.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MR. HOFFMAN: 46.

 21 MR. DELLINGER: This is Number 46?

 22 MR. HOFFMAN: Yes. One -- one moment.
 122

 1 MR. COMPTON: My name is Randy Compton,

 2 and I'm a resident of -- a lifelong resident of

 3 Knoxville, Tennessee, and I've been in the CCR

 4 management and marketing for over 30 years. I'm

 5 currently the vice president of Charah, a

 6 Louisville-based company.

 7 It is my honest opinion both as a

 8 concerned citizen, as an informed material

 9 marketer that regulation of CCRs as hazardous

 10 would cause great harm to the years of progress

 11 made in one of the most successful recycling

 12 programs in the world. The term "special waste"

 13 will carry a stigma impact to the construction

 14 industry that will be impossible to overcome. And

 15 I live with that every day. Ever since this came

 16 out, I've had customers that used to be big

 17 supporters and big users of coal combustion

 18 byproducts are no using because of the threat of

 19 lawsuits with the word "hazardous" attached to it.

 20 When the EPA came in and took over the

 21 clean-up at Kingston, which is physically a

 22 catastrophic event no doubt, that's when the word
 123

 1 started getting synonymous when -- when coal ash

 2 was used, it was "toxic" and "hazardous" were the

 3 two words that followed it, right behind it, every

 4 letter I've -- every article that I've ever seen.

 5 The EPA position that if they -- if they

 6 make it punitive enough to the utilities or cost

 7 them enough, they'll find a way to get away with

 8 or get rid of the coal ash in some form, shape, or

 9 fashion by recycling. It's flawed. That won't

 10 work. That is truly not what the market's going

 11 to do. It will not be accepted.

 12 There's no good reason to risk

 13 destroying this recycling, as I said before,

 14 because the EPA's own proposed rules acknowledge

 15 that the landfill standards between C and D are

 16 basically the same. The Portland cement industry,

 17 the American concrete industry have both embraced

 18 and used and recognized the use of CCRs in

 19 concrete as it makes their product less permeable,

 20 more dense, less heat of hydration, and requires

 21 less water to make stronger products.

 22 The Tennessee DOT supports the use of
 124

 1 fly ash in all the concrete, all the concrete here

 2 and the James White area and all that all had fly

 3 ash in that particular concrete. If CCRs are

 4 labeled hazardous or special waste, we risk losing

 5 the environmental impacts and environmental

 6 benefits that come from recycling millions of tons

 7 of this material and driving up costs of

 8 construction, the costs to the utility industry,

 9 and ultimately, the rate payers. Not to mention

 10 the millions of tons of greenhouse gases that will

 11 be generated by virgin products to replace the

 12 loss of CCPs to market.

 13 EPA can -- EPA can enact new regulations

 14 while encouraging the safe recycling of CCRs as a

 15 preferred alternative to disposal. Do not use the

 16 C with a special waste because that stigma will

 17 basically kill the recycling business. Thank you.

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MR. DELLINGER: 51.

 21 MR. NUNN: My name is Burt Nunn. I've

 22 worked for the SEFA Group since 1991. The SEFA
 125

 1 Group is a small, family-owned and operated

 2 business with 154 employees. We're located in the

 3 Carolinas, and we operate throughout the southeast

 4 and mid Atlantic states.

 5 Managing and marketing coal combustion

 6 products is our only business. We market over a

 7 million tons of environmentally-friendly fly ash

 8 which are recycled into concrete products and

 9 structures each year. I've worked in and around

 10 fly ash for nearly 20 years, and in that time, our

 11 company has recycled literally -- literally

 12 millions of tons of coal ash. And I have never

 13 witnessed, nor heard of anyone claiming to have

 14 gotten sick nor suffered any negative effects as a

 15 -- as a result of exposure to fly ash.

 16 Fly ash has been recognized by the U.S.

 17 EPA, the U.S. Green Building Council, and LEEDS,

 18 the internationally recognized Green Building

 19 certification system, as a beneficial

 20 post-industrial recycled environmentally-friendly

 21 green product. So it strikes me as odd that fly

 22 ash would be considered to be classified under
 126

 1 Subtitle C as hazardous waste for the sole purpose

 2 of giving the federal government control over

 3 regulating the disposal of the material.

 4 Our industry is

 5 environmentally-friendly, and while some

 6 environmental extremists seem to be in favor of

 7 this Subtitle C designation, they fail to realize

 8 that if fly ash is designated as hazardous, we'll

 9 be creating an environmental problem, not

 10 eliminating one. The millions of tons of coal

 11 combustion products that are currently being

 12 recycled and used beneficially in concrete

 13 products will be redirected to landfills and

 14 storage sites that are already overstressed.

 15 Most of the concrete produced will not

 16 have fly ash as a constituent if the material is

 17 designated as hazardous for disposal, even if the

 18 EPA says that beneficial use is exempt from that

 19 designation. Concrete producers say that the

 20 potential for lawsuits and negative press is not

 21 worth the risk of using fly ash in their products.

 22 Their legal counsel and insurance company have
 127

 1 already advised against using fly ash because of

 2 the negative stigma and potential for litigation.

 3 I urge you to please consider the

 4 science behind the material. By the EPA's own

 5 definition, fly ash is not hazardous. In fact,

 6 the trace amounts of heavy metals found in fly ash

 7 are not dissimilar from what we find in our own

 8 backyards and -- and waterways naturally.

 9 In summary -- in summary, fly ash is not

 10 hazardous; and therefore, the disposal of fly ash

 11 should not be regulated under Subtitle C. Listing

 12 and regulated fly ash under Subtitle C will create

 13 a tremendous reduction in the volume of fly ash

 14 and -- that is beneficially used and redirect

 15 millions of tons to landfills instead of away from

 16 overstressed landfills.

 17 I implore the EPA to implement an

 18 alternative to Subtitle C if it deems Subtitle D

 19 --

 20 MR. HOFFMAN: Excuse me. Your time is

 21 up.

 22 MR. NUNN: -- to be inadequate.
 128

 1 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Is there anybody in the

 4 audience with a number between 37 and 42?

 5 MR. LANDON: Yes.

 6 MR. DELLINGER: All right. Come

 7 forward, please.

 8 MR. HOFFMAN: This is 37.

 9 MR. DELLINGER: 37 to 42.

 10 MR. LANDON: Yes. My name is Matt

 11 Landon, and I'm a volunteer with the United

 12 Mountain Defense based here in Knoxville,

 13 Tennessee. I was one of the first responders that

 14 showed up at the TVA coal ash disaster on December

 15 22nd of 2008.

 16 You know, there's a lot of people

 17 talking in here about beneficial use and recycling

 18 and stuff. That's all money. But, you know, the

 19 thing that nobody's -- that very few people are

 20 acknowledging are the people that are directly

 21 impacted, the people that are stuck down there in

 22 Roane County and stuck down there in Perry County
 129

 1 and across all -- around all these coal fly ash

 2 dumps around the entire country.

 3 Coal fly ash is toxic based on the heavy

 4 metals and various constituents, the silica and

 5 the particle size. And I'm going to ask that the

 6 EPA at least go with Subtitle C, and if not, go

 7 with Subtitle C prime.

 8 Also, a lot of folks have been talking

 9 about the -- the Oak Ridge Associated University

 10 study, health study, the long-term health study

 11 that showed that there's not going to be any

 12 long-term health impacts from this coal fly ash.

 13 And I would say that this study is completely

 14 flawed and it's based on falsely -- you know,

 15 falsely scientific -- scientifically manipulated

 16 data and collection tactics.

 17 On January 3rd of 2009, there was a

 18 public meeting where 220 residents of Roane County

 19 and Swan Pond area specifically attended. 100% of

 20 those residents had emotional stress from this

 21 disaster. 100%. Roughly, 60% of those people had

 22 respiratory issues. The reason -- one of the
 130

 1 reasons that the study is flawed is because many

 2 of the directly affected people didn't actually

 3 participate in the study, so you had a lot of

 4 people that either moved out of the area or, you

 5 know, did not participate because of fears for,

 6 you know, retribution and stuff like that.

 7 I'd also like to say that worker safety

 8 has been a major problem that's occurring at the

 9 TVA disaster site, according to TVA's own MSDS

 10 sheet that, you know, you should be wearing

 11 respirators during a spill. And, you know, the

 12 fact that nobody is wearing respirators down there

 13 is pretty ridiculous.

 14 Also, safety precautions that are being

 15 taken in Kingston by -- and being enforced by the

 16 EPA are not being enforced down at -- down in

 17 Alabama. And this is definitely a problem. I

 18 would like to definitely say shame on the EPA for

 19 telling the folks of Perry County that coal fly

 20 ash was safe, and I'd like to call for an

 21 investigation into the actions of the EPA in

 22 Alabama.
 131

 1 Also, the person that had the bag of

 2 coal fly ash and dipped their finger in it, well,

 3 here's a real test for you. Open that bag up, put

 4 your face in there, take a real deep breath, and

 5 just think, that's what the folks in, you know,

 6 Roane County and Perry County are having to do.

 7 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm sorry. Your time is

 8 up.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MR. HOFFMAN: This is 38.

 11 MR. ROBINSON: I'm Jason Robinson, and

 12 I'm a graduate student at the University of

 13 Tennessee.

 14 I'd like to urge EPA to adopt C prime

 15 and take a position of scientific skepticism.

 16 There's been a lot of industry claims here today

 17 and all across the board about the innocuous

 18 properties of fly ash. And I'd just say that we

 19 really don't know that much about fly ash in order

 20 to say this sort of thing.

 21 We know that the constituent elements,

 22 that we can find heavy -- heavy metals, the
 132

 1 silica, we know those things have health issues

 2 for folks. We don't know that they are. There's

 3 been -- we just -- I'm urging that we study this

 4 more carefully.

 5 And in the meantime, in the interim

 6 while we're trying to find out whether or not

 7 there are these health issues, whether they're

 8 human health or ecological health, that we treat

 9 this thing as if it were a hazardous waste. That

 10 may cause some industries to have to readjust

 11 their relationships with insurance and litigation.

 12 That's fine. That happens all the time. We can

 13 even look at that as job creation if you want to.

 14 But what we don't need to do is spread this

 15 problem out to low impact -- to poor communities,

 16 to places like Kingston.

 17 In my own neighborhoods where I grew up

 18 there's a coal ash pond, and the people there have

 19 complained for years about the team fears blowing

 20 over onto their property from there. And I

 21 realize that, you know, this is a big mess. We

 22 don't know what happens when we burn coal.
 133

 1 TVA is moving away from coal. So it

 2 could see at some point in the future we are going

 3 to have a bunch of landfills that are inactive.

 4 Why not make them inactive now? Study this. Stop

 5 giving handouts to -- in the name of recycling.

 6 Well, maybe it is -- maybe you guys are

 7 right. Maybe this recycling thing is a good deal.

 8 It's saving money. We should study that a little

 9 more carefully than just across the board saying

 10 it's innocuous waste. And I'd like to --

 11 solidarity for Kingston. Thank you.

 12 (Applause)

 13 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 14 MR. HOFFMAN: 41.

 15 MR. DELLINGER: 41.

 16 MR. WILSON: My name is William Wilson.

 17 I'm not getting paid to do this. I'm just

 18 concerned.

 19 I'm just going to jump right into this.

 20 The state of Tennessee has no effective

 21 regulations in place to protect our communities

 22 from the danger of coal ash. And the evidence is
 134

 1 seen in the Kingston coal ash disaster. It's

 2 documented that Tennessee has no laws designed

 3 specifically to address the dangers of coal ash.

 4 Because of this lack of state regulation,

 5 obviously, Subtitle D is not acceptable.

 6 In fact, Subtitle C in its current form

 7 is not strong enough to deal with the dangers of

 8 coal ash. Subtitle C does not require rapid

 9 closure of dangerous ash ponds; it does not

 10 require a timely investigation of all toxic coal

 11 ash dumps; it does not require immediate clean up

 12 of all contaminated coal ash sites, despite the

 13 threat to health and the environment from toxic

 14 waste; and Subtitle C does not require polluters

 15 to ensure the healthy air and water of communities

 16 near dumps or fill sites.

 17 I demand that the EPA does its job to

 18 protect the health of Americans and take swift

 19 and decisive action before we see another Kingston

 20 disaster. Therefore, I demand the EPA to require

 21 under Subtitle C without delay that polluters:

 22 Immediately shut down all coal ash ponds and
 135

 1 unlined landfills; immediately investigate all

 2 coal ash dump sites; immediately clean up all

 3 sites contaminated by coal ash when contamination

 4 is discovered; immediately determine the nature

 5 and extent of exposure of human populations to the

 6 toxic materials in coal ash, including instituting

 7 medical monitoring when the contamination is

 8 discovered; immediately provide safe drinking

 9 water to all impacted communities when

 10 contamination threatens water supplies;

 11 immediately identify all past coal ash dump sites

 12 and fill sites and investigate these sites for

 13 contamination; immediately commence monitoring at

 14 all former and operating coal ash disposal sites

 15 and fill sites; and publicly disclose all

 16 monitoring data; install composite liners for all

 17 expanded and new landfills; eliminate fugitive

 18 dust by immediately employing daily cover for all

 19 coal ash landfills; immediately comply with

 20 hazardous material transportation requirements for

 21 all shipments; immediately cease use of coal ash

 22 as fill; test fly ash, bottom ash, slag, bottom
 136

 1 ash, FGD sludge using EPA's new leach test.

 2 And finally, regarding the beneficial

 3 use part of the Subtitle C, there should be a

 4 comprehensive investigation of how coal ash is

 5 being reused. People can say it's safe all day

 6 long, but we do not know the potential long-term

 7 effects of leaching from wallboard and concrete,

 8 bricks. These uses that are environmentally

 9 benign should continue. Those that pose a threat

 10 should be reviewed to determine any and all

 11 potential risks to our health.

 12 And I'm going to just tell people if

 13 anybody is looking for more information from the

 14 other side, you can go up to the Andrew Jackson

 15 Room on the first floor. The Citizens for

 16 Responsible Coal Ash Regulation have some

 17 information up there. And that's it.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MR. DELLINGER: This is Number 40.

 20 MS. MCCOIN: I'm not a professional

 21 speaker at all. I'm a little nervous, so please

 22 forgive me for that. My name is Sarah McCoin. I
 137

 1 am probably one of two people in this room that

 2 might have been here even as of this morning that

 3 actually resides in Harriman, Tennessee

 4 approximately -- I live approximately one and a

 5 half miles from the disaster zone. I am from the

 6 Kingston fossil plant.

 7 I am a ninth generation living on the

 8 farm. Interesting enough, I just moved here back

 9 home, June of 2008, just a few months before the

 10 coal ash spill. And where I moved from is near

 11 Labadie, Missouri. And I'd like to address both

 12 of those issues this morning.

 13 Before I do so, I would like to hand you

 14 all this committee report from Roane County.

 15 Before we found out that there was going to be an

 16 EPA hearing, we had our own hearing.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MS. MCCOIN: So let me get started

 19 because I need to talk fast. Household garbage is

 20 not classification coal ash. It's different. And

 21 I challenge any of you that have household garbage

 22 in your home, would you like for that to be coal
 138

 1 ash? Bet not.

 2 On the evening on December 22nd, our

 3 lives changed forever. Basically, the periodic

 4 table was dumped into our rivers unexpectedly.

 5 And let me preface all of this by saying that I am

 6 not an environmentalist extremist. In fact, I'm

 7 embarrassed to say that I didn't even recycle

 8 before this happened.

 9 My property, my family's property, my

 10 relatives, over 800 acres of property around my

 11 home has been purchased by TVA as a result of the

 12 TVA ash spill. There are some of us that still

 13 remain. It washed six miles upstream to my

 14 backyard along the Emory River. Six miles. And

 15 there was denial that it was there until this past

 16 summer when they finally dredged nearly a year and

 17 a half later.

 18 We were told it was a mudslide and it

 19 would take, by Tom Kilgore's words, six to eight

 20 weeks to clean it up. We are going on year number

 21 two. 300 acres of our water has been -- riverways

 22 has been filled with what looks like a moonscape.
 139

 1 Tons and tons of coal ash.

 2 Where did the lakes go? Where did the

 3 wildlife go? Where did the birds go? Where did

 4 the people go? They're gone. Why? No one wants

 5 to live around this type of household garbage

 6 classified D.

 7 Now, my prior home near Labadie,

 8 Missouri where I lived for years, I just have

 9 recently learned -- it's along the Missouri River,

 10 it floods constantly, and actually the Ameren UE

 11 plant is in the flood zone. We get our corn, our

 12 wheat. Nobody lives there because it's in the

 13 flood plain. But now Ameren UE would like to

 14 build a hundred foot retaining wall to hold their

 15 coal ash.

 16 And it also sits on the New Madrid

 17 fault. So, no matter how strong you build the

 18 thing --

 19 MR. HOFFMAN: Ma'am, I'm sorry. Your

 20 time is up.

 21 MS. MCCOIN: Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 140

 1 MS. MCCOIN: Without protection thru

 2 classification of Coal Ash as "Level C," Labadie,

 3 Missouri, the Missouri River, the farm lands,

 4 wildlife, humans will soon be exposed to exactly

 5 what we in my community have experienced... the

 6 "oh, it will never be harmful or damaging."

 7 Would you like to live next to me?

 8 Would you like to live by my friends in Missouri

 9 or anyplace else who has experienced Class D

 10 household garbage at its finest?

 11 Please classify Coal Ash as a hazardous

 12 material to protect your/our environment.

 13 We have only one earth, we have only one

 14 life, let us leave our environment in a better

 15 state for our children for our environmental

 16 future. Thank you.

 17 MR. DELLINGER: Let's -- let's try

 18 Numbers 42 through 45. Anybody here with Numbers

 19 42 through 45?

 20 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay. This is Number 45

 21 about to speak. Go ahead.

 22 MR. STORMS: Thank you for allowing me
 141

 1 to come and speak today. My name is Carl Storms.

 2 I'm with Concrete Materials in Morristown,

 3 Tennessee.

 4 I've listened to some of these speakers

 5 this morning already. The problem in Kingston is

 6 a problem of storage and disposal. It had nothing

 7 to do with it being hazardous. The concrete

 8 industry and the recycling industry has plenty of

 9 uses for fly ash.

 10 My company uses fly ash every day. It

 11 improves the quality of our concrete, makes it

 12 stronger, more durable. Without fly ash, the

 13 price of the concrete we rise at least 10%, if not

 14 more. We need to make sure that the industry can

 15 continue to use fly ash, and declaring it a

 16 hazardous material would almost eliminate that

 17 possibility because the increased cost would make

 18 it uneconomical.

 19 We do need to address the fact that ash

 20 needs to be kept safe as it is being stored. It

 21 needs to be disposed of properly. I will not

 22 argue with that. But we do need to recycle it.
 142

 1 We need to reuse it so that there is not as much

 2 to be stored and disposed of.

 3 Fly ash is one of the materials that is

 4 used in bricks now to make bricks. There are many

 5 other products being research to use the fly ash.

 6 Some day I hope that we do eliminate fly ash

 7 totally by going to some other form of energy, but

 8 that day is a long way off. And until that time,

 9 we need to reuse as much of the ash as we possibly

 10 can. And classifying it a hazardous material

 11 would not help that, it would hurt that effort and

 12 only cause there to be more ash to be stored and

 13 disposed of. Thank you very much.

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MR. HOFFMAN: 44.

 17 MR. GRAY: Good morning. My name is

 18 Danny Gray. I'm executive vice president of

 19 Charah, Incorporated.

 20 And my comments are based on over three

 21 decades of experience in the compliance, recycling

 22 and management of coal combustion residues. My
 143

 1 comments today are directed at a crucial base

 2 assumption that EPA made in calculating the

 3 perceived impacts for implementing Subtitle C

 4 program as opposed to the more logical Subtitle D

 5 approach.

 6 I believe that the base assumption in

 7 the regulatory impact analysis, RIA, is incorrect

 8 and contrary to what actual experience has been in

 9 the marketplace. Specifically, when EPA prepares

 10 -- the EPA did prepare multiple analysis on the

 11 regulation impacts on recycling. It states that

 12 -- that, based on its past experience, it is

 13 likely that the recycling rates will increase

 14 under a C approach. Apparently, the assumption is

 15 that Subtitle C will drive up disposal costs which

 16 will induce utilities to take steps to increase

 17 utilization.

 18 Of the total benefits that EPA

 19 calculates, 83 to 97% of the -- of calculated

 20 benefits are attributable to one basic false

 21 assumption in our opinion, that recycling will

 22 increase as disposal costs increase. Our
 144

 1 experience is different in contrary. We know that

 2 there are technical limitations on util --

 3 utilities to drive utilization of coal combustion

 4 byproducts regardless of what the disposal costs

 5 are.

 6 The mere association with hazardous

 7 terminology in consumer products -- products is

 8 problematic and invalidates this base assumption.

 9 We have already seen the negative impacts of the

 10 association of a C option. Currently, there are

 11 many companies in the industry that are removing

 12 coal ash from their product manufacturing process

 13 just because of the public debate and the

 14 potential ruling.

 15 Other companies are aggressively

 16 marketing competing products while using the

 17 reference to hazardous or toxic as a sales tactic

 18 to scare users of CCRs. Ironically, many of the

 19 competing products that are replacing coal

 20 combustion products actually cause harm to the

 21 environment through their manufacturing processes.

 22 To assure that recycling of CCRs will increase as
 145

 1 a result of Subtitle C is simply not consistent

 2 with our experience since December 2008.

 3 Our company has, along with others, CCP

 4 recycling industry have invested substantial

 5 capital and expanding the use. If -- if the CCRs

 6 are regulated under a Subtitle C approach, our

 7 efforts, our recycling programs will be harmed.

 8 We support the EPA's effort -- efforts

 9 to strengthen the -- the management regulations,

 10 but we support it under a Subtitle D only

 11 approach. Thank you.

 12 (Applause)

 13 MR. DELLINGER: Could Numbers 52, 55,

 14 56, 57, and 58 move forward? And 47 can come

 15 forward, too.

 16 MR. HOFFMAN: This is 47 speaking.

 17 MR. BISHOP: Hello. First of all, I'd

 18 like to thank you for the time today to convey my

 19 position on proposed subtitle change for coal ash.

 20 For the record, my name is Shane Bishop. I've

 21 worked for Quality Assurance at Headwaters

 22 Resources for over eight years.
 146

 1 I would like to use this time to discuss

 2 the inescapably negative impression the beneficial

 3 use of fly ash will be consumed by if Title -- if

 4 Subtitle C is adopted. Fly ash has been reviewed

 5 for Subtitle C designation and found non-hazardous

 6 many times before. In cases, naturally-occurring

 7 top soils aren't even as safe as fly ash is. With

 8 this recent move by the EPA to change to Subtitle

 9 C, numerous technical bodies such as the American

 10 Association of State Highway and Transportation

 11 officials, National Ready Mix Concrete

 12 Association, the American Society for Testing and

 13 Materials, the American Concrete Institute, and

 14 the Portland Cement Association have confirmed the

 15 hazardous designation is neither warranted or

 16 needed.

 17 The EPA and the states have consistently

 18 recognized that regulating coal combustion

 19 products as a hazardous waste under Subtitle C

 20 would have an adverse impact to the beneficial

 21 use. Such a result would not be consistent with

 22 the RCRA's directive that EPA considers such
 147

 1 beneficial uses in evaluating CCP regulatory

 2 options. The regulation of CCRs under RCRA

 3 Subtitle D would not adversely impact CCP

 4 beneficial use, while at the same time it would

 5 allow for the development of federal regulations

 6 that would ensure that CCRs are managed in a

 7 manner protective of human health and environment.

 8 Additionally, we now live in a litigious

 9 society that would seize every opportunity to

 10 initiate an in -- insurmountable amount for

 11 lawsuits, the cost defending nugatory lawsuits and

 12 the increased riddance cost passed directly to the

 13 consumers of power utilities, which will be you

 14 and I. With the threats of lawsuits, utility

 15 companies will have no further alternative but to

 16 completely halt the beneficial use of all fly ash.

 17 This will increase the need for larger amounts of

 18 landfill with the amount of fly ash being produced

 19 at 120 million tons per year. That would increase

 20 the hazardous waste directly into the landfill by

 21 250%.

 22 I would like to take this opportunity to
 148

 1 inspire you to consider the negative impacts on

 2 marketing, technical, financial, and legal

 3 implications for the beneficial use of fly ash.

 4 So, in closing, I urge you to maintain the past

 5 technical findings of CCRs regulation under

 6 Subtitle C is unnecessary, and again, unwarranted.

 7 Thank you for your time and attention.

 8 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MR. HOFFMAN: 52?

 11 SPEAKER: 48.

 12 MR. HOFFMAN: 48, you want to take 48

 13 now?

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Yes, that would be fine.

 15 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay.

 16 MR. CARSON: My name is Hartwell Carson.

 17 I'm the French Broad Riverkeeper. I work for the

 18 Western North Carolina Alliance.

 19 And I previously submitted comments

 20 about how toxic coal ash next to the French Broad

 21 River is polluting groundwater, dumping toxic

 22 metals into the French Broad River, and toxic ash
 149

 1 is blowing into the neighborhood next to these

 2 ponds. I recently took a sample of that ash from

 3 a person's windowsill that showed that this --

 4 this ash had arsenic at over a hundred times the

 5 safe level provided by the EPA. So we can't say

 6 that this is the same as dirt. It's significantly

 7 higher than the levels of background dirt in our

 8 area.

 9 However, that's not what I wanted to

 10 come here to talk to you about today. Many other

 11 people will tell you about the harm that toxic

 12 coal ash is having on our communities and our

 13 environment. I want to address the issue of

 14 stigma, because we've continually heard that over

 15 and over again about the hypothetical impact that

 16 hazardous waste regulation will have on coal ash

 17 recycling. That has been repeated over and over

 18 again, but the only problem with these statements

 19 is that history has shown -- has repeatedly shown

 20 these to be false.

 21 EPA has provided us several examples of

 22 where hazardous waste materials have not only
 150

 1 decreased when they were regulated as a hazardous

 2 waste, but have actually increased. These include

 3 electroplating waste, furnace dust, used oil, as

 4 well as many others.

 5 And for anyone who doubts whether people

 6 will be willing to use a pocket that contains

 7 hazardous waste, you can reach into your pocket or

 8 into your purse and pull out your cell phone,

 9 which contains numerous hazardous metals, as well

 10 as your computer contains similar metals, as well

 11 as a lot of the lightbulbs that are now in our

 12 homes, the compact fluorescent bulbs that contain

 13 mercury. People have shown that they will use

 14 these products if they are safe. If they're not

 15 safe, by all means, it should have a stigma.

 16 Does anyone still argue that cigarettes

 17 should not have a stigma attached to them or a

 18 warning label? So we need to understand what

 19 recycling products are safe. Products like

 20 putting in cement seems like a very good idea.

 21 Products like spreading it out on our agricultural

 22 fields might not be a good idea and should have a
 151

 1 stigma attached to them.

 2 So I've personally taken samples that

 3 showed coal ash is a hazardous waste, and it

 4 should be regulated as such, despite the false

 5 claims that were repeated about a stigma. Thank

 6 you.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 9 MR. HOFFMAN: 52.

 10 MR. RUSS: Hi. My name is Abel Russ,

 11 and I'm an attorney with the Environmental

 12 Integrity Project.

 13 And we support Subtitle T -- Subtitle C

 14 for a number of reasons, including gaps in state

 15 regulatory regimes. But I used to be a

 16 toxicologist and a risk assessor, so I'm going to

 17 narrow my comments to that issue.

 18 I believe that the risk assessment

 19 that's in the docket and that's in the preamble to

 20 the proposed rule underestimates the risks of coal

 21 ash, specifically groundwater-based risks. And I

 22 think that the benefits in the regulatory impact
 152

 1 analysis also underestimate the benefits of -- the

 2 health protective benefits of regulating coal ash.

 3 The risk assessment, like all risk

 4 assessments, includes a number of assumptions, and

 5 some of them are health protective. Others are

 6 seriously underestimating the risk. And

 7 specifically, there are combined risks to

 8 exposures of multiple contaminants that were not

 9 accounted for. Although the risk assessment

 10 states, for example, that arsenic is the only

 11 carcinogen in coal ash, there are, in fact,

 12 several constituents that are likely to be

 13 carcinogenic, including cadmium, lead, fluoride,

 14 and chromium, and others that we don't know enough

 15 about.

 16 The risk assessment also failed to

 17 account for possible additive or synergistic

 18 non-cancer risks. For example, as noted in the

 19 preamble, cobalt and antimony are both linked to

 20 heart and lung effects and both are among the

 21 constituents of concern in the final full-scale

 22 analysis. There are also at least four
 153

 1 neurotoxins present in coal ash, only two of which

 2 are modeled in the full-scale analysis.

 3 Although the combined effects of these

 4 neurotoxins, for example, on children's developing

 5 brains could be substantial, these weren't

 6 accounted for in the risk assessment.

 7 Additionally, at the level of individual

 8 chemicals, not all roots of exposure were

 9 accounted for. And this means, for example, the

 10 total arsenic or selenium exposure was not

 11 captured in risk assessment.

 12 All of this means that many risks were

 13 unaccounted for, and I'm not saying that the risk

 14 assessment was flawed. I think it was pretty good

 15 given the limited information that we have

 16 available. But it would be a mistake to

 17 characterize it as inherently health protective

 18 when, in fact, it may have seriously

 19 underestimated risks.

 20 And all these things are even more true

 21 of the regulatory impact analysis which limited

 22 its analysis to arsenic and the cancer risks of
 154

 1 arsenic. Not only did it lack the health

 2 protective assumptions of the risk assessment, it

 3 also neglected, for example, neurotoxicity, the

 4 ecological risk of selenium, and everything other

 5 than the cancer risk of arsenic. And I'll leave

 6 it there. Thanks.

 7 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 8 (Applause)

 9 MR. HOFFMAN: 55.

 10 MR. UNDERWOOD: I'd like to thank the

 11 EPA for giving me an opportunity to speak on an

 12 important topic such as this. My name is Dennie

 13 Underwood.

 14 I am employed by Blalock Ready Mix, a

 15 local concrete producer in the Sevierville area.

 16 We're a part of the Blalock Company, one of the

 17 largest road builders in the state of Tennessee.

 18 We employ upwards to 7- to 800 people during busy

 19 times of the year.

 20 Blalock has provided approximately

 21 225,000 cubic yards annually to the public and

 22 private sectors in our service area. Of those
 155

 1 225,000 yards, 85% of it used fly ash as a

 2 supplemental material. Our concern is that if EPA

 3 decides to designate fly ash under Subtitle C of

 4 the Resource Conservation Recovery Act, it will

 5 hinder not -- it will hinder, if not eliminate the

 6 use of fly ash in concrete all together.

 7 If fly ash is classified under Subtitle

 8 C, we would be forced to eliminate it from our

 9 concrete production. This would be due to

 10 potential litigation for using a, quote,

 11 "hazardous waste product" in our concrete. The

 12 designers that we use would not design concrete

 13 with fly ash because of their liability that they

 14 would incur if they specify. It also causes us to

 15 reclassify all our drivers if we use fly ash

 16 because they'd be potentially hauling a hazardous

 17 material.

 18 If we have to stop using fly ash as a

 19 supplemental product, then our costs would --

 20 would increase by approximately half a million

 21 dollars. This 15 to 20% increase would pass on to

 22 the consumer, further decreasing the demand of our
 156

 1 product due to higher costs. The higher cost

 2 would also reduce the available funds for road and

 3 infrastructure maintenance, loss of jobs.

 4 The stigma of a hazardous waste would

 5 effectively end the use of fly ash as a

 6 supplemental product in concrete. Better

 7 suggestion would be along the lines of -- of the

 8 Congressional Research Service has proposed a new

 9 Subtitle K, the federal waste law, which would

 10 give the EPA enforcement authority over coal waste

 11 rules without declaring the hazardous waste and to

 12 regulate the use -- reuse of coal ash.

 13 Concrete is the most versatile building

 14 product in the world and is one of the best

 15 avenues for recycling fly ash available. And I

 16 challenge anyone in this room today to show me a

 17 building product that can be esthetic, structural,

 18 durable, and if properly placed, last a hundred

 19 plus years while recycling a waste product that,

 20 if classified a hazardous product, would otherwise

 21 have to be stored. Thank you.

 22 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.
 157

 1 (Applause)

 2 MR. HOFFMAN: It's Number 58.

 3 MR. MARTIN: My name is Mark Martin.

 4 I'm with Tennessee Riverkeeper. I'm an attorney

 5 for that organization.

 6 The problem with coal ash is obviously

 7 that there's just so darn much of it. The -- it

 8 extends from the use of coal. Coal is hazardous

 9 when it's mined environmentally, it's hazardous

 10 when it's burned, and it's hazardous when it's

 11 disposed of. The ultimate solution is to do away

 12 with the use of coal. Obviously, that's not going

 13 to happen right away, so we need to do something

 14 with coal ash in the meantime.

 15 There's no question that ash is

 16 hazardous. These poisons should be properly

 17 regulated in a Subchapter C landfill. There

 18 should be composite liners, there should be cradle

 19 -- cradle to grave protection. Beneficial uses

 20 sounds like a good idea. It takes some -- a good

 21 bit of this material out of landfills. It's good

 22 in theory only for encapsulated uses. It
 158

 1 shouldn't be used as land -- landfill material.

 2 It shouldn't be used to build golf courses.

 3 But it -- really the -- its use even in

 4 concrete and drywell hasn't been properly studied.

 5 At least, in a landfill you know where the stuff

 6 is, you know where it's going to be. Now, drywall

 7 and concrete eventually will be in a C and D

 8 landfill. Currently -- that's the current

 9 practice. They're unlined.

 10 Now, does the material leach out of

 11 drywall and concrete into the ground, into

 12 groundwater? Are we just taking a problem that we

 13 have today and putting it off on our children and

 14 our grandchildren? We really don't know. The

 15 studies haven't been done. They should be done.

 16 It should have been an ongoing study.

 17 So, in sum, we -- we need Subtitle C

 18 protection, and we need scientific studies on

 19 beneficial uses. Thank you.

 20 (Applause)

 21 MR. DELLINGER: I was told that 56 and

 22 57 had signed in to speak. Are they in the room
 159

 1 at this time? 56 and 57? Let's go to Number 256

 2 and 257, 258 and 259. Are they in the room at

 3 this time?

 4 Number 50, you can move to the -- you

 5 can move over to those chairs and speak.

 6 MR. HOFFMAN: We're starting with 257.

 7 MR. STONE: My name is Jamie Stone. I'd

 8 like to talk to you about a part of fly ash that

 9 hasn't gotten a lot of attention but would be

 10 adversely affected if EPA decides to reclassify

 11 coal-fired byproducts as hazardous waste under

 12 Subtitle C, hazardous waste. Cenospheres are

 13 lightweight, inert, hollow spheres comprised

 14 largely of silica and alumina glass. I'll come

 15 back to that statement in a minute.

 16 Cenospheres float to the top of ash

 17 disposal ponds where they are collected,

 18 transported and later recycled as lightweight

 19 fillers for various plastics and concrete

 20 applications. I work for a company that has been

 21 actively and aggressively harvesting recycling,

 22 selling cenospheres for the past 38 years. I've
 160

 1 been working with cenospheres for 25 of those

 2 years. We've sold cenospheres for use in bowling

 3 balls, various building products, specialty

 4 concretes, automobile brake pads, and many other

 5 applications.

 6 Back to my earlier statement.

 7 Cenospheres are lightweight, inert, hollow

 8 spheres comprised largely of silica and alumina

 9 glass. This is from Page 5 from the EPA

 10 publication pertaining to the proposed rule change

 11 titled "Hazardous and Solid Waste Management

 12 Systems; Identification and Listing of Special

 13 Waste; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from

 14 Electric Utilities."

 15 Webster's dictionary defines "inert" as

 16 deficient in active properties; lacking a usual or

 17 anticipated chemical or biological action. By

 18 extension, cenospheres are not active.

 19 Cenospheres are lacking anticipated chemical and

 20 biological action. In other words, cenospheres do

 21 not leach out hazardous chemicals. They are not

 22 considered hazardous. No scientific study exists
 161

 1 contradicting this fact.

 2 The EPA is now considering reclassifying

 3 cenospheres as an inert substance by EPA's own

 4 definition as a hazardous waste product under

 5 Subtitle C, hazardous waste. Where is the

 6 objective data supporting this reclassification?

 7 Now for it's -- a comment on CCPs in

 8 general. In 2008, the U.S. produced more than 136

 9 million tons of coal combustion byproducts, or

 10 CCPs. The second largest industrial byproduct

 11 string. 60 million tons were utilized into

 12 beneficial use. If the EPA successfully

 13 reclassifies CCPs under -- under Subtitle C, that

 14 market will essentially dry up. Where will they

 15 go then? Hazardous waste landfills? There's 21

 16 of those categorized as Subtitle C.

 17 The only option would be to either send

 18 it to those existing landfills overtaxing their

 19 capacity or build new landfills. This is a bad

 20 decision. Go with the facts.

 21 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 162

 1 MR. HOFFMAN: 258.

 2 MR. CARIBA PHOENIX: How are you?

 3 Members of the EPA, I know that your organization

 4 has a very long and storied history. And given

 5 how all of you have worked with the EPA for a very

 6 long time, you probably know that laws such as

 7 this are not solely about regulation. They are

 8 about the message that these regulations sent.

 9 And unfortunately, there was, before

 10 Kingston coal ash spill, a culture of impunity at

 11 most of the coal ash plants in Tennessee run by

 12 TVA and a culture of impunity at Massey Energy.

 13 It was this culture of impunity that led TVA to

 14 knowingly not repair their landfill even though

 15 they had reports that it was being broken or that

 16 it was buckling, and it was this culture of

 17 impunity that allowed TVA to arrest members of the

 18 United Mountain Defense for committing the God

 19 awful crime of walking on public land to make sure

 20 that water was actually clean.

 21 Now, if you were to change this to

 22 Subtitle C, I'd say you would send a very
 163

 1 different message saying, no, coal ash is toxic.

 2 Yes, you have a responsibility to clean it up.

 3 And yes, you have a responsibility to make sure

 4 that harm does not come to people in affected

 5 communities. Subtitle D would not send that

 6 message because it would basically not declare

 7 coal ash any toxic.

 8 And in response to the previous speaker,

 9 there is a report published by the Sierra Club and

 10 Mountain Justice called "In Harm's Way," and that

 11 report spelled out very clearly that, yes, this

 12 stuff is toxic. Tens of times the safe level of

 13 arsenic, phormium, cadmium, lithium, and other

 14 heavy metals, too.

 15 And again, it's like I know there are

 16 some industry reps who might be a little bit sad

 17 that we can't use a substance because it's

 18 declared toxic. Boo-hoo. If it's declared toxic,

 19 maybe it should not be used in the first place.

 20 And if I may also say to the EPA, you know, you

 21 probably know better than anyone else that it's

 22 not just a question of what these laws are, it's
 164

 1 how they are enforced that often gets the message

 2 across.

 3 I'd say please change this to Subtitle C

 4 and then enforce the laws strictly. TVA and

 5 Massey Energy should not escape having to face

 6 either heavy fines, lawsuits, or jail time for

 7 essentially what was a deep water horizon spill

 8 multiplied by six, or Exxon Valdez multiplied by

 9 101, because that was the volume of the coal ash

 10 that was released in to the perfectly decent

 11 residents of Harriman, Tennessee who honestly just

 12 want clean water and clean air. Thank you very

 13 much.

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MR. DELLINGER: I have it. It's Jon

 17 Cariba-Phoenix.

 18 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay. This is Number 50.

 19 Go ahead.

 20 MR. WILLIAMS: I'm Chuck Williams, and

 21 even though I'm running for the state senate, I'm

 22 basically here for the people in our district, but
 165

 1 also as a citizen myself.

 2 TVA has proven, as other major

 3 utilities, they don't care. The bottom line to

 4 them is the dollars. They didn't listen to their

 5 own engineers when they let them know it was

 6 unsafe as to what they were doing, they didn't

 7 care about the environment, and now they have the

 8 audacity to have passed on their gross negligence,

 9 which is a crime, to us. I know my KUB bill went

 10 up about $25.

 11 We do need Subtitle C. We need the

 12 states and the EPA, the federal government to be

 13 able to overlook and monitor what they're doing

 14 and to ensure that they do do it. And we do also

 15 need where they cannot pass on the costs of their

 16 gross negligence to the consumers. And that's

 17 basically the bottom line.

 18 Subtitle C is the way we have to go.

 19 Thank you.

 20 (Applause)

 21 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 22 MR. HOFFMAN: That's 56.
 166

 1 MR. DAVIS: Good morning. My name is

 2 Vernon Davis. I live in Lake City, Tennessee.

 3 I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to come

 4 here before you today.

 5 I would like to voice my opposition to

 6 the regulation of coal combustion residuals under

 7 Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and

 8 Recovery Act. I've been actively involved and --

 9 and employed in the ash management industry for

 10 over 35 years. That is, for the last 35 years,

 11 for every working day I have been working on

 12 construction projects that utilize coal ash,

 13 operated ash landfills, or provided oversight to

 14 such projects. I can honestly say that I don't

 15 know of any illness or medical condition that can

 16 be attributed to ash exposure that has occurred

 17 among any of my employees or myself.

 18 I've seen many regulatory changes in the

 19 coal ash rules over the years in several states.

 20 None of them have resulted in the loss of jobs to

 21 the industry. Subtitle C regulation would

 22 devastate this industry with job losses, as well
 167

 1 as cause drastic increase in the costs to

 2 consumers. The price for electricity will be

 3 driven up and jobs will be needlessly lost. These

 4 costs will be borne by us, the consumers and

 5 workers if ash is wrongfully declared a hazardous

 6 waste.

 7 This is all being driven by an accident

 8 that happened not far from here. What contained

 9 the ash was the issue. But there are those who

 10 are trying to turn this into what the ash

 11 contains. Yes, we need good engineering. Yes, we

 12 need protective rules. Yes, there needs to be

 13 adequate oversight. All of this can be

 14 accomplished under Subtitle D regulation and

 15 well-written laws.

 16 We, in our industry, are just as

 17 concerned with the environment as anyone. We take

 18 great pains to abide by the regulations we set for

 19 -- that are set forth by the regulatory agencies.

 20 We also take great pride in the way we manage

 21 these sites. We try to be good stewards of the

 22 environment. Nothing will change in our
 168

 1 commitment regarding the way we do our jobs,

 2 regardless of the rules being debated today. But

 3 if coal ash is regulated under Subtitle C, the

 4 losses to the coal combustion products industry

 5 and the cost to consumers will be staggering.

 6 Thank you.

 7 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 8 (Applause)

 9 MR. DELLINGER: Numbers 57, 59, 60. Is

 10 there anyone in the room with a number under 60?

 11 Is -- and also, are Number 256, 259, or 260 in the

 12 room? And is Number 98 in the room? Number 98?

 13 MR. POWELL: Good afternoon. My name is

 14 Matt Powell, and I'm an environmental specialist

 15 for American Electric Power, AEP. AEP provides

 16 electricity to 5.2 million customers in 11 states

 17 and is one of the largest generators of

 18 electricity in the U.S. with, roughly, 38,000

 19 megawatts of generating capacity.

 20 AEP agrees with the views of the

 21 bipartisan group of 165 members of Congress, 45

 22 U.S. Senators, majority of states, multiple
 169

 1 federal agencies, municipal and local governments,

 2 CCR marketers, and beneficial users, and many

 3 other third parties which have maintained that

 4 regulating CCRs under RCRA's hazardous waste

 5 program is simply regulatory overkill. AEP

 6 supports regulation of CCR under RCRA's

 7 non-hazardous waste Subtitle D program, and

 8 specifically under the Subtitle D option.

 9 The difference between the Subtitle D

 10 proposal and D prime is that the latter will not

 11 require the closure of surface impoundments that

 12 are being operated with no significant adverse

 13 effect on human health and the environment. The

 14 closure of surface impoundments, and hence, the

 15 conversion of the generating units to dry

 16 handling, and construction of landfills is a major

 17 cost associated with the proposal, and minimizing

 18 this cost by allowing environmentally protective

 19 surface impoundments to continue to operate

 20 throughout their operating life would present the

 21 least cost impact to our customers.

 22 Regulation of CCRs under the RCRA
 170

 1 Subtitle C hazardous waste rules is simply not

 2 warranted due to the minimal environmental gain

 3 versus the significant financial costs that will

 4 accompany Subtitle C regulation. Extensive

 5 studies by EPRI and others have demonstrated that

 6 CCRs do not exhibit hazardous waste

 7 characteristics, and the EPA has previously

 8 reported to Congress that CCRs do not warrant

 9 Subtitle C regulation.

 10 Let us hope that the development of CCR

 11 rules will be based upon reason, scientific data,

 12 as has been done in previous EPA determinations.

 13 Thank you.

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MR. DEARTH: Good morning. My name is

 17 Vern Dearth, and I'm a concerned citizen.

 18 I just want to talk about the unintended

 19 consequences of ruling CCRs hazardous. We've

 20 heard from numerous people in the industry, and

 21 likewise, that if the EPA rules this as a Subtitle

 22 C, they'll probably discontinue use of these
 171

 1 materials.

 2 Approximately, 60 million tons are

 3 reused annually in this year -- in this country.

 4 If CCR ends in the industry, that means natural

 5 materials will have to be mined to replace the

 6 loss of the CCRs. This will result in mining that

 7 will create annually an excavation, or a hole in

 8 the ground, if all put in one area approximately 5

 9 miles long, 1 mile wide, and 90 foot deep.

 10 Imagine if this activity occurred at one

 11 place for five years. We'd have a hole 25 miles

 12 long, 5 miles wide, and over 90 foot deep. The

 13 resulting area almost as big as Knoxville. This

 14 would also increase mining activity in other areas

 15 is because the equipment infrastructure would have

 16 to be built to do this mining. That would

 17 increase the use of energy to build the equipment,

 18 mine the materials, and the processing of these

 19 materials.

 20 As a substantial amount of our

 21 electricity is generated using coal, there will be

 22 an in -- a need to increase the amount of coal
 172

 1 mined to generate the electricity which is needed

 2 to prepare the mining of these other materials.

 3 We would also increase the output of CCRs which

 4 now the EPA would like to declare as a Subtitle C.

 5 How much will declaring CCRs hazardous

 6 cost the average U.S. household? Is it going to

 7 be a thousand dollars a year, $2,000 a year?

 8 We've heard many industry officials say there will

 9 be an increase in the cost of their production

 10 which is going to be passed on to all of us. We

 11 should all remember sometimes decisions have

 12 long-term, unintended consequences for which we

 13 all pay the price and are unprepared to face.

 14 It's my wish that Subtitle D be the

 15 ruling for CCRs by the EPA. Thank you.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MR. HOFFMAN: 259.

 18 MR. BONNE: Good morning. My name is

 19 Mark Bonne. I am the technology manager at Sphere

 20 One. Sphere One is the largest domestic marketer

 21 of lightweight ceramic microspheres known as

 22 cenospheres.
 173

 1 Our product -- products are used in many

 2 industries, concretes, paints, refractory

 3 compounds. Cenospheres are a coal combustion

 4 recyclate, C -- CCR. As a technology manager, I

 5 work with our customers to find beneficial uses

 6 for CCRs to prevent them from ending up in

 7 landfills. It's small businesses like Sphere One

 8 and our customers that have put to use -- to

 9 beneficial use 43% of the CCRs generated in this

 10 customers -- in this country.

 11 Our customers, most of which are members

 12 of organizations for environmental stewardship

 13 like the ACC Responsible Care and LEEDS, have

 14 reviewed with us the concerns over the upcoming

 15 legislation put forth by the EPA to classify CC --

 16 CCRs as hazardous waste under Subtitle C. If --

 17 if the EPA classifies CCRs as -- as a Subtitle C

 18 hazardous waste, the majority of our customers

 19 will discontinue the use of these materials.

 20 The -- the waste that -- special waste

 21 designation is poorly written, and they have --

 22 and they have the following concerns: If CCRs are
 174

 1 classified as hazardous waste under Subtitle C,

 2 the additional cost in time and money to manage

 3 these materials will make them cost prohibitive to

 4 our customers. Under the EPA's proposal, Subtitle

 5 C waste is -- is regulated by a set of standards.

 6 There are standards for transport, standards for

 7 generation, standards for permitting, standards

 8 for treatment, storage and disposal.

 9 In Subtitle C regulations, the use of --

 10 of wordings to classify materials as hazardous --

 11 hazardous like materials derived from or mixtures

 12 leaving open a future date any products that

 13 contain CCRs to be classified as hazardous, no

 14 manager would expose their -- its company to the

 15 potential future liability. Our customers are

 16 concerned that mixtures spilled on the floor of

 17 their -- of their plants, if swept up, thrown in a

 18 dumpster, classify the entire dumpster as a

 19 hazardous material.

 20 Subtitle C is a very -- is a far better

 21 option to properly manage the disposal of these

 22 useful byproducts if they cannot be reused or
 175

 1 recycled. Without hazard -- the hazardous waste

 2 stigma attached to the materials by Subtitle C,

 3 com -- companies like Sphere One and our customers

 4 can find beneficial reuses for CCRs. If the tag

 5 "hazardous waste" is attached, the products then,

 6 most likely, will be dropped from formulation.

 7 I believe recycling, reusing CCRs is a

 8 much better option than landfilling them. Thanks.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you. Number 53.

 11 MR. HOFFMAN: No, it's updated. 260.

 12 MR. DELLINGER: Number 53. I can't --

 13 MR. HOFFMAN: Come up -- just come up

 14 and say it. We'll -- we'll call you right...

 15 MS. ALLEN: Good afternoon. I'm --

 16 MR. DELLINGER: What number is that?

 17 MR. HOFFMAN: 53.

 18 MS. ALLEN: 53.

 19 MR. HOFFMAN: Sorry about that. 5-3;

 20 right?

 21 MS. ALLEN: Yes.

 22 MR. HOFFMAN: It's 53. Go ahead.
 176

 1 MS. ALLEN: Hello. I'm -- I'm Marsha

 2 Allen, and I'll be speaking on behalf of Restoring

 3 Eden, a Christian environmental group.

 4 Coal ash dumping has to be stopped right

 5 now. It's destroying the earth that God's made

 6 and poisoning the people He's made. Coal ash

 7 should be treated as the hazardous waste that it

 8 is. And it's time that coal companies become

 9 better neighbors by making sure that the way they

 10 do business doesn't endanger the lives of those

 11 around them.

 12 I strongly urge the EPA to adopt the

 13 Subtitle C proposal for coal ash dumping. Jesus

 14 Christ calls us to love our neighbor, and I don't

 15 see how any of us could love our neighbor if we

 16 don't consider the air they breathe and the water

 17 that they drink.

 18 There are approximately 130 sites found

 19 where our drinking water has been contaminated by

 20 dangerous materials such as lead, arsenic and

 21 mercury, and even one site is too many. People

 22 living near unlined coal ash ponds or waters
 177

 1 contaminated by arsenic have an extremely high

 2 risk of cancer, 1 in 50, which is 2,000 times

 3 greater than the EPA's acceptable cancer risk.

 4 Children are at an even greater risk of

 5 becoming sick because of coal ash. And this is

 6 terrible, because the EPA has found that 1.54

 7 million children live near coal sites. Christ

 8 calls us to care for the least of these, and this

 9 compels me to speak up for the families and the

 10 children who will pay the cost of coal ash dumping

 11 with their health.

 12 We know that coal ash is toxic, we know

 13 it's poisoning the families and the earth God has

 14 created, and it's not classified as hazardous.

 15 Until it is, coal companies can keep dumping it.

 16 So we need federal regulations. Because of the

 17 toxic chemicals found in coal, coal ash like

 18 mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium, and others, it's

 19 completely unreasonable to treat it like normal

 20 household garbage. I urge you to adopt the

 21 Subtitle C proposal for coal ash regulation.

 22 (Applause)
 178

 1 MS. ALLEN: Do you have any questions?

 2 MR. HOFFMAN: No, that's okay. Thank

 3 you.

 4 MS. ALLEN: Thanks.

 5 MR. DELLINGER: You were 260; right?

 6 MR. HOFFMAN: Right; 260.

 7 MR. DELLINGER: Okay.

 8 MR. WHITESIDE: Thank you very much for

 9 letting us speak to you all today on this

 10 important issue. My name is David Whiteside. I'm

 11 your Tennessee Riverkeeper. We protect -- we're a

 12 non-profit organization that protects the

 13 Tennessee River and its tributaries.

 14 We are here to ask the EPA to regulate

 15 coal ash as hazardous waste under the Federal

 16 Resource Conservation Recovery Act, Subtitle C.

 17 Coal ash can be very hazardous. It can contain

 18 arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium, as well

 19 as polyaromatic hydrocarbons, and ur -- and it can

 20 contain radioactive elements such as uranium.

 21 The Tennessee River starts near

 22 Knoxville where we are today and flows through
 179

 1 Alabama before it returns to Tennessee.

 2 Currently, in the states of Tennessee and Alabama,

 3 we have conflicting standards. In Kingston,

 4 Tennessee where the TVA's coal ash disaster was,

 5 coal ash waste is being treated as hazardous and

 6 extremely dangerous where -- to the point where

 7 the trucks that leave the facility have to go to

 8 great lengths to make sure that this material is

 9 washed off of them.

 10 Once it's trucked down to Uniontown in

 11 Perry County, Alabama, it has a different set of

 12 standards. It is not treated as a dangerous

 13 material down there. It is treated much more

 14 haphazardly. And one of the things we're asking

 15 the EPA to do in -- in regulating this as

 16 hazardous waste will be to come up with uniform

 17 federal standards that the states could abide by

 18 to give a consistency between Tennessee and

 19 Alabama.

 20 Right now it's just not fair that one

 21 state can consider it a toxic substance and the

 22 other state is not as concerned about it. I --
 180

 1 that's extremely conflicting and we need guidance

 2 from the government to provide some sort of

 3 consistency among the states.

 4 Currently, Tennessee Riverkeeper has an

 5 online petition that has been signed by over 1,000

 6 citizens that agree with Tennessee Riverkeeper

 7 that they want to see coal ash regulated as

 8 hazardous waste. We've also produced a three-

 9 minute educational video explaining this issue,

 10 and that's been viewed by over a thousand people

 11 in the past few months.

 12 So, in conclusion, we are -- we are

 13 begging the U.S. EPA to regulate coal ash as

 14 hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation

 15 Recovery Act, Subtitle C. Today you've heard from

 16 citizens of Tennessee whose homes and lives were

 17 ruined by the TVA's coal ash disaster in Kingston.

 18 You've also heard from environmentalists who are

 19 concerned -- environmental leaders who are

 20 concerned about the air and water quality in their

 21 states.

 22 On the other side, you've heard from the
 181

 1 -- the construction industry and many in the

 2 mining industry, industrial biostitutes who are

 3 only concerned with their bottom line and are not

 4 concerned with -- with the well-being and public

 5 health of the citizens.

 6 So we ask, please side with the public

 7 and do the right thing for the benefit of the

 8 citizens and not to safeguard the bottom line of

 9 these small, private companies who are concerned

 10 only with their pocketbooks. So, please, please,

 11 do the right thing --

 12 MR. HOFFMAN: Your time is up.

 13 MR. WHITESIDE: -- and regulate this as

 14 hazardous waste. Thank you very much for this

 15 opportunity to speak.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MR. DELLINGER: Is there anyone in the

 18 room with Number sixty -- 62 or lower that hasn't

 19 spoken? Anybody? Come forward. Please come

 20 forward.

 21 SPEAKER: 57.

 22 SPEAKER: 57.
 182

 1 SPEAKER: That work?

 2 MR. DELLINGER: That works.

 3 MR. KAZICH: My name is Bruce Kazich.

 4 I'm the national sales manager of Trans Ash,

 5 Incorporated.

 6 Trans Ash is a small, family-owned

 7 company that was founded in 1960. We specialize

 8 in CCP management. We currently market boiler

 9 slag products and manage CCP landfills and

 10 impoundments at 18 different coal-fired facilities

 11 in 9 states and Canada. We employ approximately

 12 150 people, many of whom have over 20 years of

 13 service.

 14 We understand that a significant driver

 15 in the proposed regulatory action was the failed

 16 dike at TVA Kingston. We do not understand why a

 17 structural failure would prompt a reconsideration

 18 for the waste classification of coal ash.

 19 Subtitle D clearly creates much needed new

 20 landfill and surface impoundment standards. These

 21 regulations should be tougher but should not

 22 stigmatize the possible beneficial use of CCPs.
 183

 1 And yes, the stigma is real.

 2 Trans Ash was a charter member of the

 3 EPA's C2P2 program which promoted environmental

 4 stewardship and beneficial use of CCPs. Isn't the

 5 suspension of that program the ultimate proof of

 6 stigma? The C2P2 program suspension certainly

 7 sends conflict -- conflicting signals from the

 8 agency, especially when the environmental benefit

 9 from the utilization of CCPs is well documented

 10 and acknowledged by the EPA.

 11 In their memo of May 4th, 2010, the EPA

 12 clearly states, "Environmentally sound beneficial

 13 reuses of ash conserves resources, reduces

 14 greenhouse gas emissions, lessens the need for

 15 waste disposal units, and provides significant

 16 domestic economic benefits."

 17 The EPA claims a Subtitle C designation

 18 will actually increase the beneficial use of CCPs.

 19 This contention is certainly not supported by our

 20 customers. They have legitimate legal liability

 21 concerns. They've clearly stated they will stop

 22 using CCPs if they are classified in any way as a
 184

 1 Subtitle C waste.

 2 In our litigious society, they're simply

 3 not willing to take the risk. Therefore, the CCPs

 4 that have been safely recycled for decades will

 5 now be landfilled, creating higher energy costs,

 6 higher costs for utilities, and therefore, higher

 7 energy costs for all citizens. Users will replace

 8 CCPs with naturally mined or manufactured

 9 materials utilizing more energy, including fossil

 10 fuels, natural gas and electricity further

 11 increasing our carbon footprint.

 12 Let us also consider the economic impact

 13 of a Subtitle C designation. The American Coal

 14 Council estimates an economic impact between 6 and

 15 $11 billion. Additionally, between 130,000 and

 16 240,000 green jobs would be in jeopardy. With the

 17 current economic crisis and no significant

 18 recovery in sight, how can we justify a Subtitle C

 19 designation when Subtitle D clearly provides for

 20 the same level of environmental safety?

 21 The environment can and will be

 22 protected with strong regulations under Subtitle
 185

 1 D. The EPA should develop a performance-based

 2 federal program for CCPs under RCRA D which will

 3 insure that disposal is safely managed while

 4 continuing to promote and expand beneficial use.

 5 Thank you.

 6 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MR. DELLINGER: Right now it's about

 9 12:15, and we've gone through everybody in the

 10 room who's either a walk-in person or someone who

 11 has -- was expecting to speak sometime before

 12 12:45. If there are people in the room that would

 13 like to provide testimony at this time, regardless

 14 of your -- of your numbers if you've

 15 pre-registered.

 16 So let's start with Number 70 through

 17 63. 63 through 70 to see if there are any -- any

 18 people in here with those numbers that would like

 19 to testify now? Nobody with those numbers.

 20 How about 80 through 71? Well, how many

 21 people have pre-registered and have a number right

 22 now? All right. Let's have all those people come
 186

 1 forward and -- and provide your testimony.

 2 MR. HOFFMAN: 99 to start.

 3 MR. LAWRENCE: Good morning. I'm David

 4 Lawrence, and I have been in the fly ash and

 5 bottom ash industry for 30 years, the last 20 with

 6 Headwaters Resources.

 7 We have seen the stigma effect, we --

 8 and we know its exists. And we've seen the

 9 expanded clay and shale people speak out against

 10 bottom ash. We have explained their motive has

 11 been monetary. They're greedy. They want our

 12 market -- marketplace.

 13 I have a document from a third party lab

 14 that actually gives TCLP results that compare the

 15 expanded clay and shale and bottom ash. Guess

 16 what? The expanded clay and shale exceeds bottom

 17 ash in several heavy metal areas. Imagine that.

 18 So much for their argument. It's simply more of

 19 the marketplace.

 20 Let's discuss for a moment who will pay

 21 for the fly ash and bottom ash going to a Class C

 22 landfill or additional on-site landfill costs.
 187

 1 Look around. We will pay. We will pay additional

 2 attorney costs. And the poor will pay. The very

 3 people that can't afford additional costs, they're

 4 going to pay.

 5 So, please, let's keep fly ash and

 6 bottom ash in non-hazardous material. Thank you

 7 for your time.

 8 MR. DELLINGER: Number 93.

 9 MR. CRITCHFIELD: Thank you for allowing

 10 me to speak today, and good afternoon. My name is

 11 Steve Critchfield, vice president of Full Circle

 12 Solutions.

 13 We are a small business that provides

 14 beneficial use of coal combustion products, CCPs,

 15 for power plants and other industries in the

 16 southeast and the Midwest. We safely recycle CCPs

 17 into mulches, potting soils, masonry blocks, soil

 18 amendments, and geotechnical fills.

 19 Our power-producing plants are mostly

 20 independent power producers that do not you have

 21 their own ash basins or landfills. Therefore, our

 22 efforts have been beneficial to local communities
 188

 1 by saving over 10 million cubic yards of MSW

 2 landfill space. We have also benefitted these

 3 communities by developing industrial properties

 4 which have provided hundreds of jobs and millions

 5 of dollars in investments.

 6 My comments today concern geotechnical

 7 fills. EPA has stated that they do not believe

 8 large volume geotechnical fills constitute

 9 beneficial reuse and they intend to prohibit such

 10 fills under either Subtitle C or Subtitle D of

 11 RCRA. The EPA reached this decision without

 12 giving adequate consideration to the issue. The

 13 EPA has not given consideration to the benefits

 14 given to communities where CCPs have been used

 15 safely.

 16 The EPA should also consider the benefit

 17 of geotechnical fills that have given to many

 18 communities across the country the use of CCPs and

 19 geotechnical fills, save valuable landfill space,

 20 prevent the need of additional borrow pits, and

 21 provides industrial and commercial property for

 22 economic development and job descriptions.
 189

 1 Most of the land upon which we build

 2 could not be used for economic development. The

 3 earthwork required to develop these properties

 4 would otherwise be cost-prohibitive. Two examples

 5 of communities which have benefitted from our work

 6 are the city of Petersburg and the town of South

 7 Boston, both in Virginia.

 8 Petersburg has been economically

 9 depressed for many years. It had no available

 10 property to develop new industries and create

 11 jobs. Using CCPs, we constructed an in --

 12 industrial park with approximately 150 acres

 13 that's now available for the city to use in its

 14 economic development plans. If the city of

 15 Petersburg had undertaken this project, the

 16 earthwork alone would cost over $4 million.

 17 In South Boston, we partnered with the

 18 city and built Houghton Industrial Park. A

 19 property designated by the town for their

 20 industrial park was mostly rolling hills and would

 21 require over -- thank you.

 22 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you. 74?
 190

 1 MR. HOFFMAN: 74.

 2 MR. SHAW: My name is Tom Shaw. I am

 3 with Harsco Corporation, a global industrial

 4 services company with almost 20,000 employees. We

 5 have operations in Tennessee, South Carolina,

 6 Alabama, and Kentucky, and I am here today to

 7 represent those employees. We operate a plant in

 8 Memphis dedicated to processing boiler slag as

 9 abrasive -- abrasive blasting grit and roofing

 10 granules.

 11 Since the 1930s, we have been a green

 12 recycler of boiler slag, one of the four major

 13 types of coal combustion byproducts. Boiler slag

 14 is formed when extremely hot molten coal ash is

 15 quenched with cold water and the coal ash

 16 immediately becomes a vitrified amorphous solid,

 17 glassy matrix soil known as boiler slag.

 18 Vitrification renders a material inert in a

 19 chemical process using heat. It transforms a

 20 mixture into a soluble liquid which solidifies on

 21 cooling, essentially encapsulation by nature.

 22 Because boiler slag is vitrified, it is
 191

 1 a very durable and environmentally stable material

 2 that permanently immobilizes its chemical

 3 constituents in a glassy amorphous structure which

 4 remains stable even when broken into small

 5 fragments during abrasive blasting as evident by

 6 x-ray diffraction and TCLP data.

 7 Because it is beneficially reused,

 8 boiler slag is not commonly stored in surface

 9 impoundments. We regularly test our boiler slag,

 10 and it has always passed the TCLP testing and has

 11 never exhibited any hazardous waste

 12 characteristics. This includes both pre and post

 13 blast abrasive grit.

 14 The scientific information about boiler

 15 slag and its physical properties have not changed

 16 since we began our operations over 70 years ago.

 17 We have also tested our material using the

 18 recently developed Vanderbilt leaching procedure

 19 which is designed to reflect real world

 20 conditions, and the results confirm the absence of

 21 any hazardous waste characteristics.

 22 Regulating boiler slag destined for
 192

 1 disposal as a special waste under Subtitle C would

 2 unfairly stigmatize beneficially reused boiler

 3 slag, as is already evident by competitive

 4 actions. We have seen no evidence that boiler

 5 slag meets any threshold for regulation under

 6 Subtitle C. We are not aware of any environmental

 7 problems linked to our products.

 8 As an abrasive, we are the primary

 9 alternative to silica sand, an abrasive that

 10 presents serious worker health concerns. We

 11 recognize the need for proper and environmentally

 12 sound standards for regulating the small

 13 percentage of boiler slag that is discarded rather

 14 than beneficially reused.

 15 Accordingly, consistent with the

 16 announced views of nearly 30 states and EPA's 2

 17 previous determinations evaluating proper

 18 management of coal combustion byproducts, we

 19 support appropriate and reasonable disposal

 20 standards for any waste boiler slag under Subtitle

 21 D of RCRA. Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 193

 1 MR. DELLINGER: 81.

 2 MR. RAIA: Good afternoon. My name is

 3 Bobby Raia, and I'm here today to voice my support

 4 of the EPA to regulate coal ash under the proposed

 5 Subtitle D non-hazardous approach. Thanks for the

 6 opportunity.

 7 I'm a civil engineer currently working

 8 within the coal ash management business that

 9 specialize -- that we specializes in recycling

 10 coal combustion residuals. Currently,

 11 approximately 50% of all electricity within the

 12 United States is generated by the use of coal with

 13 its -- with its uses expected to increase by nine

 14 -- by 19% by 2030, as suggested by the United

 15 States Department of Energy.

 16 Of all the coal used to generate

 17 electricity, 44% of its residuals, or CCRs, are

 18 currently beneficially recycled in such items as

 19 concrete, brick, mortar, wallboard, drywall, green

 20 fill projects, pavement, and blocks. A hazardous

 21 classification under Subtitle C would have a

 22 crippling effect on the numerous CCR recycling
 194

 1 programs, programs that I participated in,

 2 programs that work.

 3 There is no doubt in my mind that a

 4 hazardous classification would give coal ash and

 5 its recycling programs an unwarranted stigma. The

 6 industry has already felt the effects due to

 7 negative spin and the looming potential of a

 8 hazardous classification.

 9 Engineers, architects and contractors

 10 will be unlikely to specify the use of these

 11 products in fear of professional liability,

 12 forcing them to use alternate, more expensive

 13 natural resources. If the industry is already

 14 feeling the impact, what is the future of the coal

 15 ash recycling industry should the EPA classify

 16 coal ash as hazardous? Will there even be an

 17 industry? How will this affect the jobs in the

 18 industry? How will this affect my job?

 19 What seems to be forgotten is that

 20 between the current stigma and the potential

 21 industry extinction, CCRs will continue to be

 22 generated. And as CCRs continue to be generated,
 195

 1 if they aren't being recycled, then they'll have

 2 to be landfilled. But classifying coal ash --

 3 sorry. Classifying coal ash as a hazardous waste,

 4 40% percent (sic) of the coal ash that is

 5 currently recycled will be sent to landfills for

 6 disposal.

 7 And if these landfills are going to be

 8 required to accommodate the added quantity, their

 9 life will be shortened by nearly half, forcing

 10 utility companies to expand or construct new

 11 landfills to accommodate the added quantities.

 12 And these costs are going to be reflected on your

 13 monthly bill.

 14 With landfills being expanded and

 15 constructed, the EPA, through these proposals, has

 16 attempted to standardize and strengthen the

 17 engineering standards and protective features

 18 associated with these expansions and new

 19 construction. However, both the Subtitle C and D

 20 proposals are essentially the same with the EPA

 21 actually stating that the new disposal regulations

 22 will take effect quicker under the Subtitle D,
 196

 1 non-hazardous approach.

 2 I'll conclude my speech with this. I

 3 strongly believe the EPA should regulate coal ash

 4 under the proposed Subtitle D, non-hazardous

 5 approach. Subtitle -- this approach protects the

 6 environment and human health with its standards

 7 for landfills, yet it reinforces the values and

 8 goals of recycling by promoting the use of coal

 9 ash in a variety of materials. Thanks again for

 10 the opportunity.

 11 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you. 64.

 12 MS. STOKES: Hi. My name is Katherine

 13 Stokes. I live and work in Knoxville. I work at

 14 the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. I'm also

 15 a graduate of the University of Tennessee civil

 16 engineering department.

 17 In college, I studied concrete strength.

 18 We had a lab where we would make our own concrete

 19 for testing, mixing aggregate with cement and

 20 water and sometimes adding fly ash. The fly ash

 21 came as a dry dust. We scooped it out of a bag.

 22 You wouldn't want to breathe in the particles, but
 197

 1 the ash was well contained.

 2 This dry, treated and bagged version of

 3 coal ash is more similar to a household chemical

 4 waste that is suggested in EPA Subtitle D.

 5 However, this is not the type of coal ash we're

 6 talking about today. In fact, under Subtitle C,

 7 coal ash that is recycled for other uses such as

 8 concrete is exempt from the regulations.

 9 What we're talking about today are the

 10 wet impoundment ponds or the huge dry landfills of

 11 coal ash, the type that flooded the land, houses

 12 and river of our neighbors in Roane County,

 13 Tennessee. This type of coal ash that is stored

 14 in impoundment ponds or landfills should be

 15 regulated by EPA's proposed Subtitle C. This ash

 16 hasn't been treated and is not your regular

 17 household waste as Subtitle D would suggest that

 18 it is.

 19 As we witnessed with the TVA coal ash

 20 spill, coal ash is not effectively regulated by

 21 the state of Tennessee. As we've learned from

 22 this disaster, the siding and structural stability
 198

 1 of these coal ash storage impoundments are not

 2 regulated. Neither is the potential for these

 3 chemicals to penetrate groundwater.

 4 As we've witnessed, we know the

 5 regulations are made as suggestions or guidelines

 6 rather than enforced, as they would be in Subtitle

 7 D, that they are also not followed. EPA estimates

 8 Subtitle C could cause a 0.8% increase in our

 9 electricity bills. We need to spend a little bit

 10 of money now to regulate coal ash as insurance so

 11 that we won't see another very expensive,

 12 life-destroying and very preventable accident like

 13 we saw almost two years ago here in Tennessee.

 14 Our electricity providers aren't afraid

 15 of taking risks because the cost is sent down to

 16 the customers. We are the ones that carry the

 17 burden. We're the ones who paid for the clean-up

 18 of the Kingston coal ash spill, and we need

 19 federal backing so that this doesn't happen to us

 20 again.

 21 EPA Sub -- suggested Subtitle C is the

 22 best choice for Tennessee's safety, health and
 199

 1 wallets. It will save us money and distress in

 2 the long-run by helping us avoid another disaster.

 3 Thank you.

 4 (Applause)

 5 MR. RIEDINGER: Good afternoon. My name

 6 is Dan Riedinger of the Washington D.C.- based

 7 Edison Electric Institute. EEI is the association

 8 of U.S. shareholder-owned electric companies

 9 representing about 70% of the U.S. Power sector.

 10 I would like to begin by thanking the

 11 EPA for holding these eight public hearings giving

 12 so many individuals and stakeholder groups from

 13 around the country the opportunity to comment on

 14 the agency's proposals for regulating coal

 15 combustion residuals, or coal ash. Many different

 16 voices have weighed in, including those of large

 17 industry groups, small businesses, environmental

 18 organizations, religious leaders, state

 19 regulators, politicians, and concerned citizens.

 20 And you've been asked to consider many

 21 different concerns: the desire for binding coal

 22 ash management standards that are federally
 200

 1 enforceable; the imperative of maintaining coal

 2 ash beneficial use, one of the largest and most

 3 successful U.S. recycling efforts and the huge

 4 number of associated jobs; and the goal of

 5 avoiding sharp electricity rate increases; and the

 6 need to ensure protection of public health and the

 7 environment. All of these issues can be addressed

 8 through federal regulation of coal ash as a non-

 9 hazardous waste.

 10 EEI has supported this approach since

 11 the initiation of this rule-making proceeding.

 12 This approach is consistent with the agency's 2000

 13 determination that coal ash does not warrant

 14 regulation as a hazardous waste because it does

 15 not exhibit the characteristics of hazardous

 16 waste.

 17 Over the past decade, the

 18 characteristics of coal ash have not changed, nor

 19 has the scientific foundation on which EPA

 20 determined that coal ash could safely be managed

 21 as non-hazardous waste. What has changed is a

 22 level of public awareness, interest and concern.
 201

 1 EPA now must try to address

 2 stakeholders' varied concerns. The solution isn't

 3 simply to impose the most burdensome regulation

 4 possible on utilities whose customers would bear

 5 the brunt of these costs. In fact, regulating

 6 coal ash as hazardous would not have prevented the

 7 December 2008 spill at the nearby Kingston

 8 facility.

 9 Instead, we urge EPA to adopt a strong,

 10 measured response that effectively targets

 11 legitimate coal ash management issues. This can

 12 be done by devising federal requirements for

 13 managing coal ash as a non-hazardous waste. This

 14 approach would provide the same level of public

 15 protection, as would hazardous waste regulation,

 16 but without the extra $12 billion in annual costs.

 17 Both approaches would require

 18 installation of liners to prevent leaching, and

 19 both would require groundwater monitoring. These

 20 requirements would be enforceable through citizen

 21 and state lawsuits, and if the agency chooses, by

 22 EPA itself under the same authority as the agency
 202

 1 used to develop federally enforceable

 2 non-hazardous waste rules for municipal solid

 3 waste.

 4 In addition, EEI supports adoption of

 5 federal dam safety standards that would help

 6 ensure the structural integrity of coal ash

 7 impoundments such as that used at the Kingston

 8 facility. Everyone here wants federal regulation

 9 with teeth, but we don't need regulation that

 10 imposes huge costs on consumers without

 11 commensurate public health benefits, threatens to

 12 eliminate the many beneficial uses of coal ash,

 13 and that puts U.S. Jobs at risk. Thank you.

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 15 MR. IVEY: Good evening. My name is

 16 Shaun Ivey. I work for Headwaters Resources.

 17 I have worked in the coal combustion

 18 byproducts for 23 years. I have constructed ash

 19 management sales all through the southeast part of

 20 the United States without a failure. We do

 21 groundwater testing every quarter without a

 22 failure. Before the Kingston site, no one here
 203

 1 has -- most of the people hadn't even heard of

 2 coal combustion byproducts.

 3 I strongly encourage the EPA to keep

 4 Subtitle D. It will encourage a lot of costs to

 5 go to Subtitle C. Thank you very much.

 6 MR. DELLINGER: We're going to take a

 7 break now, and we'll -- it will probably be about

 8 15 minutes, and we'll impanel a new panel. And

 9 we'll start up probably within about 15 minutes.

 10 (Whereupon, a luncheon recess was

 11 taken.)

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

 20

 21

 22
 204

 1 A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O N

 2 MS. DEVLIN: We will begin the hearings

 3 of this afternoon's session.

 4 Again, good afternoon. I thank you for

 5 attending today's public hearing on the EPA's

 6 proposed rule regarding the regulation of coal-

 7 combustion residuals.

 8 Again, before -- before we begin, I'd

 9 like to again express our thanks to all of you for

 10 taking time out of your schedules -- your busy

 11 schedules to come here. We look forward to

 12 hearing all your comments.

 13 This is the eighth public hearing we've

 14 had on this rule. We have had previous, very

 15 successful hearings in Washington, D.C.; Denver;

 16 Dallas; Charlotte; Chicago; Pittsburgh;

 17 Louisville; and now here. And we've over 2,000

 18 people at these hearing. And again, we thank you

 19 all for your comments and your participation in

 20 the hearing.

 21 My name is Betsy Devlin. I am the

 22 Associate Director of the Materials Recovery and
 205

 1 Waste Management Division at EPA, and I will be

 2 chairing this afternoon's session of this hearing.

 3 With me on the panel this afternoon are

 4 Rich Kinch, Bonnie Robinson, and Steve Souders.

 5 We are all from our EPA headquarters Office of

 6 Resource Conservation and Recovery.

 7 Before we begin the hearing this

 8 afternoon, I'm just going to go over some of the

 9 logistics of how we will conduct the hearing this

 10 afternoon. Speakers, if you preregistered, you

 11 were given a 15-minute slot in which you're

 12 scheduled to present testimony. And to guarantee

 13 that slot, we ask that you sign in at our

 14 registration desk out in the lobby at least 15

 15 minutes before you're scheduled to speak.

 16 All speakers, whether you preregistered

 17 or whether you signed up to speak when you got

 18 here today, were given a number. That is the

 19 order in which you will speak.

 20 I will call speakers up to the podium by

 21 number. I will call them generally in groups of

 22 four or five. And when your number is called, we
 206

 1 ask that you walk to the microphone; please state

 2 your name; and we, again, may ask you to spell

 3 your name for the court reporter, but it's

 4 important that we get your name and your

 5 affiliation.

 6 And because there are so many people who

 7 have signed up to speak today, and to be fair to

 8 everyone, testimony is limited to three minutes.

 9 We will be using an electronic timekeeping system,

 10 but we will also hold up cards to let you know

 11 when your time is getting low.

 12 When we hold up the first card, which is

 13 a green card, you will have two minutes left. We

 14 hold up the second card, it is a yellow card, you

 15 will have one minute left. The third card is an

 16 orange card, and that shows you have 30 seconds

 17 left. And when your time is up, we're going to

 18 hold up a red card; and that does mean we're going

 19 to ask you to stop speaking right then. Your time

 20 is up.

 21 But please remember, if you have not

 22 completed your remarks and you have other
 207

 1 comments, you can submit them either in front of

 2 the court reporter -- in the box in front of the

 3 court reporter if you've brought a written copy

 4 with you; or, if not, you can write them and

 5 submit them outside at our registration desk. Any

 6 comments that you don't get to say in -- say

 7 orally but you give us in writing will be

 8 considered just as if you had said them at the

 9 hearing.

 10 We will not be asking -- answering any

 11 questions today on the proposal; but from time to

 12 time, a member of the panel may ask you a question

 13 to clarify some of your testimony.

 14 If you have brought a written copy of

 15 your testimony, we will ask that you leave a -- a

 16 copy in the box by our court reporter that's right

 17 in front of me here. And if you are only

 18 submitting written comments, please put them in

 19 the box by the registration desk.

 20 And again, if you have additional

 21 comments after today, we ask that you follow the

 22 instructions on the yellow handout sheet. And you
 208

 1 can get that yellow handout sheet at our

 2 registration desk and submit your -- any comments

 3 that you have by November 19th. November 19th is

 4 the close of the comment period on this

 5 regulation.

 6 Again, our goal is to ensure that

 7 everyone who has come today to present testimony

 8 is given that opportunity. And to the extent

 9 allowable, we will try to accommodate any of those

 10 who have not preregistered, and we'll -- we will

 11 also try to accommodate those who've asked to

 12 speak earlier due to an airline flight or other

 13 transportation issues. So if it looks like I'm

 14 calling people out of order, don't worry. I'm

 15 trying to fit everyone in.

 16 Our hearing today is scheduled to close

 17 at 10:00, but we will stay later, if necessary, to

 18 allow as many of you as possible to provide your

 19 testimony. Again, if for some reason the time

 20 doesn't allow you to present your testimony,

 21 please leave your written comments in the box out

 22 by our registration desk.
 209

 1 And again, those written comments will

 2 be collected. They will be entered into the

 3 docket. They will be considered just as though

 4 you had presented them orally.

 5 If you would like to testify today, but

 6 have not yet done so, please sign up at the

 7 registration desk out in -- out in the -- in the

 8 lobby. And again, during the hearing, if you have

 9 any questions at all about what's going on, just

 10 please contact our staff out at the registration

 11 desk. They can assist you.

 12 We are likely to take some occasional

 13 breaks, but we will eliminate or shorten those

 14 breaks to, again, allow as many people as possible

 15 to testify.

 16 Finally, if you do have a -- a cell

 17 phone or a BlackBerry, we ask that you either turn

 18 it off or turn it to vibrate. And if you need to

 19 use your phone at any time during the hearing,

 20 just please step out into the lobby.

 21 Again, we ask for your patience. As we

 22 get through this, we might need to make some minor
 210

 1 adjustments, but I think this morning went

 2 smoothly, so I hope this afternoon will go just as

 3 well.

 4 So with that, I'd like to start by

 5 making sure -- is there anyone in the audience

 6 with the number of 62 or below who did not get to

 7 testify this morning? Okay. And your number,

 8 please, ma'am?

 9 MS. SMITHYMAN: 61.

 10 MS. DEVLIN: Okay. If you would -- if

 11 you would come to the podium, Number 61 would step

 12 forward? And also, Numbers 63, 65, and 66? Thank

 13 you.

 14 Number 61, please, go ahead.

 15 MS. SMITHYMAN: My name is Linda

 16 Smithyman. It's S-m-i-t-h-y-m-a-n. I'm a

 17 resident of Knox County, and I was here when the

 18 Kingston coal ash spill occurred.

 19 I'm affiliated with a number of

 20 environmental groups. And it had to take the

 21 Kingston spill to shed new light on coal ash. I

 22 mean, this is happening in our backyard, folks.
 211

 1 Someone told me, and I believe what they

 2 said, that there were folks driving into the

 3 facility down at Kingston that made phone calls to

 4 TVA to tell them that there was a leak time and

 5 time again, and yet it seemed that nothing was

 6 done about it. And what happened? How many homes

 7 were destroyed? How much land was contaminated?

 8 How many people had to get drinking water for

 9 their daily needs?

 10 If the Kingston spill had actually

 11 happened upriver from Knoxville and affected our

 12 daily water supply, there would have been even

 13 greater uproar about the cleanup and the future of

 14 coal ash plants.

 15 In 2000, the EPA deemed coal ash a

 16 nonhazardous material and, thus, it did not fall

 17 under federal regulations or inspections.

 18 Inspections are left up to state regulators.

 19 Since 2000, there's been improved

 20 pollution controls to keep more and more toxins

 21 from leaving smoke stacks, thus increasing the

 22 amount of toxins in coal ash. Classifying the
 212

 1 coal ash as hazardous would almost certainly

 2 affect how the waste is recycled.

 3 Environmentalists have concerns. The

 4 tests have shown that the dangerous toxins, such

 5 as arsenic, lead, chromium, manganese, and barium

 6 have been linked to serious health conditions,

 7 such as cancer, liver damage, and neurological

 8 complications.

 9 Ash ponds are located in 35 states, and

 10 the majority of dump sites are over three decades

 11 old. There are many toxins in the waste.

 12 According to an EPA report, many of the ash ponds

 13 in Kentucky were not designed or constructed by

 14 engineers, bringing into question whether or not

 15 ash is properly contained at the sites.

 16 Several Kentucky utilities, LG&E's

 17 ponds, fall into this category. I used to live in

 18 Kentucky for a little while. These ash-disposal

 19 sites also leak their toxic cargo into ground

 20 water or discharge it directly into rivers,

 21 creeks, and lakes as runoff or through permitted

 22 outfalls.
 213

 1 Until the EPA takes action, there are no

 2 federal rules setting standards for the safe

 3 disposal of ash or limiting the discharge of toxic

 4 ash, leachate, into our waterways. We need

 5 comprehensive federally-enforceable safeguards to

 6 protect human health, wildlife, and the

 7 environment.

 8 Coal ash must be regulated under

 9 Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and

 10 Recovery Act as special waste with all the

 11 safeguards that apply. Coal ash should not be

 12 regulated under the much weaker --

 13 MR. SOUDERS: Sorry.

 14 MS. SMITHYMAN: Okay.

 15 MS. DEVLIN: Okay. Thank you very much.

 16 MS. SMITHYMAN: -- and less protective

 17 standards provided by a Subtitle D designation, as

 18 nonhazardous waste.

 19 Regulating coal ash under Subtitle D or

 20 RCRA is a busted and broken approach that

 21 essentially keeps the status quo of voluntary and

 22 patchwork protections. Subtitle D guidelines
 214

 1 cannot guarantee all citizens adequate protections

 2 from toxic ash because Subtitle D does not require

 3 states to adopt federal guidelines.

 4 There are currently no

 5 federally-enforceable regulations specific to coal

 6 ash, and contamination from coal ash landfills and

 7 wasteponds is already poisoning drinking water

 8 supplies and damaging wildlife. such as fish and

 9 birds, at locations across the country. The last

 10 of federally-enforceable safeguards is exactly

 11 what led to the disaster in Tennessee, which a dam

 12 holding more than 1 billion gallons of toxic coal

 13 ash failed, destroying 300 acres, dozens of homes,

 14 killed fish and other wildlife, and poisoned the

 15 Emory and Clinch Rivers.

 16 Coal ash is contaminating our drinking

 17 water supplied, and it is only getting worse as

 18 the waste stream grows in volume and toxicity.

 19 The failure to safely dispose of coal ash

 20 transfers the pollutants captured by Clean Air Act

 21 regulations to the nation's waters.

 22 Living near an unlined coal ash waste
 215

 1 pond and drinking water contaminated with arsenic

 2 can be more dangerous than smoking a pack of

 3 cigarettes a day, according to a risk assessment

 4 done by the EPA. Lax state regulations will

 5 continue to place communities at risk from high-

 6 hazard dams and leaking dumps until federal

 7 minimum standards under Subtitle C of RCRA are

 8 established.

 9 Coal ash must be regulated as a "special

 10 waste" under Subtitle C of the Resource

 11 Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Obama

 12 administration needs to rely on the best available

 13 science in setting federally-enforceable

 14 safeguards for coal ash. Regulating coal ash as a

 15 special waste gets rid of dangerous coal ash waste

 16 ponds and ensures another community will not have

 17 to experience a disastrous spill such as the one

 18 that happened in December 2008 at the Tennessee

 19 Valley Authority waste pond; we don't want another

 20 TVA accident.

 21 Federally-enforceable safeguards must

 22 ensure coal ash dumps and waste ponds have all the
 216

 1 protections presently required at household waste

 2 landfills, including solid waste permits, liners,

 3 monitoring systems, leachate collection systems,

 4 corrective action, financial assurance, fugitive

 5 dust, suppression, transport controls, et cetera.

 6 Only Subtitle C regulations can

 7 guarantee the full panoply of needed protections

 8 and the phase- out of dangerous waste ponds. Lax

 9 "guidelines," such as those that would be applied

 10 under weaker Subtitle D regulations, will fail to

 11 fix the problem as EPA expects that a substantial

 12 number of coal ash dumps and waste ponds -

 13 representing approximately 50% of the coal ash in

 14 the U.S. - will not clean up under this plan.

 15 Regulation of coal ash under Subtitle C will

 16 increase disposal costs and, thus, provide an

 17 incentive for greater ash recycling. The costs

 18 passed onto the general public will be higher,

 19 unfortunately.

 20 Strong, federally-enforceable standards

 21 ensure much greater compliance and, thus, much

 22 greater likelihood that future spills and
 217

 1 disasters - and the costs associated with their

 2 cleanup - will be avoided.

 3 Through research, EPA must determine

 4 which reuses of coal ash are safe and beneficial,

 5 and must prohibit reuses that constitute dumping

 6 and expose people and the environment to hazardous

 7 chemicals. Failure to regulate coal ash dumped in

 8 mines is a dangerous omission, and EPA should not

 9 exempt this practice from regulation.

 10 MS. DEVLIN: Number 63, please?

 11 MS. GOTTLIEB: Hello. I am Barbara

 12 Gottlieb, Deputy Director for Environment and

 13 Health at Physicians for Social Responsibility,

 14 our national organization of physicians and other

 15 health professionals. We're 50,000 members in 25

 16 chapters.

 17 Some industry representatives whom we've

 18 heard from today have suggested that coal ash is

 19 not toxic, and that the TVA Kingston spill was

 20 somehow not of much consequence to hu -- human

 21 health. On behalf PSR, I would like to correct

 22 that mischaracterization.
 218

 1 It may be that coal ash is bound at the

 2 molecular level in some recycling uses rendering

 3 it inert and ho -- harmless. We certainly hope

 4 so. But that is not what we are dealing with in

 5 coal ash in some 2,000 storage sites around the

 6 country. What leaches, blows, and spills out of

 7 storage sites includes arsenic, selenium, cadmium,

 8 chroni -- chromium, molybdenum, and a long list of

 9 other clearly toxic heavy metals. The

 10 contamination of people's drinking water wells

 11 from coal ash waste, as is scientifically

 12 documented in the EPAs listing of damage cases,

 13 proves in scientific terms that coal ash is toxic.

 14 What I'd like to go focus on today,

 15 though, is that the EPA's assessment of coal-ash

 16 toxicity is actually hindered by errors of

 17 methodology and of assumptions. I'd like to raise

 18 five issues that actually lead the EPA to

 19 underestimate coal-ash toxicity.

 20 First, the EPA's test for measuring

 21 leaching is inadequate. The EPA's own Science

 22 Advisory Board and no less than the National
 219

 1 Academy of Sciences have both called on the EPA to

 2 replace its leaching test with a more modern, more

 3 accurate version. When, in 2009, the EPA used a

 4 test that accounted for additional factors, such

 5 as the pH of the ash and field conditions where

 6 leaching might take place, leaching was shown to

 7 be dramatically higher than previously believed.

 8 Second, the EPA failed to consider the

 9 potential for harm from simu -- simultaneous

 10 exposure to multiple heavy metals. Exposure to

 11 several contaminants concurrently can cause

 12 synergistic interactions that result in a greater

 13 risk to health. Concurrent exposures may

 14 intensify existing health effects or may give rise

 15 to new health effects.

 16 This can happen where different

 17 contaminates op -- contaminants operate by a

 18 common mechanism of toxicity; it can also happen

 19 where different contaminants affect the same body

 20 organ or system. Both scenarios occur with

 21 coal-ash toxicants. Unfortunately, the EPA does

 22 not take multiple exposures into account.
 220

 1 The EPA doesn't consider the greater

 2 threat to children. The EPA disregards long

 3 latency periods. Harm to health from coal ash may

 4 take years to become evident. This is

 5 particularly true of cancer which results from

 6 damage to cell DNA and mutations in genes.

 7 Two years, as the case with the TVA

 8 spill, is too short a time for this damage to

 9 manifest; and thus, it's too soon to declare that

 10 no such harm was done by the pill.

 11 Finally, the EPA overlooks the transfer

 12 of the problem from Tennessee to Alabama. A full

 13 assessment of health impacts must consider impacts

 14 where the coal ash is eventually disposed.

 15 For these reasons, PSR strongly supports

 16 Subtitle C. Thank you.

 17 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 66,

 18 please?

 19 MR. SWARTZ: Hello. My name is Steve

 20 Swartz, and I am co-owner of New Age Fastening

 21 Systems, the developer of expendable abrasive New

 22 Age Blast Media.
 221

 1 Earlier, my colleague spoke about what

 2 we felt was the misuse of the EPA logo, and today

 3 I'd like to talk about the beneficial-use program,

 4 as -- as well as what we feel is a misuse of the

 5 EPA endorsement.

 6 Now, everybody in this room, for the

 7 most part, has heard of the Creature from the

 8 Black Lagoon. Today, what I bring to you,

 9 courtesy of the Harsco Corporation, is what we

 10 call beauty from the black lagoon. What you have

 11 here is an ad. Black beauty abrasives speaks

 12 about passing the TCLP test. Obviously, you have a

 13 woman that's immersed in what only appears to be a

 14 black lagoon, and -- it's ads like this that we

 15 feel are very misleading. We feel like -- that

 16 the EPA has -- is in the position to do something

 17 about an ad like this.

 18 You know, when it comes to the -- the

 19 beneficial uses for coal combustion waste, we feel

 20 like -- that this is not a beneficial use, and

 21 this -- this ad is very misleading. It --

 22 continue to -- to tie their ads to the TCLP, which
 222

 1 we feel is a futile attempt at linking the TCLP

 2 standards to those drinking water standards.

 3 You know, if -- you know, in layman's

 4 terms, we just feel like this -- this ad is almost

 5 like the beneficial-use program gone wild. It's

 6 -- you know, a -- a picture speaks a thousand

 7 words, and we just feel like -- that -- that this

 8 -- this just speaks of misuse of coal combustion

 9 waste. Thank you very much.

 10 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. May I have

 11 numbers 67, 68, 69, and 70, please? Number 67?

 12 Thank you.

 13 MR. BRYANT: Good afternoon. My name is

 14 Mark Bryant. I come to -- before you today on

 15 behalf of the 150-plus members of the American

 16 Coal Ash Association.

 17 The netagi -- negative stigma created by

 18 EPA's proposal is growing. The regulatory effect

 19 appears weighted towards placing -- excuse me -- a

 20 hazardous special waste on a nonhazardous

 21 material, and has resulted in uncertainty,

 22 misinformation, and anxiety in an otherwise normal
 223

 1 commodity market. The damage to CCR markets is

 2 real, and the people that use, manage, and trade

 3 them are being harmed.

 4 Additional examples of the negative are

 5 available today that EPA needs to be aware of.

 6 EPA's proposal is -- hurts hard-working and

 7 honest, small businessmen and women and their

 8 employees.

 9 All this harm and suffering because EPA

 10 wants federal jurisdiction for a nonhazardous

 11 material, nonhazardous by any test or criteria. A

 12 federal or a state-led RCRA Subtitle D program

 13 will be more than adequate for everyone's

 14 protection and safety.

 15 At previous meetings, EPA has heard test

 16 -- testimony from competitors of some of these

 17 small recycling businesses, most recently blasting

 18 grit, in favor of a Subtitle C determination for

 19 what appears the sole purpose of gaining a

 20 business advantage and a financial gain. Using

 21 the negative stigma, the competing market knows

 22 what it means.
 224

 1 We are now learning of incidents where

 2 small businesses are having operating loans denied

 3 because collateral property improved by CCRs that

 4 secured the loans in the past are failing

 5 inspection, and falling victim to misinformation

 6 and ambiguity. The stigma is real. Companies and

 7 jobs are being lost.

 8 We are in possession of public and

 9 private construction project documents that

 10 specifically state fly ash will not be used in

 11 ready mix anywhere on the site. The stigma is

 12 real and growing.

 13 We have just received advertising

 14 materials for concrete products manufacturers that

 15 warrant that all of their products to be free of

 16 coal ash because it is currently under

 17 investigation by U.S. EPA as a possible

 18 hazardous waste. The stigma EPA created is real.

 19 Finally, we have asked EPA to consider

 20 the unique contracts and language used in this

 21 industry. We have shared this language with EPA,

 22 and asked EPA to consider the implosion and
 225

 1 beneficial use in recycling that will occur when

 2 cancellation or forced majeure clauses kick in

 3 because EPA chosen to list CCRs as a hazardous

 4 waste. This will be a huge hit to the recycling

 5 industry that EPA has supported for many years.

 6 So far, EPA has chosen to ignore this impending

 7 situation.

 8 RCRA works. According to RCRA, CCRs are

 9 not hazardous. Government-funded research and

 10 demonstration has supported beneficial use and

 11 recycling for years. This industry is based on

 12 good science.

 13 Subtitle D is technically sufficient,

 14 and all the good people will be protected and not

 15 harmed any further. Thank you.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 68,

 18 please?

 19 MR. ADAMS: My name is Mike Adams, and I

 20 have recycled fly ash for the past 30 years, the

 21 last 11 years as a v -- vice president for

 22 Headwaters Resources, the largest marketer of fly
 226

 1 ash in North America.

 2 My premise for my testimony is that was

 3 EPA's assertion that a hazardous designation will

 4 increase CCP's utilization is flawed, and that the

 5 stigma of a hazardous-waste designation is real.

 6 The listing of CCPs as a hazardous material for

 7 disposal will effectively kill the most successful

 8 recycling program in the U.S., increase

 9 greenhouse-gas production by millions of tons of

 10 CO2, and require an additional 50-million cubic

 11 yards of landfill space annually.

 12 The following is an example of that

 13 stigma that is now taking place even before any

 14 rule has been issued. I have here a price sheet

 15 from a concrete block producer that is affiliated

 16 with the nation's largest concrete block producer.

 17 This price sheet was issued within the last couple

 18 of months.

 19 It includes their standard pricing and

 20 the following warrant in bold print. Blank

 21 company -- I will leave the nim -- them nameless

 22 at this time -- warrants all concrete masonry
 227

 1 units to be free of any coal ash. Coal ash is

 2 currently under investigation by the EPA to be

 3 classified as hazardous waste.

 4 Why are they making this warranty? It

 5 can be for one reason and one reason only. They

 6 are concerned with the possible liability of coal

 7 ash even though there is no -- and I repeat, no

 8 scientific evidence that the use of coal ash in

 9 the production of concrete products is harmful to

 10 people or animals or the environment. Their

 11 concern is the future liability associated with

 12 unscrupulous attorneys and possible class-action

 13 suits.

 14 This is an example of how sti --

 15 significant stigma will be. In the EPA's positive

 16 economic justification for a hazardous designation

 17 of coal ash, which is required for any such

 18 ruling, they have assumed that beneficial reuse

 19 will -- will significantly increase due to the

 20 hazardous designation.

 21 Without this assumption, the hazardous

 22 designation is a huge economic loss to the
 228

 1 electric con -- consumers of the country. Stigma

 2 will cause this.

 3 This and other examples of stigma prove

 4 the EPA assumption is wrong, and a hazard

 5 designation will not increase any coal ash sales.

 6 It will effectively kill very successful and

 7 environmentally-positive recycling program.

 8 The true regulatory options before us

 9 for comment today, the Subtitle C hazardous

 10 approach and the Subtitle D nonhazardous approach

 11 both propose new landfill engineering standards

 12 that are essentially the same. Landfills won't be

 13 any stronger or better under Subtitle C, but coal

 14 recyclers will be saddled with a hazardous-waste

 15 stigma that will make continued recycling of this

 16 re -- resource difficult or impossible.

 17 MR. GENTILE: Thank you.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MS. DEVLIN: Number 69, please?

 20 MR. SILVERTOOTH: My name is Mike

 21 Silvertooth with Mineral Resource Technologies,

 22 Inc., a Cemex company. We are a full service coal
 229

 1 combustion products company and marketing

 2 management in North America. I want to thank the

 3 EPA panel for giving us this opportunity to

 4 address the disposal of CCRs from electric

 5 utilities.

 6 Besides being one of the full ser --

 7 besides being a full-service marketing and

 8 management company of CCPs, MRT's key role is to

 9 supply our parent company, Cemex, with fly ash,

 10 bottom ash, and synthetic gypsum for the

 11 production of ready mix, concrete pipe, and cement

 12 in the U.S.

 13 Our company was recognized by EPA in

 14 regards to the C2P2 reward with the enhanced

 15 utilization of CCPs in 2008. Specifically, EPA

 16 recognized us for internally consuming 2.1 million

 17 tons of CCPs annually in our various products. We

 18 continue to be the single largest beneficial user

 19 of CCPs in the U.S.

 20 EPA named Cemex USA Energy Start Partner

 21 of the year for outstanding energy management and

 22 reduction in greenhouse gases (sic) emissions for
 230

 1 the second year in a row in 2009 and 2010.

 2 Locally, our Knoxville cement plant received the

 3 Energy Star rating in 2008 and 2009 from the U.S.

 4 EPA in regards for demonstrating the ability to

 5 reduce energy use and protect the environment

 6 through energy efficiency.

 7 As you can see, our company is dedicated

 8 to operating in a sustainable manner that

 9 minimized the impact to the environment. The

 10 reduction of greenhouse gas is a top priority of

 11 EPA, and is also a top priority of our company, as

 12 well.

 13 The utilization of CCPs is a major

 14 portion of our in -- internal efforts to minimize

 15 greenhouse gases, and could very well be the

 16 single largest source or reducing CO2 year over

 17 year. With the utilization of fly ash in our

 18 concrete operations alone, we have reduced CO2 by

 19 up to 1.6 million tons annually while, at the same

 20 time, improving the quality and useful-service

 21 life of our concrete.

 22 Also, we continue to use CCPs as
 231

 1 raw-feed replacement for mined virgin materials

 2 for the production of Portland cement. By

 3 utilizing CCPs in our cement operations, Cemex sib

 4 -- substitutes a portion of the mined raw

 5 materials, such as clay, shell, and natural

 6 gypsum. This enables us to re -- conserve natural

 7 resources, for (sic) land disturbances, and reduce

 8 CO2 for mining operations. At the same time, this

 9 reduces the amount of CCPs disposed at power

 10 plants and avoids the CO2s generated from the

 11 disposal activities.

 12 Prior to utilize -- utilizing any CCP

 13 for raw feed, the material must be tested for

 14 total minerals, TCLP metals, and, in some cases,

 15 TCLP organic. The test results must conform to

 16 all federal and/or state regulations in order to

 17 be used in our operations. No material defined as

 18 hazardous waste in Title 40, Code of Federal

 19 Regulations, Subtitle 261 can be used in any

 20 manner.

 21 Cemex urges EPA to elect man --

 22 management of CCPs under RCRA Subtitle D. This
 232

 1 option allows CCPs to be managed under the same

 2 similar guidelines proposed under the RCRA

 3 Subtitle C option, but allows CCPs to remain

 4 classified as a nonhazardous material.

 5 Should CCPs fall under RCRA Subtitle C

 6 management, there are too many negative variable

 7 that will hamper the beneficial use of CCPs and

 8 will cripple a large avenue in the reduction of

 9 greenhouse gases in our country.

 10 Thank you to the EPA panel for allowing

 11 my company to address our concerns.

 12 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 70,

 13 please?

 14 MR. WALDROP: Good afternoon. My name

 15 is Bob Waldrop, president of Full Circle

 16 Solutions. We're a small business that provides

 17 beneficial use of coal-combustion products for

 18 power plants and other industries in the Southeast

 19 and Midwest. We safely recycle CCPs into mulches,

 20 potting soils, masonry block, soil amendments, and

 21 geotechnical fills.

 22 My comments today concern the issue of
 233

 1 stigma. The stigma associated with the regulation

 2 of CCPs as hazardous waste is real and here with

 3 us today.

 4 First, our clients that produce masonry

 5 block have stated that they will no longer use

 6 bottom ash if it becomes labeled as hazardous.

 7 They are already seeing competitors advertise that

 8 they do not use hazardous materials in their

 9 block.

 10 Our clients are concerned that any

 11 lawsuit will turn into a publical -- public

 12 spectacle. The mere mention of "hazardous

 13 materials" will force them to defend using what

 14 has been a safe and effective material for years.

 15 No one can possibly think that attorneys will not

 16 attack block manufacturers that use what has been

 17 labeled "hazardous."

 18 Second, we have lost two major

 19 construction projects due to a hazardous label.

 20 The first was a development in eastern Virginia

 21 that would have enhanced property values and the

 22 tax base of a small rural county. County
 234

 1 officials stated that they liked the project and

 2 want to approve without the use of CCPs; however,

 3 if CCPs were used, they would deny approval

 4 because they did not want to get involved with a

 5 hazardous project.

 6 The second project, an industrial park,

 7 also in eastern Virginia, would have provided land

 8 ready for an industry to build upon, even though

 9 we proved the environmental safety of a properly-

 10 constructed geotechnical fill, the owners backed

 11 away because, in their words, EPA thinks this may

 12 be hazardous.

 13 More recently, standard ways of

 14 conducting any business have changed for the CCP

 15 industry. This is the result of the negative

 16 stigma from EPA's proposal to regulate CCPs as a

 17 hazardous waste.

 18 One of our business loans was up for

 19 renewal, and the loan was collateralized with the

 20 industrial and commercial properties developed

 21 with CCPs. As part of the refinance, the bank

 22 ordered Phase I Environmental Assessments. These
 235

 1 properties have had several Phase I assessments

 2 performed in the past. They have always been

 3 clean.

 4 However, this time, due to the presence

 5 of CCPs, the environmental consultant directed the

 6 bank to have a Phase II study done. When

 7 challenged with the facts, including years of

 8 groundwater and surface water monitoring data

 9 which proved these sites are clean, the con --

 10 consultant could only say that since EPA is

 11 considering these -- regulating the CCPs as

 12 hazardous, then it must be bad.

 13 The bank has decided they will not renew

 14 the loan. If they call that loan, good people are

 15 going to lose their jobs.

 16 The stigma issue is real. It's

 17 affecting CCP companies today. Therefore, we urge

 18 EPA to make an informed decision on the regulation

 19 of CCPs and ben -- and beneficial recycling of

 20 these valuable materials. If EPA truly supports

 21 recycling, Subtitle D is the answer. Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 236

 1 MR. GENTILE: Thank you. May I have

 2 Numbers, 71, 73, 75, and 92 and 98. And again,

 3 we've bit -- a bit out of order on those two, just

 4 trying to fit some people in. So Number 71,

 5 please? Thank you.

 6 MR. FARRAR: Good afternoon. My name is

 7 Tyler Farrar. I'm the agricultural marketing

 8 specialist for Full Circle Solutions, Inc.

 9 It is my job to educate farmers on all

 10 the wonderful benefits of CCRs, specifically with

 11 FGD gypsum. Some of the benefits are increased

 12 crop yields, improved soil quality, control of

 13 erosion from soil runoff, and the limited movement

 14 of fertilizers and chemicals into nearby streams.

 15 The chemical constituents of CCRs are

 16 commonly found in many everyday products and

 17 natural materials, such as soil, rock, and other

 18 parts of the earth's crust. Agriculture

 19 represents the largest untapped potential market

 20 for beneficial uses of this valuable resource.

 21 I have two specific issues I would like

 22 to address. The first one is the extensive
 237

 1 research that the USDA, EPA, and state

 2 universities have done with CCRs and FGD gypsum.

 3 Decades -- decades of research has been done to

 4 show the functional benefits of FGD gypsum.

 5 FGD gypsum substitutes for the use of

 6 virgin materials. It is applied at appropriate

 7 agronomic rates, and the use of which meets

 8 applicable standards.

 9 Designating CCRs as hazardous or toxic

 10 is counter to scientific evidence, and would

 11 seriously limit the current use of these

 12 materials. EPA and other governing bodies have

 13 determined that they are nonhazardous, and

 14 regulation under Subtitle C is unwarranted.

 15 The second issue is stigma. I'm a

 16 fifth-generation farmer. We spend our lifetime

 17 being stewards of the land, typically living where

 18 we farm. Farmers would not take the risk of

 19 damaging their livelihood by applying materials to

 20 the land that is designated as a hazardous

 21 substance. Our farms are passed down through the

 22 generations. And the EP -- EPA proposed Subtitle
 238

 1 C or D labeled a special waste would damage the

 2 productive capacity or value of the land for

 3 future generations.

 4 In our grain and reusable society, it is

 5 in our best interest to continue to reuse

 6 products, such as CCRs, that help us live more

 7 productive and enjoyable lives. CCRs directly and

 8 directly contribute over $4.5 billion annually to

 9 the United States economy and thousands of jobs.

 10 In the current state of our economic situation, a

 11 Subtitle C classification would devastate small

 12 businesses and individual towns that depend on our

 13 industry for survival.

 14 Many people pride themselves on efforts

 15 to recycle paper, glass, cans, and cardboard.

 16 These recycle strategies are employed widely in

 17 the United States to help cut down the need for

 18 landfills and conserve limited reser -- sources.

 19 Please allow us to continue this

 20 tradition by keeping CCRs as Subtitle D. Thank

 21 you.

 22 (Applause)
 239

 1 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 73,

 2 please? 73? Not here. 75? Thank you.

 3 MS. AMYX: Hello. My name is Alison

 4 Amyx, and I'm the communications and outreach

 5 director of Georgia Interfaith Power & Light,

 6 which is an organization dedicated to helping

 7 communities of faith care for God's creation.

 8 I'm here today to voice my support for

 9 EPA regulations that would treat coal ash as a

 10 special waste under Subtitle C of the Resource

 11 Conservation and Recovery Act. I urge the EPA to

 12 adopt enforceable federal safeguards to protect

 13 our ecosystem from the pollutants in coal ash.

 14 As it stands, communities across the

 15 country are being exposed to heavy metals, such as

 16 arsenic, lead, and mercury. These heavy metals

 17 seep from coal ash storage sites into our drinking

 18 waters, rivers, and streams.

 19 As a person of faith, I believe that

 20 this is unacceptable. God created the world and

 21 called it good, and we are called to be stewards

 22 of God's creation to keep it clean so that
 240

 1 generations to come will also have a chance to

 2 enjoy it.

 3 Unfortunately, as we all know, burn

 4 coaling is a dirty business, and the coal ash

 5 waste has to be stored somewhere. Regulating its

 6 disposal and ensuring that it's stored properly

 7 are just a couple of ways that we can lessen our

 8 impact on the created world. We have a moral

 9 obligation to ensure that all citizens have access

 10 to clean water and a clean environment.

 11 There are faith communities all over the

 12 state of Georgia and across the country who are

 13 working to reduce their dependance on fossil

 14 fuels. But even as we do all we can in our

 15 congregations and we can in our personal lives,

 16 and even as we invest in clean-energy

 17 alternatives, we must work to mitigate the

 18 consequences of burning coal in the meantime.

 19 So in conclusion, I urge the EPA to

 20 regulate coal ash under Subtitle C so that we can

 21 protect the creative world and ensure that we

 22 leave the gift of a clean world to future
 241

 1 generations. Thank you.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 92?

 4 MR. SILVER: Good afternoon. My name is

 5 Derrick Silver, manager of Full Circle Solutions,

 6 Petersburg Virginia Operations.

 7 Over the past 20 years, I have helped

 8 construct dozens of geotechnical fil projects with

 9 coal combustion products. In compliance with

 10 existing state regulations, these fills have al --

 11 always been constructed in a manner that protects

 12 both groundwater and surface waters.

 13 Before starting a field, we carefully

 14 examine the environmental setting. Qualified

 15 professionals identify the extent of groundwater,

 16 surface waters, and wetlands. The project is then

 17 de -- designed to give many forms of protection to

 18 these valuable resources.

 19 Setbacks are put in place to allow for

 20 large buffer areas. The buffer areas allow for

 21 soil attenuation of vegetation screening. Before

 22 placement of CCPs begin, sedimentation basins,
 242

 1 soil berms, silt fencing, runoff and runoff

 2 ditches and other storm water control devices are

 3 installed. These measures ensure that CCPs do not

 4 enter any surface water.

 5 The first CCP placed in is bottom ash.

 6 We placed one foot of bottom ash at the bottom of

 7 every CCP fill to allow for drainage and any rain

 8 water that comes through -- through the field.

 9 Water in the drainage layer is routed to sub --

 10 sub -- excuse me, sediment basins where it's

 11 contained (sic) with storm water. This water is

 12 then recycled for dust control and proper

 13 compaction.

 14 Placement of CCPs is done with method

 15 far exceeds those from earth fills -- earthen

 16 fills. Properly compacted fills prevent storm

 17 water infiltration. We test compaction ten times

 18 more than normal for the earthen fills.

 19 Sloping also provides for positive

 20 drainage, unlike earthen fills. A top slope, at

 21 least 2%, is constructed. Phasing of CCP fills

 22 also limits water infiltration, will limit the
 243

 1 amount of CCP fill area an inactive at any given

 2 time.

 3 As soon as each phase has been

 4 completed; we cover the CCPs. The proper cover

 5 placed over a CCP fill also helps prevent any

 6 storm water intrusion. We replace a minimum of

 7 two feet of dirt over CCPs. We don't use any --

 8 just any dirt. We make sure that the dirt placed

 9 on the fill is compatible, suiting the growth of

 10 grasses and other vegetation.

 11 Grassing is then completed and just not

 12 imported, it's maintained. We periodically reseed

 13 anything in areas to mow, as well as to keep it

 14 healthy. These are but a few of the controls we

 15 design and build for any CCP geotechnical fills.

 16 Though participation in the state

 17 regulation process, we have made certain that

 18 these and other controls have been written in

 19 Subtitle D, solid waste regulations. I'm sorry.

 20 Thank you.

 21 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 244

 1 MS. DEVLIN: May I have Numbers, 76, 77,

 2 78, and 96? Number 76, please?

 3 MR. DONAHUE: Good. afternoon. My name

 4 is -- my name is Bob Donahue. I'm the power wise

 5 program director for Georgia Interfaith Power &

 6 Light.

 7 Alison just talked about our

 8 organization, so I won't repeat that. But my role

 9 is to work with the faith-based community in

 10 implementing energy efficiency programs throughout

 11 churches, synagogues in Georgia. I wish to thank

 12 you for the opportunity to speak on this important

 13 issue today.

 14 Over the years, I've seen the results of

 15 sel -- self-regulation and minimal regulation by

 16 industry. The record is not good: Climate

 17 change, Gulf oil spill disaster, Tennessee coal

 18 ash spill, mercury throughout the food chain just

 19 about everywhere you go.

 20 In a previous career, I was director of

 21 site assessment operations in its superfund

 22 hazardous ranking system program within U.S.
 245

 1 corporation. There I had seen 30-foot high slag

 2 piles filled with chromium and arsenic directly

 3 across the street from elementary schools, and

 4 also on the banks of the Anclote River in Tarpon

 5 Springs, Florida. I also witnessed and

 6 investigated toxins in the public water supply for

 7 2 million people in Miami originating from

 8 industrial septic tanks permitted with minimal

 9 standards.

 10 So after 40 years of working for

 11 government and business on environmental problems

 12 throughout the southeast, I do not have confidence

 13 at all in industries self-regulation or minimal

 14 regulation. So the question before us today:

 15 Should we have stricter environmental regulations

 16 and safeguards for 130 million tons of coal ash

 17 laced with chromium, arsenic, lead, and mercury,

 18 many of which contain contaminant levels in excess

 19 of those found at the nation's most dangerous

 20 superfund hazardous waste sites?

 21 My initial reaction is "Duh." My

 22 professional reaction is "Yes, I strong --
 246

 1 strongly recommend EPA institute Subtitle C

 2 regulations for storage of coal ash." I want to

 3 thank you for the time to speak here today on this

 4 important topic. Thank you.

 5 (Applause)

 6 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 77,

 7 please? State your name.

 8 MS. GRIFFITH: We've not welcomed you.

 9 Thanks for coming.

 10 MR. GENTILE: Thank you.

 11 MS. GRIFFITH: My name is Gloria

 12 Griffin, and I'm a Tennessee Sierra Water

 13 Sentinel.

 14 EPA's own research has documented dozens

 15 of cases of pollution that has escaped coal ash

 16 sites. The EPA must classify coal ash as a

 17 hazardous waste, which would provide a strong

 18 oversight vehicle for the 141 million tons of

 19 toxic coal ash produced in the U.S. each year.

 20 Coal ash is a dangerous mixture of

 21 arsenic, lead, mercury; selenium, accumulative

 22 toxic brew. When improperly disposed of, it
 247

 1 contaminates drinking water supplies, surface

 2 waters, and our communities.

 3 There are thousands of these

 4 poorly-managed and poorly-maintained coal ash

 5 sites across the United States. Coal ash is

 6 hazardous and must be regulated under the most

 7 protective provisions of the U.S. hazardous waste

 8 laws.

 9 The true cost of coal ash will never be

 10 known, might never be known, but Tennessee knows.

 11 Tennessee knows the water quality in the Emory

 12 River at the site of the TV coal ash disaster has

 13 been impaired, and the aquatic habitat has been

 14 destroyed.

 15 The true cost of coal ash may never be

 16 known; but Tennessee knows that the health re --

 17 assessment report did not gave a clean bill of

 18 health to the impacts of this disaster. It

 19 concedes that the Kingston ash is dangerous,

 20 containing levels of arsenic well above the

 21 background arsenic in the area.

 22 Coal ash -- the true cost of coal ash
 248

 1 may never be known, but Tennessee knows that a

 2 hydrogeological investigation has not been done in

 3 the disaster area and, therefore, the health

 4 assessment could not effectively ascertain impacts

 5 to human health from contaminated drinking water.

 6 Tennessee knows coal ash cannot be left

 7 to the state monitoring. Tennessee will never

 8 regulate coal ash. They never have and they never

 9 will.

 10 Tennessee knows. Tennessee knows

 11 communities all over the country currently near

 12 coal ash storage -- storage sites are in sacrifice

 13 zones.

 14 The EPA knows coal ash is a poison-laced

 15 concoction. I ask EPA only to believe in its own

 16 findings on this issue and do the right thing by

 17 protecting people, not coal-industry profits. I

 18 urge EPA to adopt the stronger regulation, Option

 19 C, to protect ground and surface water, ensuring

 20 safe and healthy communities. Thank you.

 21 (Applause)

 22 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 78,
 249

 1 please?

 2 MR. WHITWORTH: I'm Dean Whitworth. And

 3 the combustion of coal releases a number of toxic

 4 substances, substances that have been sequestered

 5 in the earth for millions of years. And when we

 6 burn coal, we release many of these substances

 7 into the atmosphere. And ultimately, I end up

 8 breathing, drinking, and eating them. The

 9 remainder of these materials are in the ash.

 10 Therefore, it is entirely appropriate

 11 and prudent that we do everything technologically

 12 feasible to prevent this portion from escaping

 13 into our environment. Therefore, I request, I

 14 expect, and I demand that combustion residuals

 15 from electric utilities be regulated under

 16 Subtitle C.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 96?

 19 MR. LEMAIRE: My name is Walter LeMaire,

 20 director of Mineral Resource Technologies, MRT.

 21 MRT is a coal combustion product marketing and

 22 management company that promotes, manages, and
 250

 1 expands the developed beneficial applications for

 2 CCPs along with our sister companies.

 3 I would like to thank today's EPA panel

 4 for giving me the time to addresses the recent

 5 proposal for the disposal of coal combustion

 6 residuals from electric utilities.

 7 MRT and its parent company, Cemex, use

 8 CCPs, including fly ash, bottom ash, and synthetic

 9 gypsum in its cement construction products,

 10 concrete pipe, ready mix con -- ready mix concrete

 11 manufacturing operations, and we promote the

 12 beneficial use of CCPs to external customers. We

 13 are continually expanding the applications where

 14 beneficial use of CCPs can add value to and lower

 15 the environmental impact of the construction-

 16 materials industry, both internally and for our

 17 external customers.

 18 The beneficial use of CCPs saves virgin

 19 resources, lowers the cost of electricity

 20 generation, reduces energy consumption, lowers

 21 greenhouse gas emissions, lowers the end-user cost

 22 of concrete products, and reduces the need for
 251

 1 landfill space which further lowers the impact on

 2 the environment.

 3 MRT and Cemex understand the importance

 4 of sustainable development, and continually seek

 5 ways to reduce the environmental impact of our

 6 operations by balancing materials demand with a

 7 commitment to environmental sustainability. We

 8 conduct business with respect and care for the

 9 environment as evidenced by our consecutive Energy

 10 Star Partner of the Year awards in 2009 and 2010.

 11 Another example is our participation in

 12 the Coal Combustion Products Partnership, C2P2,

 13 which is a joint government and industry program

 14 to increase the beneficial use of coal combustion

 15 products and to reduce energy consumption,

 16 greenhouse gas emissions, and to increase

 17 industrial recycling. We're committed to

 18 preserving and improving ecologies in which we

 19 operate and devote considerable resources to

 20 environmental quality efforts.

 21 MRT fully supports the EPS's proposes

 22 RCRA Subtitle D option to manage CCPs. This
 252

 1 option increases the existing physical

 2 requirements and management guidelines of CCPs on

 3 a federal level almost identical to RCRA Subtitle

 4 C option, but allows CCPs to remain clearly

 5 classified as a nonhazardous material.

 6 Should the EPA choose to reclassify CCPs

 7 under RCRA Subtitle C, the encapsulated beneficial

 8 uses supported by the EPA could be severely

 9 limited or potentially eliminated due to

 10 end-consumer returns.

 11 I would like to thank EPA panel for

 12 allowing my company to address some of our

 13 concerns.

 14 (Applause)

 15 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. May I have

 16 Numbers 80, 82, 83, 109, and 125. Are you Number

 17 80? Please come forward.

 18 MR. BRUCKER: (coughs) Excuse me. My

 19 name's Gerry Brucker, and I've worked in the coal

 20 reclamation industry now for the past 9 years.

 21 I've worked with heavy equipment now for the past

 22 28 years.
 253

 1 I've been involved in numerous

 2 beneficial reuse projects in -- in -- over three

 3 states, and have seen firsthand the positive

 4 impact to both the industry and the communities in

 5 which the projects were completed. In each case,

 6 both the local communities and the businesses are

 7 able to expand and provide jobs for local

 8 citizens, as well expanding their infrastructure.

 9 I've al -- I've also seen in the pa --

 10 in the past few months the reduction in the number

 11 of these types of projects, not only due to the

 12 economic slowdown, but also because of the

 13 negative publicity of the coal ash controversy. I

 14 strongly disagree with the need to label coal ash

 15 as a hazard -- hazardous material, and believe

 16 that the negative stigma attached to the coal ash

 17 by this label is -- will completely halt the

 18 beneficial reuse programs that have been

 19 established for the past between 20-years plus.

 20 I find the concept that the labeling of

 21 this material is hazardous in order to

 22 artificially increase the disposal costs of the
 254

 1 coal ash in order to promote its reuse as being

 2 totally without merit or basis. Those of us in

 3 the ash recycling community understand that the

 4 vast majority of coal ash reuse is in the

 5 construction area, and that the construction

 6 market will totally turn away from ash reuse due

 7 to the stigma attached with laz -- labeling it as

 8 hazardous.

 9 I strongly ask you to leave it as it is,

 10 Subtitle D.

 11 (Applause)

 12 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 82,

 13 please?

 14 MR. WALLS: For the record, my name is

 15 Jeremy Walls.

 16 Good afternoon. I would like to thank

 17 you for the time today to con -- convey my

 18 position on this proposed subtitle change for coal

 19 fly ash.

 20 I have worked for the Headwaters

 21 Resources for 11 years, and I wanted to use the

 22 time allotted to me to discuss the topic of
 255

 1 discontinued use and the inev -- inevitable stigma

 2 which is going to be placed on the beneficial use

 3 of fly ash if Subtitle C is adopted.

 4 From the beginning of time, we have been

 5 harvesting the earth's resources for its energy

 6 and beneficial use. We have taken resources from

 7 the earth to create products and processes to --

 8 to benefit man in some way, form, or fashion, for

 9 instance, the use of wood and stone for use for

 10 fire and heat, also for making weapons to obtain

 11 food. So just look how far we have come since

 12 then.

 13 Over thousands of years, man has

 14 continually been discovering new and innovative

 15 ways to use the natural resources and improve the

 16 processes by which they are used. We are blessed

 17 to have these resources for our continued use.

 18 Today we are still using materials that

 19 keep us evolving into a people of great

 20 achievement and innovation. The use of coal for

 21 power generation has been strictly regulated for

 22 years, and continues to improve.
 256

 1 Yes, there are alternatives; however,

 2 they are costly and years from being able to

 3 replace coals from -- coal's role from power

 4 generation. So the continued use of coal power,

 5 without the ability of beneficial use of fly ash,

 6 lacks logic. In my opinion, designating coal

 7 combustion byproducts as a hazardous waste would

 8 inhibit power- generation innovation and, in turn,

 9 set us back for years to come.

 10 I'll take this opportunity to remind you

 11 of a long-term implication of the designation

 12 change. This is a step back -- this is a step

 13 back for the continued use of our natural

 14 resources in a responsible manner. The disposable

 15 -- disposal of a beneficial re-useable material

 16 that is going to wear the label "hazardous," such

 17 as a rapist, a thief, or a murderer, once

 18 convicted, you will always be just that and no

 19 longer a use to society but a burden.

 20 (Applause)

 21 MS. DEVLIN: Number 83, please?

 22 MR. DOLES: Good afternoon. My name is
 257

 1 Jim Doles, and I've worked for Headwaters for 12

 2 years in engineering and research and development.

 3 Previously, fly ash has been reviewed by

 4 the EPA and found nonhazardous. Scientists are --

 5 scientific research supports this outcome. The

 6 recent failure of the ash impoundment in Kingston,

 7 Tennessee has -- which has brought the spotlight

 8 on ash, was related to a civil-engineering

 9 failure, not a failure of the product being

 10 contained.

 11 Regulating the use of CCPs as hazardous

 12 will give it -- have a neg -- negative impact on

 13 beneficial use, therefore creating need for more

 14 land fills. And people don't like land fills,

 15 either.

 16 Wind and solar power are clean, but with

 17 the fraction of power that they supply and the

 18 many years it will take to build their

 19 infrastructure, EPA should not phase out coal so

 20 quickly. The dependence on coal can and won't --

 21 can't and won't go away soon. These regulations

 22 will raise power bills and just be transferred to
 258

 1 the general public.

 2 Beneficial use of ash has been around

 3 for years with the environmentally-friendly state

 4 of California requiring the highest Portland

 5 cement replacements with fly ash. The impact even

 6 by the media on oil spills and ash pond problems

 7 are negative. Positive things don't get news

 8 attention.

 9 Let's try to utilize several hundred

 10 years of coal reserves to keep jobs in America. I

 11 ask the EPA to continue regulating CCPs as

 12 Subtitle D, encouraging its continued beneficial

 13 use in building materials and other

 14 environmentally- friendly products. Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MS. DEVLIN: Okay. We're running a bit

 17 ahead of schedule, so I'd like to try to fit in

 18 some people who registered today. Numbers 261,

 19 262, 263, and 264, are you in the audience? Thank

 20 you. Thank you. You're Number 261?

 21 MR. MOREHEAD: Yes, ma'am.

 22 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.
 259

 1 MR. MOREHEAD: Good afternoon. My name

 2 is Tupper Morehead, and I am a Franciscan serving

 3 in the Episcopal diocese of East Tennessee. And I

 4 live in Norris, Tennessee.

 5 I'm also a recently retired physician.

 6 I served as a state public health officer for six

 7 current and former coal mining counties in east

 8 Tennessee: Anderson, Campbell, Claiborne, Morgan,

 9 Scott, and Union Counties. I am knowledgeable

 10 about the toxic and hazardous adverse effects of

 11 coal ash.

 12 I refer you to the website of Physicians

 13 for social Responsibility, www.psr.org, of which I

 14 am a member. I am also a senior fellow and member

 15 of the American College of Obstetricians and

 16 Gynecologists; thus, I am vocationally and

 17 professionally very interested in the metabolic

 18 and teratological effects of the elemental and

 19 chemical components of coal waste upon pregnant

 20 women, the developing fetus, and young children.

 21 It is clear to me that EPA should adopt

 22 Subtitle C as a first step in stringently
 260

 1 regulating the coal industry for the well-being

 2 and health of American people. It is the -- the

 3 role of the EPA to protect the environment. Its

 4 mission is not to create jobs or prevent job loss.

 5 Its role is not to protect corporations,

 6 lobbyists, the powerful, the affluent, or

 7 investors.

 8 The EPA was created for one single

 9 purpose: Protect the environment. Protect the

 10 sacramentality of creation and all of its

 11 creatures. I urge you to adopt Subtitle C. Thank

 12 you.

 13 (Applause)

 14 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 262?

 15 MS. MCWHERTER: My name is Lisa

 16 McWherter, and I'm a resident of Asheville, North

 17 Carolina, and a -- a member of Sierra Club, and

 18 also a physical therapist practicing in Asheville,

 19 North Carolina.

 20 And again, I have concerns about the

 21 health -- and as far as economics goes, when you

 22 look at the economics of being able to recycle
 261

 1 these coal ash products as opposed to the

 2 economics of all the healthcare issues that we, as

 3 taxpayers, are going to be paying that burden from

 4 all these healthcare issues, as far as just

 5 economics, it just doesn't make sense to not

 6 regulate these things that are known as toxins, to

 7 regulate them as toxic substances. So I -- again,

 8 I would urge you to adopt Subtitle C.

 9 Another issue is that in our Progress

 10 Energy steam power plant in Arden, North Carolina,

 11 there's been some groundwater pollution and

 12 there's been some -- the -- the -- the coal ash

 13 ponds spill directly into the French Broad River

 14 there, and there have been high levels of arsenic

 15 in the fish. 35% of the fish in -- in one study

 16 were found at arsenic levels higher than what is

 17 considered safe for human consumption.

 18 And I have great concern about that.

 19 And I know that these coal ash ponds are all over

 20 the country, and I'm concerned about regulating

 21 them.

 22 I'm also concerned with the, quote,
 262

 1 "beneficial uses" of the coal ash in solid

 2 materials as far as the safety of that. I would

 3 not want to eat out of dishes that had glaze on

 4 them with lead, which leaches out. And I have

 5 great concern about leaching from these concrete

 6 and other solid materials that are used -- that

 7 are taken from the coal ash.

 8 And concrete is not made in -- made as a

 9 permanent substance. It does break down, it

 10 crumbles, and it makes dust.

 11 So I think there, again, we should look

 12 at that as a toxic waste, and definitely consider

 13 where we're using it and how we dispose of it.

 14 Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 263,

 17 please?

 18 MS. PIRAINO: Hi. My name is Laura

 19 Piraino. Thank you for hosting this meeting and

 20 listening to our regional community.

 21 I am deeply concerned about the impact

 22 of coal ash in western North Carolina. North
 263

 1 Carolina has 12 high-hazard coal ash dumps, more

 2 than any other state. These include Progress

 3 Energy's Asheville plant 1964 and 1982 ponds in

 4 Arden, which are about 10 miles from my house in

 5 Asheville. In -- in October 2009, Appalachian

 6 Voices study revealed that all of these

 7 high-hazard dumps in our state are contaminating

 8 groundwater with toxic pollutants.

 9 Last year, high levels of arsenic were

 10 discovered in water and sediment samples collected

 11 downstream from the Asheville plant on the French

 12 Broad River. I do not feel that the state

 13 agencies or the coal companies are going to

 14 protect me, my two children, or my neighbors from

 15 this unacceptable health risk.

 16 Like many Asheville residents and

 17 visitors, I have a lifestyle that centers around

 18 outdoor recreation. The larger French Broad River

 19 watershed, trout and small mouth bass fishing are

 20 very popular, as are kayaking, rafting, tubing,

 21 cycling and camping. Many local recreation

 22 companies feature river-based activities,
 264

 1 including float trips leaving directly from the

 2 Biltmore estate.

 3 Contamination not only threatens our

 4 water supply, but also threatens our unique

 5 culture and outdoor recreation tourist industry.

 6 The visitors attracted to our area include many

 7 scientists due to the incredible biodiversity

 8 found in western North Carolina, which supports so

 9 much flora and fauna, it hasn't even been fully

 10 catalogued yet.

 11 A large-scale spill, more likely without

 12 federal regulation, would be disastrous to this

 13 ecosystem of international importance to the

 14 scientific community. Contained air, soil, and

 15 water negatively affect our strong local foods

 16 movement, threatening the progress we have made in

 17 local food security. Our restaurants in Asheville

 18 are nationally renowned for featuring

 19 farm-to-table dishes, including the local cow --

 20 trout caught in that river and raised in this

 21 watershed.

 22 Much of the strength of our housing
 265

 1 market relies on marketing our pristine mountain

 2 air, water, and land; yet our state allows coal

 3 ash to be used as construction fill, requiring no

 4 groundwater monitoring, no regular inspections, no

 5 permits, and no liners. Continued discovery of

 6 toxic contamination will have a profoundly

 7 negative effect on our property values already

 8 threatened by the current recession.

 9 We need enforceable federal protections

 10 for this dangerous toxic material. A strong

 11 federal rule can ensure 100% compliance, prevent

 12 these health problems, avoid costly water

 13 cleanups, and prevent massive disasters like the

 14 Tennessee spill.

 15 I support the EPA's plan to regulate

 16 coal ash as special waste under Subtitle C. Thank

 17 you very much for your time.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. May I have

 20 Numbers 88, 91, 94, 95, and 98. Number 88? Thank

 21 you.

 22 MS. PRESTON: Good afternoon. My name
 266

 1 is Katie Preston, and I am the operations director

 2 and south Georgia director for Georgia Interfaith

 3 Power & Light.

 4 Our mission is to engage communities of

 5 faith in stewardship of God's creation as a direct

 6 reflection of our faithfulness through worship,

 7 education, and the sustainable generation and

 8 efficient use of energy.

 9 I am here to ask the EPA to support

 10 Subtitle C and to regulate coal ash as a hazardous

 11 waste. As a citizen of Georgia, I am appalled to

 12 know that none of Georgia Power's 11 power plants

 13 with coal ash surface impoundments are properly

 14 regulated. Without regulation like that found in

 15 Subtitle C, these impoundments are leaching deadly

 16 chemicals into our environment. Chemicals like

 17 mercury and arsenic, which can cause death, should

 18 not be allowed to stream unregulated into our

 19 environment.

 20 As stewards of creation, we are called

 21 to stand up and speak out against such atrocities.

 22 God created this world for us as a gift and as a
 267

 1 life force to support us. And instead of

 2 respecting that gift and feeling a sense of awe

 3 for all that is within the world, we are

 4 destroying it with our need to consume.

 5 Georgia Power, a subsidiary of the

 6 Southern Company, lives to consume our natural

 7 resource of coal, and produces large amounts of

 8 unregula -- unregulated coal ash in the state of

 9 Georgia. They say that we do not need regulation,

 10 and that we cannot afford the regulation because

 11 they will pass the costs on us, the consumers.

 12 But what we cannot afford is the unregulation of

 13 coal ash and the destruction of our environment.

 14 Southern Company has had serious

 15 problems with its unregulated coal ash

 16 impoundments in the past. And in 2002, before

 17 anyone heard about the TVA Kingston spill, a

 18 sinkhole opened up in impound -- impoundment at

 19 Georgia Power's Plant Bowen in Bartow County,

 20 George, eventually covering 4 acres and reaching

 21 30 feet in depth. No one heard about it. The

 22 structure's failure released 2.25 million gallons
 268

 1 of water and a coal ash mix into a tributary that

 2 fed into the Etowah River, which in turn provides

 3 drinking water downstream.

 4 Contamination of the environment and

 5 water supplies with toxic levels of arsenic, lead,

 6 and chemicals is a pervasive reality at America's

 7 coal ash disposal sites because states do not

 8 regulate it. The case for a national regulation

 9 setting commonsense safeguards for states to meet,

 10 such as liners, monitoring, and cleanup standards,

 11 could not be more persuasive. It is time for the

 12 EPA to join us in our call to be stewards of

 13 creation, and to stand with us to regulate coal

 14 ash.

 15 I urge the EPA to adopt Subtitle C and

 16 to put an end to the destruction of God's gift of

 17 creation. Thank you.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 91,

 20 please?

 21 MS. MCCLURE: My name is Matt McClure,

 22 and I'm a professional engineer in JEA's
 269

 1 environmental permitting and assessment's

 2 department. JEA is a municipally-owned nonprofit

 3 utility providing water, sewer, and electric

 4 services -- services for a three-county region in

 5 northeast Florida.

 6 From the regulatory options on the table

 7 at this point, JEA urges EPA to pursue the

 8 Subtitle D prime approach. JEA believes that CCRs

 9 do not rise to the level of hazardous wastes, and

 10 that regulating them as such would provide

 11 marginal environmental benefit at a great cost.

 12 As a utility in Florida, a Subtitle C

 13 regulatory framework would not be practical.

 14 Florida has a statutory prohibition against the

 15 permitting of hazardous waste landfills, as well

 16 as a prohibition against considering byproducts

 17 for reuse if they are otherwise hazardous waste.

 18 JEA would be forced to send its CCRs to

 19 other states for disposal as hazardous, and EPA

 20 has already highlighted the lack of capacity

 21 associated with such an outcome in its preamble.

 22 State statutory changes needed to accommodate this
 270

 1 hazardous-waste listing would be expected to have

 2 a low probability of -- of success for obvious

 3 reasons.

 4 The cost to JEA of managing its CCRs as

 5 hazardous waste would be prohibitive, and would

 6 come at a time when we have already been forced to

 7 enact a series of rate hikes due to adverse

 8 business conditions. A subtitle C approach,

 9 combined with a multitude of other environmental

 10 initiatives simultaneously being pursued by EPA at

 11 this time, would place JEA and its owners, the

 12 citizens of northeast Florida, in a bind.

 13 Regarding the Subtitle D or D prime

 14 approaches, JEA would point that the one size fits

 15 all national standards being proposed do not allow

 16 enough flexibility for utilities to operate

 17 efficiently; and using corporate websites as an

 18 enforcement tool would seem to be a path toward

 19 unproductive litigation. More flexibility is

 20 needed in the framework of the regulations for

 21 equally protective but different liner systems,

 22 including dual-synthetic membrane systems;
 271

 1 alternative groundwater monitoring programs in

 2 zones of discharges; and processing practices,

 3 such as slurry systems, where the CCRs react and

 4 solidify within a short time of conveyance.

 5 Additionally, the Subtitle D approach

 6 should not penalize states like Florida that are

 7 already regulating the beneficial use of CCRs, as

 8 well as the disposal CCRs at new facilities under

 9 a qua -- quasi Subtitle D approach already.

 10 JEA urges EPA to more carefully consider

 11 a statutory path toward a regulatory framework

 12 tailored specifically to CCRs to follow neither

 13 Subtitles C nor D. JEA believes that rather than

 14 in using a somewhat overreaching approach, there

 15 would be congressional support to provide EPA the

 16 authority to approve state programs that meet EPA

 17 parameters, allowing states like Florida to manage

 18 the issue in a way that best serves its citizens

 19 while retaining enforcement authority for those

 20 states that do not.

 21 And I thank you for allowing me to

 22 address the audience.
 272

 1 (Applause)

 2 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 94,

 3 please?

 4 MS. HAMPTON: Good afternoon. My name

 5 is Shanda Hampton of Full Circle Solutions. We

 6 specialize in the safe and effective recycling of

 7 coal combustion products.

 8 Working in our company's accounting

 9 department has allowed me to see how EPA's

 10 regularity proposal has already affected our

 11 company. The negative stigma coming from the

 12 EPA's regulatory has hit us hard. The loss of the

 13 projects considered to be hazardous has forced us

 14 into more expensive ways to handle the CCPs with

 15 no additional revenue.

 16 To remain a viable company, we have had

 17 to lay off a number of employees, reduce pay and

 18 benefits for the remaining employees, and find

 19 many other cost reductions. Negative stigma is

 20 real, and is already hurting real people.

 21 Personally, I am greatly concerned about

 22 EPA's proposal. With this failing economy, my
 273

 1 husband has not been able to find full-time work

 2 in over two years. We have three young children to

 3 support on my reduced salary alone.

 4 A decision by EPA to unnecessarily

 5 regulate CCPs as a hazardous waste may very well

 6 cost me my job. Putting more families on welfare

 7 is not what this country needs.

 8 Therefore, I urge EPA to make the right

 9 decision: Regular CCPs under Subtitle D. Thank

 10 you.

 11 (Applause)

 12 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 95,

 13 please?

 14 MS. SALTER: Good afternoon. My name is

 15 Tabitha Salter with Full Circle Solutions.

 16 In my position as human resource

 17 manager, I have the opportunity to work with every

 18 employee in our company both professionally and

 19 personally. Even though environmental regulations

 20 are not an area of my strength for me, I have seen

 21 the effects of the EPA's proposal and what it has

 22 already done to our employees. Jobs have been
 274

 1 affected.

 2 Soon after the EPA began considering

 3 regulating coal combustion products as a hazardous

 4 waste, our company lost two key projects. These

 5 were structural fill projects that would have been

 6 very beneficial to the communities in which they

 7 were to be built. However, due to the stigma

 8 associated with what might be called as "hazardous

 9 material," they were turned down and we were

 10 forced to seek other ways to manage our client's

 11 coal combustion product.

 12 As a result, we lost over 15% of our

 13 workforce. This included employees at every level

 14 of company. We lost managers, truck drivers,

 15 equipment operators, and laborers. These were

 16 good employees who had been with our company for

 17 many years. They did not deserve to lose their

 18 jobs as a result of this neg -- negative stigma.

 19 As a human resource manager, I also work

 20 with our employees' health issues. I understand

 21 that many people who are not familiar with coal

 22 combustion products have commented on their
 275

 1 concerns over the effects exposure to coal

 2 combustion products may have on their health or

 3 the health of their families.

 4 Our employees have direct exposure with

 5 coal combustion products every day. We monitor

 6 their exposure and review any potential impacts

 7 that ex -- exposure may cause on their health. In

 8 over 20 years of operations, we have never had any

 9 employee's health negative -- negatively affected

 10 by the exposure of coal combustion products.

 11 Negative stigma is the real issue here,

 12 not health effects. Therefore, we urge the

 13 Environmental Protection Agency to make the right

 14 deci -- decision and re -- regulate coal

 15 combustion products, including beneficial

 16 structural fills, under Subtitle D. Thank you.

 17 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MS. DEVLIN: Okay. Okay. May I have

 20 Numbers 85, 87, 98, 100, and 211? I know I'm

 21 jumping around a bit, but -- but we're doing it as

 22 the order -- as -- as I know people have signed
 276

 1 in. So don't worry if I seem to skip over you. I

 2 -- I will get back to all of the numbers. So

 3 Number 85, please?

 4 MR. GILBERT: Good afternoon. My name

 5 is Steven Gilbert, and I'm here to speak in

 6 support of designating coal ash as a special waste

 7 and regulated by Subtitle C.

 8 I have a Ph.D. in toxicology, and I'm a

 9 diplomat in the American Board of Toxicology, and

 10 found and director of the Institute for

 11 Neurotoxicology and Neurological Disorders, and an

 12 affiliate professor at the University of

 13 Washington Development of Environmental and

 14 Occupational Health Sciences.

 15 I am here to -- today representing the

 16 Physicians for Social Responsibility. I am

 17 president of the board of the Washington

 18 Physicians for Social Responsibility and on the

 19 national board of the Washington Physicians for

 20 Social Responsibility, and a grandfather deeply

 21 concerned about future generations.

 22 The coal ash spill that inundated
 277

 1 Tennessee occurred at a time that caused the least

 2 acute effects on human health, as in no was

 3 killed. Everyone was very lucky, except the

 4 economical damage was enormous and there was

 5 serious consequences for many families.

 6 While I commend the emergency response

 7 and subsequent monitoring by the EPA and the

 8 report by the Tennessee Department of Health, the

 9 broader is one of protecting human and

 10 environmental health from coal ash waste. Coal

 11 combustion waste with its many contaminants is the

 12 second largest industrial waste treatment in the

 13 United States.

 14 We have an ethical responsibility to

 15 protect the most vulnerable among us from exposure

 16 to arsenic, mercury, and other coal ash

 17 contaminants in the air we breathe, the water we

 18 drink, and the dirt we play in. This is

 19 particularly important for children who are not

 20 little adults as they eat -- eat more, drink more,

 21 breathe more than adults are more vulnerable to

 22 the health effects from asthma to cancer to
 278

 1 neurological disorders. All clean-up standards

 2 and disposal management standards must be set to

 3 protect children.

 4 I find that the current RFDs and MRLs

 5 for arsenic and mercury to be inadequate. In

 6 addition, our procedures for assessing health

 7 impacts of multiple chemical exposure are grossly

 8 inadequate.

 9 The standard is to do a risk assessment

 10 one chemical at a time, but no one is exposed to

 11 one chemical at a time. To addresses these

 12 inadequacies and ensure healthy and sustainable --

 13 sorry, environment, a precautionary approach is

 14 recommended that we classify coal ash as a special

 15 waste.

 16 The EP -- the FDA takes a very

 17 precautionary approach to introducing new drugs

 18 into the marketplace by requiring companies to

 19 demonstrate efficacy and safety of their products.

 20 Producers of coal ash waste should assume the

 21 burden of -- demonstrating safety. The public

 22 should not have to assume the burden of proving
 279

 1 harm.

 2 Aldo Leopold said, "A thing is right

 3 when it tends to preserve the integrity,

 4 stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It

 5 is wrong when it attends otherwise." Not

 6 adequately regulating coal ash and accepting the

 7 true cost of ener -- energy production is wrong.

 8 We have an ethical responsibility to

 9 ensure that our children can reach and maintain

 10 their full potential free from exposure to

 11 contaminants in coal ash. We have the knowledge,

 12 and we must take action and stop externalizing the

 13 health costs and environmental costs onto children

 14 and future generations.

 15 I refer you to the PSR Coal Ash Report

 16 for details on health and environmental concerns,

 17 and a list of detailed recommendations. Thank you

 18 very much.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 87,

 21 please? Is Number 87 here? Okay. 98?

 22 MR. HAYEK: Good afternoon. My name is
 280

 1 Rick Hayek. I'm with American Electric Power, and

 2 I'm the manager of our ash and gypsum marketing.

 3 I'm also a veteran of the Armed

 4 Services, and I want to thank you for this

 5 opportunity to have the freedom to speak. It's

 6 good to hear both pros and cons. In a lot of

 7 countries, we wouldn't get this opportunity. So I

 8 thank you for this opportunity.

 9 Your responsibility is tremendous

 10 because of this freedom that we have to share

 11 opposing opinions, and I want to offer my

 12 perspective on the continued beneficial use of

 13 ash.

 14 I've been in the -- in the marketing end

 15 of ash and in the coal business for 32 years with

 16 American Electric Power. We recently had a

 17 downsizing, where we lost 20% of our workforce.

 18 And I've -- over the 32 years, I've met many

 19 people that have worked their entire life with

 20 ash; people that have walked in it, bathed in it,

 21 ate it, drank it, because it was part of their

 22 job.
 281

 1 Going around to these retirement parties

 2 over the past year, never once has anybody said,

 3 "Well, so and so died as a result of his exposure

 4 to ash or residuals." Maybe they died from

 5 smoking or something of that nature, but nothing

 6 has ever been brought to my attention that, "Hey,

 7 we need to re-look at this because it's a result

 8 of them and their work environment."

 9 As a marketer, it's my responsibility

 10 that before this ash goes out into the public,

 11 what we do is we give samples of all of these

 12 ashes, whether it's fly ash, bottom ash, boiler

 13 slag, gypsum, whatever -- and we sell millions and

 14 millions of tons of this stuff. We give a sample

 15 to them to take to a lab, and they test it. We

 16 have our own lab, and we test it.

 17 And never once have we had to come out

 18 and say, "We can't market this to you because a

 19 TCLP test, a heavy metal exceeds a -- a safe

 20 rating." We've always been within the right

 21 parameters. Many times our -- in our ash the

 22 heavy metals don't even become traceable. There's
 282

 1 no trace of them.

 2 Therefore, we recommend a Subtitle D

 3 prime approach and the continued beneficial use.

 4 And if there's problems with engineering, which is

 5 the real cause of what happened at TVA was an

 6 engineering fault with the dam, address that. But

 7 my experience and my social responsibility as a

 8 marketer for ash, I can sleep very good at night

 9 knowing that we're putting a safe product out into

 10 the market. Thank you very much.

 11 (Applause)

 12 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 100,

 13 please? 211?

 14 MR. MILLIKEN: My name is Eric Milliken.

 15 I've been in the recycle business with the coal

 16 combustion products for 14 years. I manager

 17 operations and conduct sales for Synthetic

 18 Materials, the largest processor and marketer of

 19 flue gas gypsum in the United States.

 20 We currently process and market for

 21 beneficial reuse over 4 million tons of FTD. My

 22 efforts have been more with the synthetic gypsum
 283

 1 created by a process in the scrubber system from

 2 the coal-burning fossil plants.

 3 Synthetic gypsum is used in many

 4 applications, 90% which is wallboard, 6% cement,

 5 and the rest in your ag and fillers. It provides

 6 a low-cost byproduct generated from coal fossil

 7 plants to all of these industries.

 8 The EPA has proposed regulation Subtitle

 9 C that could pro -- prove unworkable and even

 10 environmentally counterproductive. Although the

 11 EP -- the EPA proposal specifically encourages and

 12 does not restrict beneficial uses of CCRs, the EPA

 13 proposed regulatory options could restrict or even

 14 prevent altogether its various beneficial uses.

 15 This has already been demonstrated with

 16 customers, as well as suppliers, refusing to move

 17 forward with commitments due to the real

 18 liabilities that come with an unnecessary

 19 hazardous waste classification of coal combustion

 20 products. The EPA regulatory agenda will subject

 21 -- would subject manufacturers to an avalanche of

 22 new permitting requirements, re -- new permitting
 284

 1 requirements and stifle job creations. More

 2 regulations will only hinu -- hinder a

 3 manufacturer's ability to continue to lead a

 4 nation out of the steepest recession since the

 5 30s.

 6 By the label of hazardous waste, we are

 7 increasing the needs of mining and increase the

 8 need of even more impoundments, wets or dry.

 9 My family and I, we live within two

 10 miles of one of the largest coal-fired plants in

 11 the U.S., and that's TVA Cumberland. A wallboard

 12 plant is right next door to the -- to the TVA

 13 utility. What happens if the gypsum the wallboard

 14 received from the utility as hazardous waste?

 15 What happens to all of the newly cost-efficient

 16 wallboard plants that are not on the seaboard?

 17 The low-cost byproduct material available to them

 18 is no wall avail -- no longer available. If this

 19 -- it is not feasible for these plants to receive

 20 natural gypsum.

 21 A hazardous waste classification affects

 22 more than just my job or the utilities. It has an
 285

 1 enormous trickle-down effect on the economy.

 2 Utility costs go up, manufacturing costs go up,

 3 sending back cost -- sending the costs back to the

 4 consumer, increased unemployment. They have less

 5 resources. Consumers build smaller houses. The

 6 economy does not grow as robust as you would

 7 expect.

 8 The appropriate response to this

 9 proposed Subtitle D classification, the reason for

 10 these discussions entirely, was a re -- failed

 11 retention pond, not a hazardous waste material.

 12 Thank you for your time.

 13 (Applause)

 14 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Sir, I'm sorry.

 15 I forgot your number. Please come forward. 89?

 16 Please come.

 17 MR. HOLLAND: Hi. My name is Richmond

 18 Holland. I represent the Tennessee Paper Council

 19 and the American Forest and Products Association.

 20 This is a trade association of the forest products

 21 pulp and paper industry.

 22 We supped the EPA's decision, first, not
 286

 1 to include coal combustion byproducts from the

 2 manufacturing sector in this rule making. We

 3 believe our management of coal ash differs

 4 somewhat from that of the electric utilities.

 5 Pulp and paper mills use a variety of

 6 fuels in addition to coal. As a result, we -- our

 7 mills frequently co-manage coal ash and with ash

 8 generated from other fuels, including biomass. We

 9 believe that our ash-management units are

 10 significantly different from that of the utility

 11 sector.

 12 We do support the decision reached by

 13 the Clinton administration in 2000 that coal ash

 14 should be regulated under Subtitle D, the

 15 nonhazardous waste provision of RCRA. We believe

 16 that much of the additional information developed

 17 by EPA subsequent to that determination does not

 18 support the need for applying hazardous waste

 19 regulations to coal byproducts.

 20 Appropriate management standards and

 21 engineering design would have avoided the

 22 catastrophic failure of the TVA surface
 287

 1 impoundment, which can be achieved through

 2 nonhazardous waste requirement.

 3 If EPA promulgates hazardous waste

 4 regulations for coal combustion byproducts, those

 5 materials may be disposed rather than reused.

 6 This is not only inconsistent with years of U.S.

 7 Policy to support recycling and reuse, but is a

 8 waste of resources, and is inconsistent with the

 9 goals of the Resource Conservation Recovery Act.

 10 Our members are very concerned that EPA

 11 did not evaluate the economic impact of the

 12 proposed rule in the manufacturing sector,

 13 particularly if the Subtitle C rules are

 14 promulgated. We believe that our byproducts could

 15 have to be managed as -- as -- as hazardous waste

 16 materials even though it's not required under

 17 regulation, but we would have to do that, anyway.

 18 And that's -- we also believe that EPA

 19 should consider the additional costs of

 20 electricity that will result from the promulgation

 21 of regulations designating coal combustion product

 22 -- byproducts as -- as hazardous. And for those
 288

 1 of yous -- us that use a lot of electricity,

 2 that's not a trivial issue.

 3 And our last point is if EPA were to

 4 regulate coal combustion byproducts as hazardous

 5 waste, it is unlikely that our members would be

 6 unable to manage their hazardous waste any other

 7 way even if the rules do not apply to them. This

 8 additional cost was certainly considered by EPA,

 9 but it would be yet another cost to us.

 10 We work in a global marketplace where no

 11 other country considers coal combustion byproducts

 12 to be hazardous materials. The EPA has the

 13 opportunity to keep jobs in the U.S. by keeping

 14 manufacturing costs competitive and not

 15 promulgating hazardous waste regulations for coal

 16 combustion byproducts. Thank you.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Sir, you're

 19 Number 87? Please come forward.

 20 MR. RINGE: My name is Axel Ringe. I am

 21 the water quality chair for the Tennessee chapter

 22 of the Sierra Club. I appreciate your holding
 289

 1 this hearing in Tennessee, even though it was,

 2 perhaps, precipitated by public pressure.

 3 I would like to point out, first, that

 4 coal ash is a national problem. There are coal

 5 ash landfills scattered all over this country.

 6 This is not just a Tennessee problem, even though

 7 what bro -- led up to this situation was a coal

 8 ash failure in Kingston.

 9 Coal ash contains toxins. Your own

 10 research confirms that. It includes arsenic,

 11 cadmium, chromium, lead, selenium, thallium, some

 12 of which are bioaccumulators. These toxins have

 13 been linked to cancers, to organ diseases,

 14 respiratory illnesses, neurological damage,

 15 reproductive and development products -- problems.

 16 EPA science has indicated that there --

 17 occur at very high levels of some of these heavy

 18 metals, and that they leach from coal ash. These

 19 leachates contaminate rivers, lakes, and streams

 20 that fish and other wildlife rely upon, including

 21 people who utilize these wildlife for comsumption.

 22 We would urge the EPA to regulate coal
 290

 1 ash as a special waste under Subtitle C of RCRA.

 2 It requires federally-enforceable stan --

 3 safeguards.

 4 If you leave it up to the states, it's

 5 not going to happen. I testify that here, in

 6 Tennessee, there is no control over what the power

 7 plants do with their coal ash. Power plants

 8 generally tend to be located on lakes or rivers,

 9 and they situate their coal ash dump sites

 10 adjacent to them. So that any leachates coming

 11 off of that go directly into the water bodies and

 12 into the ground water.

 13 And I would just close by saying that

 14 the failure to regulate coal ash dumped in mines

 15 is a dangerous omission from the proposed

 16 regulations, and we believe that EPA should not

 17 exempt this practice from regulation. Thank you.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. I'd like to do

 20 a quick check. Is there anyone in the audience

 21 with a Number 100 or below whom I haven't called?

 22 Okay. Is there anyone who registered today who
 291

 1 has a number between 250 and 264 who has not

 2 spoken?

 3 Okay. Good. Okay. Then may I have Numbers 101, 102,

 4 103, 104, and 105? 101, please.

 5 MR. CHANCE: Hello, and thank you for

 6 the opportunity to speak today. My name is Eric

 7 Chance, and I'm the water quality associate for

 8 Appalachian Voices and the Watauga Riverkeeper, a

 9 North Carolina-based environmental nonprofit. Our

 10 work includes studying the effects of coal

 11 combustion waste on the environment.

 12 In North Carolina, a review of voluntary

 13 groundwater monitoring data revealed that every

 14 coal ash pond for which data was available is

 15 leaching heavy metals and other pollutants into

 16 groundwater. Equally as alarming is the

 17 prevalence of this contamination; is the fact that

 18 at all of these sites, the levels of contamination

 19 were very high.

 20 The monitoring showed 681 exceedances of

 21 North Carolina state groundwater standards,

 22 including arsenic levels up to 8.8 times the state
 292

 1 standard, boron levels up to 16.6 times the state

 2 standard, chromium levels up to twice the state

 3 standard, iron levels up to 380 times the state

 4 standard, lead levels up to three times the state

 5 standard, and manganese levels up to 200 times the

 6 state standard.

 7 This contamination not only has the

 8 potential to damage nearby waterways, but it also

 9 can contaminate drinking water of nearby

 10 residents. The extent and degree of this off-site

 11 contamination is largely unknown because it has

 12 not been studied, and there is no legal

 13 requirement for the companies responsible for it

 14 to do so under the current regulatory framework.

 15 And at only 1 of the 13 ash ponds

 16 reviewed in this study did the North Carolina

 17 Department of Environmental and Natural Resources

 18 require any sort of clean up.

 19 In Tennessee, Appalachian Voices has

 20 also partnered in research in the wake of the

 21 Kingston coal ash spill. Research has been

 22 ongoing since the spill, and has shown levels of
 293

 1 arsenic, barium, cadmium, lead, selenium in the

 2 Emory River in exceedance of drinking water and

 3 aquatic life criteria.

 4 Although water quality has returned to a

 5 more normal states, ash and ash laden river

 6 sediments with high levels of arsenic have washed

 7 far downstream from the spill site. Also,

 8 selenium levels in fish downstream from the site

 9 continue to rise, and have exceeded threshold

 10 levels for reproduction and growth.

 11 Our research clearly shows that coal

 12 combustion waste has significant impacts on

 13 groundwater, surface water, and aquatic organisms.

 14 The current regulatory framework has not

 15 adequately addressed the tox -- toxicity of coal

 16 ash, and has allowed this contamination to go on

 17 for too long. We believe that it should be

 18 regulated under Subtitle C. Thank you.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 102,

 21 please? 102? 103?

 22 MS. LARSON: My name is Jean Larson.
 294

 1 I'm a resident of Lester, North Carolina. That's

 2 in western North Carolina.

 3 I saw an interesting quote the other

 4 day. "We don't see things as they are. We see

 5 things as we are."

 6 I am a retired RN. During my career, I

 7 worked as a neurological nurse, a public health

 8 nurse, and a school nurse. I'm focusing this

 9 testimony about the handling coal ash on the heavy

 10 metals that it contains.

 11 Heavy metals are elements. They don't

 12 break down. The more that you have of them, the

 13 more they accumulate. They are toxic.

 14 According to the Center for Disease

 15 Control, the National Institute for Health, health

 16 effects from individual heavy metals include

 17 cancer, neurological, respiratory, and renal

 18 problems. They may take years to develop from the

 19 time of exposure.

 20 Heavy metals cause health problems from

 21 years of mild exposure or from one large exposure.

 22 We do not understand the effects of multiple --
 295

 1 exposure to multiple different heavy metals.

 2 Children are more susceptible to

 3 exposure to any type of a toxin. And one of the

 4 issues with children and heavy metals is learning

 5 disabilities. As a school nurse, I can tell you,

 6 there are a lot of issues with children these days

 7 that I just don't remember when I was young in the

 8 1950s.

 9 Wet coal ash can seep into the

 10 groundwater. Dry coal ash can be fine

 11 particulates that we will breathe in.

 12 I see coal ash as a public health hazard

 13 that should be carefully monitored, and I support

 14 is the Option Subtitle C. Thank you for having

 15 these hearings.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 105?

 18 105? 104? 104.

 19 MR. CASEY: Good afternoon. I would

 20 first like to thank the EPA for giving me the

 21 opportunity to speak on such an important issue.

 22 My name is Mark Casey, and I am employed
 296

 1 by the SEFA Group, a coal combustion product com

 2 -- product marketing company based near Columbia,

 3 South Carolina. I reside in northeast Tennessee

 4 just outside of Knoxville in the small town of

 5 Norris.

 6 My marketing territory stretches from

 7 Chattanooga, Tennessee, into southeast Kentucky,

 8 and into southwest Virginia. In recent years, due

 9 to the current recession, the construction

 10 industry, and specifically the concrete industry,

 11 has fallen off a bit. But in 2006, I personally

 12 helped recycle nearly 150,000 tons of fly ash

 13 generated by one of the Tennessee Valley

 14 Authority's coal-fired steam plants for the use as

 15 a cement substitute in concrete.

 16 My concern is that if E -- if EPA

 17 decides to designated fly ash under Subtitle C for

 18 the Resource Conservation Recovery Act, it will

 19 hinder, if not eliminate, the use of fly ash in

 20 concrete altogether. My customers, the ready mix

 21 concrete producers, have indicated to me that if

 22 fly ash is listed under the haz -- under the
 297

 1 hazardous waste Subtitle C of -- of the RCRA, they

 2 will be forced to eliminate it from their concrete

 3 mix designs altogether for fear of litigation.

 4 I understand that the EPA has clearly

 5 stated that it does not want to disrupt current

 6 recycling efforts, and that they believe that

 7 designating coal combustion products as a special

 8 waste under the Subtitle C category will actually

 9 increase CT -- CCPs use. If the EPA's assumption

 10 is correct, then my company and I may benefit

 11 financially. So then why am I here today arguing

 12 against my own personal financial interests?

 13 Obviously, I disagree with EPA's assumption.

 14 Under EPA's special waste proposal, two

 15 trucks leave a power plant loaded with coal

 16 combustion products. One truck will turn left

 17 destined for disposal as hazardous waste, while,

 18 at the same time, the second truck with the same

 19 exact material on board will turn right and travel

 20 to my customer's plant with absolutely no

 21 restrictions outside those imposed by normal DOT.

 22 It is very difficult business. It is difficult
 298

 1 for business owners and their attorneys to

 2 reconcile this concept.

 3 There's no doubt that this issue has bum

 4 -- become political, and politics is about

 5 compromise. Just recently the Congressional

 6 Reacher -- Research Service has suggested that

 7 Congress add a new Subtitle K to federal waste law

 8 to give EPA enforcement authority over coal waste

 9 rules without declaring the waste hazardous and to

 10 regulate beneficial reuse of coal ash. That would

 11 be a compromise.

 12 This new proposal, as well as Subtitle

 13 D, would take away the stigma associated with the

 14 hazardous label, and help preserve one of

 15 America's greatest all-time recycling success --

 16 success stories. Thank you for your time.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. 105, 106, 107,

 19 109, and 127? Okay. What's your -- what's your

 20 number? You are Number 106 -- 107? 107, come up.

 21 MR. TURNER: Good afternoon. My name's

 22 Kenneth Turner. I'm the general manager of Bell
 299

 1 Concrete Industries located in Middlesboro,

 2 Kentucky. We're a manufacturer of packaged

 3 cement-based mixes, as well as precast concrete

 4 products. We've use Class F fly ash in our

 5 products for close to 30 years.

 6 There's a few points that I think that a

 7 lot of people agree on, and that is that we need

 8 to do whatever's possible to prevent a

 9 reoccurrence of failure such as the one the

 10 Kingston fossil plant. Containment ponds are --

 11 are -- were a bad idea, are a bad idea, and should

 12 be phased out. Either Subtitle C or D seems to

 13 adequately address that.

 14 Another point that most people agree on

 15 is that the use of fly ash as a replacement for

 16 cement and concrete is a win-win. The ash doesn't

 17 go to landfill. Additional cement doesn't have to

 18 be produced. The quality of the concrete's

 19 improved, and the cost of the concrete to the end

 20 user is reduced.

 21 A Subtitle D classification will

 22 preserve all that. Phasing out of containment
 300

 1 ponds will not affect the beneficial uses of the

 2 fly ash.

 3 If fly ash is moved to subtitle C

 4 classification, we expect specifying -- the

 5 specifying community will outright ban the use of

 6 fly ash in their products. We would also expect

 7 to see insurance companies exclude coverage for

 8 any claims that may arise from the use of fly ash

 9 in concrete.

 10 Power companies may even refuse to sell

 11 fly ash if it's classified as hazardous. They

 12 would be faced with disposing of a larger volume

 13 of material that's now considered hazardous. The

 14 cost of power would go up. Without fly ash,

 15 quality concrete would not be as good but would

 16 cost more. Cement costs two and a half times that

 17 of fly ash. In short, we all would pay more.

 18 Ten years ago, the EPA determined fly

 19 ash to be nonhazardous. If not for the failure at

 20 Kingston, we wouldn't be here today. That is --

 21 that is a containment issue, not a classification

 22 issue.
 301

 1 We ask that you confirm the findings

 2 from 2000 and leave fly ash under Subtitle D.

 3 Thank you.

 4 (Applause)

 5 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 109?

 6 MR. VAN HAM: Thank you for giving me

 7 the opportunity to talk. My name is John Van Ham,

 8 and I'm a chemist with Headwaters Incorporated.

 9 I've been characterizing fly ash as nonhazardous

 10 for over three years now. As a scientist, I use

 11 logic, reason, and factual evidence when analyzing

 12 problems, whether it is at work or in other

 13 aspects of my day-to-day life.

 14 There are a number of incontrovertible

 15 facts that must be discussed if coal ash is

 16 regulated Subtitle C. Designating coal ash as

 17 special waste that can also be use beneficially

 18 will destroy any kind of potential use of the ash

 19 due to stigma, which is already taking place. No

 20 one will want to utilize materials that are

 21 somehow considered both hazardous and

 22 nonhazardous. It's too confusing and obfuscates
 302

 1 the fact that coal ash does, indeed, have a myriad

 2 of beneficial uses.

 3 Subtitle C regulation will affect

 4 everyone who turns on a light switch. There will

 5 be large increases to power bills due to the cost

 6 of building numerous hazardous landfills and the

 7 loss of selling ash for beneficial use or

 8 sustainable construction. Considering the dire

 9 economic situation most Americans are in these

 10 days, rebranding coal ash as hazardous will put a

 11 huge dent in all of our pocketbooks, guarantee it.

 12 Additionally, no other country in the world

 13 considers it a hazardous material.

 14 What happened here at Kingston was a

 15 tragedy, to be sure. However, this tragedy was

 16 not due to the potential toxicity of fly ash. It

 17 was an engineering accident and should be

 18 addressed as such.

 19 Coal is what we have to produce

 20 electricity. It is still by far the most

 21 dependable and widely- used source for power.

 22 Each and every one of us uses it every day. And
 303

 1 we have in fly ash the beneficial byproduct. We

 2 all take advantage of this benefit daily in the

 3 roads that we travel on, in the drywall and

 4 foundations of our homes, and our everyday lives.

 5 I urge you not to react, as most

 6 everyone seems to do in this day and age, with

 7 shrill and quick emotion. We have been using fly

 8 ash in con -- in concrete and construction

 9 reliably since the 1930s in the United States.

 10 Current science proves that the material

 11 is nonhazardous by your own standards. The eight

 12 heavy metals that we test for may be present in

 13 ash, but not in the levels that would classify

 14 them as hazardous.

 15 In fact, these same chemicals are found

 16 in native soil and rock. It's the same exact

 17 metals that are already found in the soil all

 18 around us.

 19 So in closing, I urge you to maintain

 20 the past technical findings, that coal ash's

 21 regulation under Subtitle C is unnecessary and

 22 unwarranted. Thanks.
 304

 1 (Applause)

 2 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. We're running

 3 quite a bit ahead of schedule. I want to make a

 4 -- an -- an announcement. Do I have anyone with a

 5 number of 110 or below who hasn't spoken? Okay.

 6 I understand Numbers 112, 114, and 189 are here.

 7 If you would come forward? You are number --

 8 okay, 112, 114, 189? 112?

 9 MR. QUARLES: Hello. My name is Mark

 10 Quarles. I'm an environmental consultant with

 11 about 25 years experience. I live new Nashville,

 12 Tennessee, and I'm a licenced, professional

 13 geologist in Tennessee.

 14 I've personally investigated

 15 approximately 40 coal combustion waste sites in 12

 16 states within the last ten months. Based on my

 17 research of actual data and state files, I support

 18 the Subtitle C determination proposed by EPA.

 19 My work was recently published in three

 20 damage case reports coauthored by the

 21 Environmental Integrity Project, Sierra Club,

 22 Earth Justice, and other technical members and
 305

 1 their staff. Subtitle C designation is needed

 2 because the approach proposed by Subtitle D has

 3 not worked.

 4 My research of those 40 sites where

 5 states had discretion on design and operational

 6 standards and groundwater and surface water

 7 indicates a failed policy. Of the approximately

 8 40 sites that I've investigated, all but one had

 9 obvious evidence of groundwater contamination.

 10 Clear evidence of contamination exists at these

 11 sites regardless of the sites being lined or wet

 12 -- lined or not, wet or dry, and even composite

 13 lined dry landfills.

 14 The industry argues that no harm exists,

 15 and that contaminants are not mobile. My

 16 experience is there is no scientific basis for

 17 that conclusion. They base the argument on their

 18 belief that no migration occurs.

 19 Well, they're able to make that argument

 20 because states rarely, if ever, require that

 21 off-site monitoring even be performed even when

 22 severe contamination exists at the property line.
 306

 1 Industry solution is to simply buy the property

 2 instead of initiating corrective actions.

 3 The industry also argues that

 4 contaminants are not toxic. My experience is that

 5 cannot be further from the truth. Coal combustion

 6 waste in recycled byproducts contain heavy metals,

 7 some of which are known carcinogens.

 8 They make the argument of no toxicity

 9 because states oftentimes do not require

 10 monitoring programs to even include metals. In

 11 fact, monitoring programs in the 1980s and '90s

 12 were even more stringent than they are today,

 13 including metals that don't exist in many sites

 14 today. Instead, they require secondary standards

 15 with no human toxicity standards to make the claim

 16 of no toxicity.

 17 The industry argues that the waste is

 18 inert. It couldn't be further from the truth.

 19 They base it on laboratory methods that the EPA's

 20 recognized since 2003 does not work.

 21 In summary, I support the Subtitle C

 22 designation because the risks of waste require
 307

 1 that designation. State-delegated programs have

 2 been unsuccessful in regulating coal waste and

 3 beneficial reuse. We need uniform standards that

 4 states must meet or exceed.

 5 We need closer existing pilements and

 6 landfills that are not compose lined within two

 7 years. All disposal facilities should be required

 8 to initiate groundwater and surface water

 9 monitoring, and also be subjected to rigorous

 10 design and corrective actions. Thank you for your

 11 time.

 12 (Applause)

 13 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 114,

 14 please?

 15 MR. FAIR: Hello. My name is Henry

 16 Fair, and I'm an artist that looks at toxic sites.

 17 I've looked at a number of coal ash

 18 sites in the United States and around the world,

 19 and I'd like to point out, first, that the reason

 20 the United States is addressing this issue is

 21 precisely the -- because we've had a catastrophic

 22 event.
 308

 1 There are over 100 cases of groundwater

 2 contamination, and those are only ones we know.

 3 There are over 44, according to the EPA report,

 4 cases of high-hazard impoundments. And again,

 5 those are just the ones that we know. There's coal

 6 ash stored in many places we don't know.

 7 I would argue that it is the role of the

 8 federal government to protect its citizens and not

 9 to protect the fiduciary interests of

 10 manufacturers in an industry. I think that

 11 Subtitle C is probably not enough.

 12 I think that all sites should be

 13 monitored for groundwater contamination. I think

 14 that all sites should have a liner. And I think

 15 that all sites should be capped so that windblown

 16 dust is not a problem. Thank you four your time.

 17 And I'd like to thank the EPA for -- for

 18 considering this issue.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Again, we're --

 21 we're running a -- a bit ahead of schedule. Does

 22 anyone in the audience -- has anyone registered
 309

 1 and have -- has a number to speak and -- and I

 2 have not called them?

 3 Okay. Number 125 and 189, please come forward.

 4 Great. Number 125, thank you.

 5 MR. MARSHALL: Thank you. My name --

 6 name is David Marshall of Headwaters Resources.

 7 You're here today to discuss our

 8 concerns about the potential changes of reg -- of

 9 regulating coal ash disposal. But we are here

 10 today because a U.S. government-owned utility

 11 failed to heed repeated warnings of pending

 12 failure at a utility at the -- in this state, a

 13 failure of engineering and management practices,

 14 not a men -- a failure of materials.

 15 Fortunately, this failure did not harm

 16 any individuals directly, but lives were affected.

 17 And now the EPA, in typical knee-jerk reaction, is

 18 looking to impose standards that have been obvious

 19 and in place for all other operators of power

 20 plants across the U.S.

 21 As an individual who understands science

 22 and scientific process, the most disturbing charge
 310

 1 against the Bush Administration was its

 2 willingness to allow science to be suppressed in

 3 favor of politically-favorable actions. The Obama

 4 Administration was elected partially in response

 5 to this type of behavior.

 6 It's a science based on the standards

 7 set by the EPA. It's clear that coal ash poses no

 8 greater harm to human health than any other

 9 building materials we use today.

 10 There are those in the audience today

 11 who will tell us that great harm is being done,

 12 but they have no hard specific evidence to

 13 document that. These charges have been thoroughly

 14 investigated and demi -- dismissed multiple times.

 15 And now we see the EPA, as an act of

 16 expedience, is putting on this show to allow

 17 people to express their opinions. The EPA has

 18 continued to dismiss the science that demonstrates

 19 clearly the effective use of coal ash is not

 20 harmful and is beneficial when 42% of the coal ash

 21 generated is used in this country.

 22 The administration is doing exactly what
 311

 1 the Bush generation was --was doing, ignoring the

 2 facts and the science, and allowing a political

 3 popular sideshow to occur, and ignoring those of

 4 who have dedicated our lives to making use of

 5 byproducts because we know and believe in what we

 6 are doing.

 7 It's popular to attack coal through this

 8 backdoor method of product regulation, to attempt

 9 to eliminate coal, but that is not sufficient for

 10 those in the -- in the market. They want to use

 11 coal to stop use -- now -- coal use to stop now

 12 and completely.

 13 They are convinced that sufficient power

 14 can be generated from solar and wind and other

 15 reuseable. Those people have no stake in the

 16 game, did not understand the needs of meeting the

 17 long-term and continual supply of energy that is

 18 every day in our -- expected every day by our

 19 citizens.

 20 The people who do have a stake in the

 21 game, the generators and distributors of

 22 electricity that power everything around us do
 312

 1 understand that they are expected to be there when

 2 the light switch is turned on, when the iPod is

 3 plugged in. And while advances have made -- been

 4 made, energies from renewable is not there nor can

 5 be it -- can it be soon.

 6 Major utilities are not ignoring these

 7 potential sources of energy generation. They all

 8 have programs developing the grids, the

 9 technologies, and the processes to integrate all

 10 means of power generation to meet the needs in the

 11 U.S. and beyond its borders.

 12 Coal ash is not toxic. The science does

 13 not support that term. That adjective has begun

 14 to be attached to just about everything that the

 15 press reports on. Yet the term "toxic" has

 16 specific meanings. It has definitions outlined by

 17 the EPA guidelines.

 18 To regulate the EPA under a label -- by

 19 the EPA under a label of "special waste" is to

 20 deny what the EPA has supported and promoted for

 21 over 30 years, and would require the EPA to deny

 22 their own truth, their own science, and enable
 313

 1 political expedience. Thank you.

 2 MR. GENTILE: Thank you.

 3 (Applause)

 4 MS. DEVLIN: Number 189, please?

 5 MR. LINEBERGER: Hi. My name is Ed

 6 Lineberger. I'm not a scientist or work for any

 7 company. I'm a local resident in Kingston. I

 8 grew up right here in Knoxville.

 9 I moved down to Kingston, unfortunately,

 10 about six months before the spill happened. I

 11 live within a mile and a half of the spill. The

 12 river's right straight across the street from my

 13 home.

 14 After the spill occurred, I got on the

 15 Internet and just did any own research on coal ash

 16 and its ingredients, and I noticed about the heavy

 17 metals. I took it upon myself to have my family

 18 tested, and our blood work came back from the Mayo

 19 Clinic.

 20 Me, my wife, and both my children came

 21 back positive three times the normal levels for

 22 several metals. And as a prudent person, that
 314

 1 would cause anyone grave concern, especially with

 2 our children.

 3 When I think about the waste, you know,

 4 and -- and what is in the -- the ingredients and

 5 the heavy metals that are in this ash, I think

 6 back about the early '80s. From 1980 to 82, I

 7 worked right here at the University of Tennessee.

 8 I was a pipefitter. We were exposed to asbestos.

 9 And then about 1981, they came along,

 10 the EPA said, "Well, now you've got to wear a suit

 11 and a respirator and gloves, and you've got to wet

 12 this pipe insulation down. You've got to double

 13 bag it and store it so we can come and pick it

 14 up." Well, you know, that happened along about

 15 1981. Well, now, how many people are dying from

 16 asbestos-related cancers?

 17 Sometimes it takes many, many, many

 18 years to determine what these chemicals will do to

 19 the human body. And what I don't want to see

 20 happen is 30 or 40 years from now our children and

 21 grandchildren are in the same type of meeting and

 22 the EPA is saying, "Well, sorry, we -- maybe we
 315

 1 should have regulated that a little bit better

 2 back then. We're sorry we've made you sick."

 3 And you know, if we're not sure -- I've

 4 not -- I've been to all the local meeting down in

 5 the Kingston area. I have not had any true

 6 evidence that it's not hazardous. You know, when

 7 I see "arsenic" and some of these other ken -- you

 8 know, products that are in the ash, I know that's

 9 something we shouldn't have in our bodies, and we

 10 should not be exposed to it.

 11 So you know, the EPA needs to come up.

 12 I mean, last summer, you know, I was so confused

 13 at these meetings. On day -- one meeting they're

 14 saying it's okay; don't worry about it. Then the

 15 next meeting, they shut the river down and said,

 16 "No human contact. No swimming. No tubing," you

 17 know, and I'm a recreational person.

 18 So you know, to me, that tells me

 19 they're just really not sure what this will do to

 20 us, just like they didn't know what would happen,

 21 you know, with asbestos and some of these other

 22 chemicals from years past.
 316

 1 So I think it's a good idea that they do

 2 regulate this, and find a proper way to store it.

 3 Thank you very much.

 4 (Applause)

 5 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Okay. Numbers

 6 141, 152, and 212 -- 212. Okay. In -- and in

 7 addition, we have some walks-ins, Numbers 265,

 8 266, 267. So -- okay. Since those numbers are

 9 out of order, I'll -- I'll repeat them again:

 10 141, 152, 212, and 265, 266, and 267. Okay.

 11 Number 141? All right. 152? 152.

 12 MR. SCHULTZ: My name's Scott Schultz.

 13 I'm the director of byproduct services for JEA, a

 14 municipally-owned electric water and sewer utility

 15 owned by the City of Jacksonville, Florida.

 16 JEA is one of a handful of utilities

 17 that processes and manages its CCRs internally.

 18 JEA considers the recycling of its CCRs the right

 19 thing to do and an integral part of our

 20 environmental- sustain -- sustainability

 21 initiatives.

 22 I'm going to be spece -- speaking to
 317

 1 only recycling and not the storage of CCRs.

 2 Recycling of CCRs is one of the few forms of

 3 recycling that requires no government subsidy and

 4 provides renewable and cost benefits that both the

 5 producer and the consumer. In addition to the

 6 environmental benefits of recycling our CCRs, it

 7 saves our rate payers over $10 million per year.

 8 The consideration by the EPA of

 9 classifying CCRs as hazardous waste has already

 10 negatively affect (sic) our recycling efforts.

 11 The classification of CCRs under Subtitle C,

 12 regardless of exemptions, will cease our CCR

 13 recycling program.

 14 We do need to remember that almost all

 15 environmental issues surrounding CCRs are not

 16 associated with the recycling but storage,

 17 including the tragedy at Kingston. Thank you.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 212?

 20 212?

 21 MR. FOSTER: Rick Foster. I'm just

 22 going to be one more person in support of
 318

 1 regulation of coal combustion residues and wastes.

 2 They are hazardous wastes. They contain

 3 poisonous elements and compounds in dangerous

 4 concentration. The world is "poison," like the

 5 band.

 6 Call a spade a spade. For example,

 7 arsenic and mercury are two of the poisonous

 8 elements in coal. Compounds can be destroyed.

 9 Elements are permanent.

 10 Poisonous ones have to be kept out of

 11 circulation. The more they are immobilized, the

 12 better.

 13 Everyone should know that by now. But

 14 while people keep avoiding even the word "poison,"

 15 the facts may need repeating.

 16 We know that the current storage methods

 17 have problems. This hearing exists because people

 18 had to stop pretending otherwise. TVA is still

 19 working on their token clean up of the Kingston

 20 collapse.

 21 You can tell it's token because they

 22 used hydraulic dredging for water-soluble poisons.
 319

 1 Folks, hydraulic dredging literally sucks. It

 2 rinses everything it picks up. Anything that

 3 could be carried away in the water got there,

 4 spreading it around making more waste. Anyone who

 5 knows how hydraulic dredging works knew what would

 6 happen, but no one stopped it.

 7 TVA could have re-channeled the Emory

 8 around the spill, lowered the reservoir, and

 9 bulldozed instead, but doing a good job of clean

 10 up was not their priority.

 11 I support capture and isolation of coal

 12 residues. Capture is better than putting poisons

 13 into the air and water, but it doesn't actually

 14 get rid of them. Any dump exposed to the weather

 15 will have a leaching problem. It -- dealing that

 16 -- with that problem means fixing the residues

 17 with pavement and spreading them all over the

 18 state and calling it a beneficial use, that should

 19 at least slow down their entry into the water.

 20 Remember, these things came out of the

 21 ground in the first place. Leaching will happen

 22 anyway. It'll just take longer, depending on how
 320

 1 well the highway is maintained.

 2 "Beneficial use" is a dodgy term. It

 3 more or less means hiding the waste in plain

 4 sight. It may still be better than dumping coal

 5 residues back into the mines the coal came from.

 6 Just because the poisons stayed put while they

 7 were a part of the coal doesn't mean they'll stay

 8 put afterward, not even in the same place.

 9 Think of coal as a sort of natural

 10 carbon filter. You need solid carbon to hold on

 11 to the poisons. Burn the carbon, and you've not

 12 only burned your only economical place to keep it,

 13 but you've lost the stability of all those other

 14 elements, too.

 15 Lately, even carbon dioxide has been

 16 declared a problem under the EPA's jurisdiction.

 17 Despite hype, large-scale capture and

 18 immobilization of it can't be practical. There is

 19 just too much of it to put it all back underground

 20 and make it stay.

 21 I support implementation of both

 22 Subtitle C and D of RCRA. Subtitle C would be
 321

 1 more thorough, while D gets moving faster.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 265?

 4 266?

 5 MR. GRACE: Thank you for holding this

 6 public hearing. I'm David Grace, a student at

 7 Warren Wilson College, and I'm speaking in favor

 8 of the Subtitle C option.

 9 I want to speak for those in my

 10 generation who no longer have the hope to speak,

 11 for those who know the damage and are

 12 disillusioned with the process established to

 13 protect it.

 14 Like many, I've lived unaware of the

 15 danger of coal and its byproducts. I was raised

 16 with the assurance that as long as I did my best,

 17 everything would fall into place for me. And I

 18 would be healthy, happy, and able to share this

 19 with others. However, now I am aware of the

 20 toxicity of coal -- coal ash, and realize that

 21 health is not guaranteed or even possible for

 22 everyone.
 322

 1 For some, doing their best will not make

 2 any difference. For those people whose water is

 3 polluted by coal ash, their best will not prevent

 4 cancer. For those species in the water of this

 5 state, when toxic coal slurry rushed into the

 6 rivers, their best did not save their lives. For

 7 the generation that I was born into, we inherit

 8 the -- the grief that comes from these deaths.

 9 We are born with a hope that can't

 10 support itself. For every poisoned fish and

 11 everyone that eats poisoned fish or drink poisoned

 12 water, there's a proportionate death in our

 13 capacity to experience the wonder of living.

 14 Every generation of every species should be able

 15 to express their potential to -- to the fullest

 16 within the shared limits of their respective

 17 ecosystem, not the imposed ineq -- inequitable

 18 limits associated with coal ash.

 19 Without adequate regulation of coal ash,

 20 there's an unacceptable, unnecessary loss of -- of

 21 life in human and nonhuman communities in terms of

 22 physical death and the emotional death of the
 323

 1 living.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 267,

 4 please?

 5 MS. MONROE: My name is Hannah Monroe.

 6 Thank you for having this public hearing.

 7 I'm an environmental education major at

 8 Warren Wilson College in Asheville, North

 9 Carolina. I am a Quaker, and I've believed in

 10 protecting people, animals, and the environment

 11 from exploitation. I strongly support Subtitle C.

 12 I am speaking for the animals who suffer

 13 from pollution of hazardous waste. What give us

 14 the right to destroy the habitat of animals who

 15 play a crucial role in our ecosystem and who have

 16 done nothing to cause this destruction? All

 17 beings have inherent value and deserve to live in

 18 clean environments that are not contaminated by

 19 hazardous waste such as coal ash. That's why I

 20 support the regulation of coal ash under Subtitle

 21 C. Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 324

 1 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Numbers 128 and

 2 172? And is there anyone else in the audience

 3 with a number whom I have not called? 105, please

 4 come forward.

 5 MS. MCCULLOUGH: 171.

 6 MS. DEVLIN: Please come forward.

 7 That's great. Okay. So I think the first number

 8 is 105. Thank you.

 9 MR. HOHNE: My name is Alex Hohne, and I

 10 am here to speaking for Synthetic Materials.

 11 I was raised on a farm in middle

 12 Tennessee. I've backpacked and hiked many of the

 13 hills and mountains in the state of Tennessee, as

 14 well as many ne -- neighboring states. I've

 15 kayaked, rapid and canoed many of the river --

 16 streams, rivers, and lakes.

 17 From this background, I've come to

 18 appreciate all of the opportunities and resources

 19 that are available for our use. I've also

 20 realized that we have to live in harmony with the

 21 earth or we'll -- or risk extinction.

 22 I have for many years been involved in a
 325

 1 number of innovative recycling processes involving

 2 everything from municipal solid waste to metal

 3 recycling to industrial minerals. Sensible

 4 recycling of reuse certain -- or re-purposing of

 5 materials reduces the strain in our natural

 6 resources.

 7 For instance, recycling metals

 8 eliminates the necessity to mine additional

 9 material -- raw materials and process those to

 10 create new metals. Recycling municipal solid

 11 waste results in lower emissions in the

 12 manufacture of new products, and reduces both

 13 emissions and impact on the depletion of the

 14 environment while reducing a necessity for

 15 landfills.

 16 Upcycling old clothes to make stylish

 17 handbags reduces the impact to landfills and

 18 reduces emissions from manufacturing cloth

 19 materials while providing a useful accessory is

 20 environmentally sound to the public. No matter

 21 how small, every effort to recycle, reuse, or

 22 re-purpose is a worthwhile effort if done in an
 326

 1 appropriate and responsible manner.

 2 One of the most successful recycling

 3 efforts in history has been the recycling and

 4 reuse of coal combustion products. In 2008,

 5 greater than 44% of all coal combustion products

 6 were either recycled or beneficially used. Use of

 7 these products have resulted in the reduction of

 8 environmental impact cement production, production

 9 in mining of gypsum rock for the production of

 10 wallboard, the production of aggregates for a

 11 number of different applications, the reclamation

 12 of land after mining operations have ceased, and

 13 significant reduction of the impacts of landfills

 14 for the storage of these products.

 15 In December 2008, a disaster occurred at

 16 Kingston. To call it anything than a disaster

 17 would be a travesty. The disaster was caused,

 18 however, by the structural failure of an

 19 impoundment that resulted in release of thousands

 20 of tons of coal ash residuals. The clean-up

 21 effort has been huge, long, expensive, and

 22 complicated.
 327

 1 While this incident had very unfortunate

 2 consequences to the immediate area, the failure of

 3 the impoundment structure does not render the

 4 impounded material as hazardous any more than the

 5 July 24th failure of the Lake Delhi dam in Iowa

 6 renders water as a hazardous substance. While

 7 these products may contain various constituents

 8 listed as toxic substances, so does the dirt

 9 that's native to the area.

 10 Increased responsible reuse and

 11 recycling of these products will not only reduce

 12 the need for mining and other manufacturing

 13 operations necessary to produce the products they

 14 replace, but it will reduce a likelihood of a

 15 similar occurrence since less material will be

 16 stored in landfills or impoundments. Thank you.

 17 MR. GENTILE: Thank you.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MS. DEVLIN: Number 128?

 20 MR. DENHAM: My name is John Denham, and

 21 I work within the coal ash industry.

 22 I came here today to voice my opinion
 328

 1 and express my concerns against the prop --

 2 proposed regulation to classify coal ash as a

 3 hazardous material and regulate ash disposal under

 4 Subtitle C.

 5 Based on my experience, coal ash does

 6 not qualify as a hazardous waste by chemical

 7 composition make its classification as a hazardous

 8 material unwarranted. Since almost all

 9 electricity generation of the United States is

 10 from coal-burning power facilities, it is

 11 essential that we are able to recycle the ash

 12 byproducts.

 13 A hazardous material label for ash would

 14 be detrimental to all current and future recycling

 15 efforts. Without recycling, we would impact our

 16 environment in negative way, substantially drive

 17 up cost to both businesses and individuals alike.

 18 These dramatic cost increases would hit everyone

 19 across the country, not just in coal areas or

 20 coal-producing states.

 21 Since protective features, the landfill

 22 designs will be the same under both C and D. The
 329

 1 additional harm of Subtitle C approach does not

 2 seem logical, and recycling will be damaged and

 3 all the benefits of ash recycling lost.

 4 I believe that there are some

 5 misunderstandings in this debate over the future

 6 of fly ash regulations. Over the past several

 7 months, I've been reading and hearing that the

 8 main concern the parties against fly ash are the

 9 -- they want this industry to more regulated and

 10 monitored. The fly ash in -- dispose industry can

 11 implement and comply with the stricter guidelines

 12 in monitoring and regulations. Most landfills

 13 built in the last 20 years have these design and

 14 operation features already.

 15 Subtitle D program implemented under

 16 state control will provide the necessary

 17 protection. However, these regulation

 18 classifications should be based on factual

 19 information and solid scientific data.

 20 The EPA assumes that the hazardous

 21 regulation approach will drive up recycling. I do

 22 not agree with this assumption based on my
 330

 1 firsthand experience within the industry.

 2 In conclusion, I hope and respectfully

 3 request the EPA will make the decision not to

 4 classify coal ash as a hazardous material under

 5 Subtitle C, and continue to allow recycling of

 6 this multi-use and beneficial byproduct and

 7 disposal regulation under Subtitle D. Thank you.

 8 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 171?

 9 MS. MCCULLOUGH: I am Leah McCullough, a

 10 minister in the United Church of Christ, who holds

 11 a -- who serves as campus minister in Asheville,

 12 North Carolina. And I want to thank the EPA for

 13 holding these hearings.

 14 I strongly support the regulation as

 15 proposed under Subtitle C of the Resource

 16 Conservation and Recovery Act. My support for

 17 Subtitle C is ground in moral and ethical values

 18 instilled in me by my faith tradition: To love my

 19 neighbor, to do justice, and to care for creation.

 20 Jesus taught that the greatest

 21 Commandments are to love God with all one's heart,

 22 soul, mind, and strength, and to love one's
 331

 1 neighbor as oneself. In Romans, we are reminded:

 2 Love does no wrong to one's neighbor.

 3 In Micah, we are called to love

 4 kindness, do justice, and walk humbly with God.

 5 And in Genesis, the first divine words spoken by

 6 God to human beings were about their relationship

 7 to the earth and not to God. God says, "Have

 8 dominion over the fish of the sea, and birds of

 9 the air, and every living thing that moves upon

 10 the earth." The Hebrew verb for "have dominion"

 11 must be understood as care giving and nurturing

 12 and not exploitation.

 13 Created in God's image, humans are to

 14 care for the earth as God cares for all of

 15 creation. Are we loving our neighbors and doing

 16 no harm when we allow coal companies to

 17 contaminate our drinking water with toxic metals

 18 and do nothing to stop it? Are we doing justice

 19 when we allow an industry's business practices to

 20 cause higher risk of cancer, respiratory diseases,

 21 and neurological damage in people living in

 22 proximity to their plants?
 332

 1 Is it a more egregious injustice that --

 2 that the communities -- that these communities are

 3 often minority, low-income, or indigenous

 4 populations? Are we caring for and nurturing the

 5 earth when we allow hazardous metals to leach into

 6 soil and groundwater, polluting our streams and

 7 rivers, and poisoning fish and wildlife?

 8 Am I loving my neighbor, doing justice,

 9 and caring for creation if I remain silent about

 10 these issues? I don't think so, and that is why

 11 I'm here today. I am willing to do my part, and I

 12 expect you to do your part.

 13 You, the EPA, have conducted the

 14 research and produced the result -- reports that

 15 give solid evidence of the devastating effects of

 16 coal ash on human health and the environment. You

 17 are aware of the crisis, and now you have the

 18 opportunity to do something about these wrongs and

 19 to rectify the problems for future generations. I

 20 pray that, given what you know, you will do what

 21 is morally right for humanity and the environment.

 22 The words offered to the people of
 333

 1 Israel, when they are renewing their covenant with

 2 God, have echoed in my head and heart as I have

 3 been preparing for this hearing. In closing, I

 4 offer them to you. "I call heaven and earth to

 5 witness against you today that I have set before

 6 you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose

 7 life so that you and your descendants may live."

 8 Thank you.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 172,

 11 please?

 12 DR. BUTTON: My name is Dr. Gregory

 13 Button.

 14 As an environmental health researcher

 15 who has conducted over three decades of academic

 16 research on environmental hazards and disasters,

 17 including the 2008 TVA ash spill in Kingston,

 18 Tennessee fo -- fossil fuel plant, I strongly

 19 support the EPA's decision to regulate coal ash

 20 and urge the EPA to adopt Subtitle C option.

 21 There can be no dispute that coal ash is

 22 hazardous and contains numerous toxic chemicals,
 334

 1 including mercury and lead, as well as other

 2 harmful substances. Only junk science would

 3 propose otherwise. While the coal industry would

 4 have us endorse junk science, robust scientific

 5 evidence strongly suggests that such claims are

 6 erroneous.

 7 Unless the EPA adopts the

 8 above-mentioned option, our nation's citizens and

 9 our environment will continue to remain vulnerable

 10 to the toxicity of coal ash. The TVA ash spill has

 11 dramatically and tragically demonstrated the

 12 failures of relying on a patchwork of state

 13 regulation.

 14 It is imperative that the EPA have

 15 direct oversight over the generation of storage,

 16 transportation, and the disposal of coal ash in

 17 order to safeguard the public and the environment.

 18 Subtitle D would continue to rely on a

 19 state-by-state patchwork of regulations, which

 20 time and time again has proven to be inadequate.

 21 In my 30 years of research conducting

 22 disaster research, which includes the Exxon-
 335

 1 Valdez oil spill, Hurricane Katrina, and most

 2 recently BP oil spill in the Gulf, I would have to

 3 say that the TVA spill was among the most

 4 horrendous disasters that I have investigated.

 5 The tragedy of the ash spill is that it was

 6 totally preventable.

 7 If federal regulatory guidelines, such

 8 as though proposed in Subtitle C, were in place,

 9 it probably would not have occurred; or, if it did

 10 occur, the deleterious damage that it inflicted

 11 would have been severely curtailed.

 12 If the EPA were to adopt Subtitle D as

 13 written by the coal industry, our nation's

 14 communities and our lands will continue to be

 15 vulnerable to the insidious harm of coal ash

 16 waste. Equally disturbing, one of the nation's

 17 most revered regulatory agencies, the EPA, will

 18 have failed to uphold the vital mission assigned

 19 to it by Congress, that of protecting our

 20 citizenry and our environmental heritage from

 21 polluters. Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 336

 1 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. May I have

 2 Numbers 110, 113? And is there anyone else in the

 3 room who has a number whom I have not called?

 4 MR. GENTILE: Okay. No, if -- ma'am, if

 5 you have number, come forward. It's okay. 141,

 6 please take a seat. 122. Okay.

 7 MS. MASTIN: Okay. I'm Mary Mastin. I

 8 am chair of the Upper Cumberland Group of the

 9 Sierra Club, and I am on the board, board

 10 secretary of the Tennessee Environmental Council.

 11 I'm making these comments on behalf of both

 12 organizations.

 13 Ever since the Kingston disaster, I

 14 started paying a whole lot of attention to what

 15 was happening with the coal ash cleanup, what was

 16 happening in the state legislature, and with the

 17 Tennessee Environmental -- Department of

 18 Environment and Conservation on regulation of coal

 19 ash.

 20 One of the main reasons that I got so

 21 concerned, other than the environmental

 22 organizations that I represent, was I've got
 337

 1 grandchildren who fish and swim in the Chickamauga

 2 Lake, just north of Chattanooga and downstream

 3 from Kingston, and I got very concerned about the

 4 water quality in the Tennessee River.

 5 Now, I have been at briefings by EPA,

 6 TVA, and TDEC both in Kingston and at the

 7 legislature. I have been -- attended almost every

 8 hearing in the legislature last year -- or for the

 9 past two years dealing with the disaster or with

 10 the regulation of coal ash. I have attended

 11 private meetings with TDEC officials, and with the

 12 leading aquatic biologists on the effects of

 13 selenium on fish.

 14 I had studied and made comments on the

 15 NPDS permits dealing with water quality but -- for

 16 both Kingston and Johnsonville. And I have become

 17 aware of the situation with the other fossil

 18 plants -- TVAs six other plants in Tennessee.

 19 I am strongly convinced that Tennessee

 20 law and agencies are not capable of protecting

 21 Tennessee citizens from the dangers of coal ash

 22 and the -- and -- dangers of coal ash in our
 338

 1 waters. And I strongly ask EPA to adopt the

 2 regulations under Subse -- Subsection C to handle

 3 coal ash as a hazardous waste.

 4 What I saw in the legislature was that

 5 TDEC's failure to get the law through removing the

 6 exemption from waste water impoundments from the

 7 -- the Dam Safety Act, I've read the Attorney

 8 General's -- the TVA Inspector General's report,

 9 and TDEC's lessons learned. I drafted a

 10 resolution to the state legislature to require

 11 annual reports from TDEC about TVA's progress on

 12 this. Thank you very much.

 13 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 14 (Applause)

 15 MS. DEVLIN: Number 113, please?

 16 MR. PADDOCK: My name is Brian Paddock.

 17 I'm an attorney. I live in Jackson County in

 18 middle Tennessee, a rural county.

 19 I was asked to be here today by the

 20 Solar Valley Coalition. I have worked with a

 21 number of groups advocating clean energy, and must

 22 say, to start out with, that there's new -- no
 339

 1 such thing as either clean coal or clean nuclear.

 2 In 2009, I became aware of a pollution

 3 from the Trans-ash landsfill (sic) called the

 4 Bevins landfill. And without going into the

 5 history of that landfill, I would like to submit

 6 in aid of this comment a -- a dir -- a

 7 commission's order directed to the operators of

 8 that monofill coal ash landfill.

 9 It lays out the history in which a

 10 permit by rule permit for the first section of a

 11 -- of coal ash dumping in a -- essentially unlined

 12 gravel pit was permitted for the Johnsonville TVA

 13 plant's ash. The edges -- apparently, the

 14 vertical walls were lined, but the bottom was not.

 15 And the installation was simply not done as set up

 16 by the permit. Ultimately, the commissioner's

 17 order I've handed in was given out.

 18 The -- there has since then been a Phase

 19 2. And as TVA admitted in the environmental

 20 assessment for Phase 2, they said, well, a lot of

 21 leachate came out of that, even though we didn't

 22 expect any. Essentially, we expected it to all
 340

 1 leak into the ground, but it started coming out in

 2 a pool. So we've had to collect it up and pump

 3 it, and take it over -- back over to the plant,

 4 where we pit it in ponds that essentially leak

 5 back into the Tennessee River. So that's the

 6 state of -- of that.

 7 And I'm going to give as Web page here

 8 that has the complete environmental assessment --

 9 the complete environmental assessment links for

 10 TVA's analysis of what went wrong with Phase 1,

 11 and what they're going to do in Phase 2.

 12 Originally, Phase 2 was requested again

 13 as a permit by rule. And in fact, after the

 14 public hearing, someone discovered a page of

 15 exemptions that were being requested of the

 16 commissioner to essentially strip away most of the

 17 protections in the standards for containment.

 18 Ultimately, the department found its courage and

 19 said that this was going to have to be a full

 20 Class 2.

 21 I spent earlier this year for three

 22 solid months, along with others, trying to get
 341

 1 modern coal ash containment legislation passed in

 2 Tennessee. We had complete agreement by the time

 3 we'd finished negotiations with the state

 4 department.

 5 What happened was that the afternoon

 6 before the first committee hearing, the Chamber of

 7 Commerce lobbyist made two phone calls, and the

 8 bill never even got a motion the next day. With

 9 that kind of opposition form powerful interests,

 10 the inability of the state agency and the

 11 legislature to protect us is evident.

 12 Thank you. We would ask that you put

 13 coal ash under Subtitle C.

 14 (Applause)

 15 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 122,

 16 please?

 17 MS. STOGSDILL: Hello. My name is

 18 Mickayla Stogsdill, and I'm an eighth grader at

 19 Farragut Middle School here in Knoxville.

 20 I believe that Subtitle C is the better

 21 choice for the well-being of our environment. It

 22 states that coal ash will be considered a
 342

 1 hazardous waste, and will be treated was one;

 2 whereas Subtitle D labels coal ash as mere

 3 household waste.

 4 I asked my dad if we had arsenic in our

 5 trash can usually, and he looked at me like I was

 6 the craziest girl he'd ever seen.

 7 Considering coal ash as household waste

 8 means it would be treated like your everyday

 9 household trash even though it contains arsenic, a

 10 poisonous substance, in addition to radioactive

 11 material and selenium. These waste products raise

 12 the risk of danger to the liver, kidney, and

 13 lungs. They also have the potential to cause

 14 major respiratory problems.

 15 In addition, coal ash is also another

 16 environmental -- in addition, coal ash is also

 17 extremely flammable. If a landfill were to catch

 18 on fire, any coal ash contained therein would

 19 create another environmental problem and podent --

 20 and potential danger to the public.

 21 True, Subtitle D will cost less

 22 initially, but if catastrophe strikes, it would be
 343

 1 the citizens' responsibility to recourse, as well

 2 in -- as funded. The government would not be

 3 required to fix the problem nor pay for the

 4 repair. In these dire economic times, what

 5 average citizen has the funds to bankroll any

 6 legal action in the wake of catastrophic loss?

 7 I'm reminded of the story of the little

 8 Dutch boy. He found a hole in the dike of his

 9 town, which he plugged up with his finger.

 10 However, the problem was never really repaired,

 11 and the town flooded in the end.

 12 Subtitle D seems dangerously similar.

 13 It doesn't really fix the problem long-term. A

 14 well- executed effort now will save time later.

 15 Even though Subtitle C is more expensive

 16 to implement, it would be better to spend more up

 17 front than to spend half that much now only to

 18 have -- have to redo the repair again and again in

 19 the future. Subtitle C will ensure the total

 20 remaking of the environment that was covered by

 21 5.4 million cubic yards of coal ash. After all, a

 22 stitch in time will save nine.
 344

 1 Every year, a company makes a toy that

 2 every kid wants; then another company reproduces a

 3 similar product. It's a little cheaper, has more

 4 health risks, and may be recalled when tested. In

 5 my opinion, Subtitle C is that brand-new toy, and

 6 Subtitle D is like a cheaper version of it.

 7 Subtitle D won't last. Subtitle C will.

 8 Subtitle D will crumble. Subtitle C will not.

 9 Subtitle C will not fail.

 10 I thank you for your time, and I

 11 appreciate you listening to our concerns. Thank

 12 you.

 13 (Applause)

 14 MR. GENTILE: Number 141, please? 141?

 15 MR. HARPOLE: Thank you. My name is

 16 Chad Harpole, and I'm the director of public

 17 affairs for the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce.

 18 On behalf of our -- of the Kentucky

 19 Chamber and our 2700-member companies across

 20 Kentucky, we appreciate the time to come to

 21 Knoxville to express our concern in opposition to

 22 the proposed regulation of the coal combustion
 345

 1 residual rule, Subtitle C hazardous waste, under

 2 the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

 3 The Kentucky Chamber believes regulating

 4 fly ash under Subtitle C option will impose

 5 significant costs on power-plant operations, and

 6 ultimately result in additional utility cost

 7 increases for businesses and consumers. Kentucky

 8 is proud to be the fifth leading producer of

 9 energy in the country, driving significant

 10 manufacturing in our state, including automotive

 11 production and aluminum production.

 12 We enjoy these low-cost utility rates

 13 thanks to the availability and proximity of

 14 Kentucky coal. Without a doubt, Kentucky's coal

 15 industry will be impacted under the Class C plan

 16 due to the potential for utilities to cut back

 17 production at coal-fired electric generation

 18 plants.

 19 If this occurs, we feel classifying coal

 20 ash as Class C waste will significantly threaten

 21 electric reliability to businesses and consumers

 22 in our state, and significantly affect local
 346

 1 economies through the reduction in payroll taxes

 2 and employment numbers. Increased energy costs

 3 and decreased electric reliability will have a

 4 significant, adverse impact on all sectors of the

 5 business community, and could potentially force

 6 Kentucky businesses to relocate out of our state.

 7 We strongly feel, under Subtitle C,

 8 could end the beneficial use of recycling coal

 9 ash into products like cement and drywall.

 10 Regulation under Subtitle C will harm one of best

 11 and oldest recycling industries, and drive up

 12 costs for the construction and home-building

 13 industries, industries that are already struggling

 14 in the current economic climate.

 15 We also are concerned with the amount of

 16 potential litigation that could be created due to

 17 products manufactured or constructed in the past

 18 if coal ash is retroactively ruled as Class C

 19 hazardous waste.

 20 In closing, the Chamber urges USEPA to

 21 develop nonhazardous waste regulations for coal

 22 ash under Subtitle D of RCRA. Such an approach
 347

 1 would allow USEPA to work with states in

 2 implementing regulations that are fully protective

 3 of human health and our environment without

 4 negatively impacting coal ash's beneficial use and

 5 causing an increase in energy prices at a time

 6 when our country can least afford it. Thank you

 7 for your time.

 8 (Applause)

 9 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Your number,

 10 please?

 11 MR. HYFANTIS: 117.

 12 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 13 MR. HYFANTIS: 117, yes, ma'am. Thank

 14 you. My name is George Hyfantis, and I speak here

 15 today as an engineer, an educator, and a private

 16 citizen. First, I'd like to thank EPA for

 17 extending the comment period on your proposed

 18 regulations, and adding Knoxville to your pub --

 19 your list of public meetings.

 20 By way of background, I'm a practicing

 21 engineer, and an adjunct professor at the

 22 University of Tennessee, where I teach civil
 348

 1 engineering. I teach graduate-level courses in

 2 solid and hazardous waste management.

 3 The emphasis of this class now and for

 4 the last 30 years has been teaching engineers how

 5 to characterize waste and to design landfills.

 6 For these last 30 years or so, I've been perplexed

 7 about the decision to allow coal combustion

 8 residuals, CCRs, to be disposed of in ponds along

 9 the side of rivers.

 10 The standard technique for determining

 11 whether or not a waste is hazardous has been and,

 12 to my knowledge, continues to be the toxicity

 13 characteristic's leaching procedure. And I'll use

 14 TCLP. There exists abundant data in the

 15 literature concerning the chemical characteristics

 16 of CCRs, and similarly, there exists abundant data

 17 concerning the concentrations of contaminants in

 18 TCLP extracts.

 19 Analytical results for both the total

 20 CCR concentrations and TCLPs vary significantly,

 21 and are based on the coal source, the combustion

 22 technology, and the pollution-control technology,
 349

 1 among other things.

 2 The point of this limited discussion is

 3 that most of the CCRs are nonhazardous according

 4 to the TCLP, but sometimes they are. Our

 5 regulatory strategy ought to err on the side of

 6 safe disposal. The challenge for EPA is choosing

 7 between your two options, and choosing between

 8 your two options is balancing the need to handle

 9 the CCRs in an environmentally-protective manner

 10 while still allowing the beneficial use of these

 11 wastes to continue without chemically analyzing

 12 every single batch of waste produced.

 13 In my professional opinion, we cannot

 14 continue to allow CCRs to be disposed of in ponds

 15 or piles along rivers. CCRs should be disposed of

 16 in lined landfills with leachate collection

 17 systems using the design standards of Subtitle D.

 18 The siting of these landfills would

 19 similarly follow the siting requirements of

 20 Subtitle D, which means they should not be near

 21 rivers and away from population centers.

 22 The disposal of CCRs must come under
 350

 1 regulatory authority of EPA and the states. In

 2 order to accomplish this, your options suggest

 3 that the regulatory framework of RCRA under

 4 Subtitle C is necessary. This is the regulatory

 5 framework chosen.

 6 I believe that EPA should designate CCRs

 7 as a special waste. A special waste designation

 8 would allow for the continued beneficial use of

 9 CCRs, and will allow for the remaining material be

 10 to -- to be disposed of Subtitle D landfills.

 11 This requirement for a double liner and leachate

 12 collection system would be overkill for CCRs.

 13 Thank you for your time.

 14 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 15 MR. HYFANTIS: The requirement for a

 16 double liner and leachate collection system would

 17 be "overkill" for CCRs while a single liner and

 18 leachate collection system would provide adequate

 19 environmental protection.

 20 Further, it is my recommendation that

 21 EPA consider working closely with the Department

 22 of Interior's Office of Surface Mining to develop
 351

 1 a joint program that allows the disposal of CCRs

 2 at abandoned and active surface mine sites using

 3 the same design criteria for RCRA Subtitle D

 4 landfills.

 5 The National Academy of Sciences

 6 published a comprehensive study of the viability

 7 of this very idea. Their report entitled

 8 "managing Coal Combustion Residues in Mines" was

 9 published in 2006. Proper disposal at abandoned

 10 surface mine sites provides an opportunity for

 11 land reclamation and reuse. I suggest making this

 12 report a part of your comment record.

 13 The Knoxville Field Office of the Office

 14 of Surface Mining has developed an innovated

 15 program for surface mine closure called the

 16 Appalachian Regional Reforestation Initiative.

 17 This very successful program has been used to

 18 restore recently closed surface mines to

 19 productive forests.

 20 This technique can be combined with the

 21 design requirements for an RCRA Subtitle D

 22 Landfill cap. Using this combined technique would
 352

 1 allow a formerly-mined area to be reforested as

 2 opposed to becoming a large grassy field in the

 3 mountains. I have included a concept design with

 4 these comments for your consideration. Again,

 5 thank you for extending your comment period.

 6 MS. DEVLIN: Is there anyone in the

 7 audience with a number of 120 or below who has not

 8 spoken? Okay. I understand that Number 166 is in

 9 the audience and would like to speak? Please --

 10 thank you. And I also understand that Number 268,

 11 uh-huh, you registered today? Okay. If you two

 12 would come forward, please? So 166 and 268.

 13 MR. SIMMERS: Good afternoon. My name

 14 is Dennis Simmers, and I live in Cambria Township,

 15 Cambria County, Pennsylvania.

 16 I have read many reports on today's

 17 issues, ranging from Earth Justice's "Waste Deep"

 18 to "Fate and Transport" by the Anthracite Region

 19 Independent Power Producers Association, and

 20 others. And I am here to testify in my opinion on

 21 the wide view of my community's perspective.

 22 I represent the sixth generation of my
 353

 1 family to live in Cambrai County. Through three

 2 successive generations, and now four with my

 3 children, we have been subjected to the hazards

 4 and detrimental consequences of discarding waste

 5 bituminous coal on the surface of the earth. The

 6 effect is well known. Acid mine drainage,

 7 contaminated surface and groundwater, hundreds of

 8 acres of unfit property, public nuisances, and

 9 life-threatening terrain, as well as air quality

 10 issues.

 11 The Revlon waste coal pile was a perfect

 12 all- in-one example to me of these detrimental

 13 effects. From my earliest recollection until I

 14 was 30, I can clearly recall the acrid rotten-egg

 15 stench and contaminated water around this pile.

 16 Approximately 20 years ago, we witnessed

 17 the arrival of the first of three waste coal-fired

 18 electric generating stations in Cambria Township.

 19 By historic standards, it seemed like the coal

 20 piles was being eliminated in no time. What took

 21 the mining industry 100 years to create was

 22 quickly being taken away. It was done safely, and
 354

 1 actually there are -- there's approximately 30

 2 years of research on this removal technique that

 3 does not bear out hazardous consequences to the

 4 ash being replaced in these areas.

 5 I would like to close my comments with a

 6 request as a local resident with children. I have

 7 witnessed the arrival of a substantial solution to

 8 our problem.

 9 The waste coal power industry is in the

 10 process of safely remediating what I consider to

 11 be Pennsylvania's Number 1 environmental

 12 catastrophe.

 13 I urge the EPA to keep the waste coal

 14 power industry's unique position in cleaning up

 15 the environment and -- in mind during your

 16 consideration of ash beneficial use. I do not

 17 live in Boston, Washington, Philadelphia, or

 18 Seattle and visit the area once in a while. I

 19 live in the community 100% of the time.

 20 In my opinion, waste coal fired power

 21 ash is the very definition of beneficial use. It

 22 should be encouraged, and not made to be even
 355

 1 slightly more financially burdensome or punitive.

 2 Thank you.

 3 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 268,

 4 please.

 5 MR. MORALES: Thank you. My name is

 6 Patrick Morales. I speak on -- on behalf as -- as

 7 a member of We May Be Back, an organization of

 8 backpackers, hikers, and active environmentalists

 9 or -- not necessarily environmentalists, but

 10 active in the con -- the condition of our

 11 environment for survival.

 12 I live in east Tennessee and in the

 13 vicinity of this most recent 2008 disaster at

 14 Kingston. And if that wasn't lesson enough, I

 15 don't know what was. I -- but I -- but I won't go

 16 there. I just want to know that -- let you know

 17 that I do and we, as We May Be Back, support

 18 Subtitle C.

 19 And I have problems, as a person, with

 20 self- implementation and self-regulation. I've

 21 tried it myself, whe -- whether it be not eating a

 22 certain food or what have you, some personal
 356

 1 discipline. And it didn't work until the

 2 consequences got too bad and the problem had to be

 3 addressed. And I think that's where we're at with

 4 this coal ash.

 5 If -- if -- if we're trying to determine

 6 if it's a toxic chemical, I guess we need to test

 7 for that. And I've understood that sometimes the

 8 testing and the determination methods of -- for

 9 determining whether coal ash is toxic or deadly or

 10 not are not necessarily measuring for those

 11 things, those chemicals.

 12 There's just one question. I -- I don't

 13 want to -- you-all, I'm sure you-all have heard a

 14 bunch of good stuff and a bunch of good evidence

 15 pro and con. I just want to ask all those who

 16 support Subtitle D, do you or anyone you know live

 17 near a coal impoundment or a sludge pond? And if

 18 not, move your vacation home real to one and see

 19 how you like it. Thank you.

 20 (Applause)

 21 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. At this time,

 22 do -- do we have anyone in the audience who has a
 357

 1 number and who has not yet spoken?

 2 Okay. Seeing not, and the fact that we are running a

 3 bit ahead of schedule, we are going to take

 4 approximately a 15-minute break. So by my watch,

 5 that'll get us back at five past 4. Oh. I'm sorry,

 6 sir?

 7 Please come forward now. Yes, that would

 8 be fine. Okay. And you are Number 265?

 9 MR. GOLDEN: Yes.

 10 MS. DEVLIN: Great. Thank you. Thank

 11 you.

 12 MR. GOLDEN: My name is Jim Golden. I

 13 live here in Knoxville, Tennessee.

 14 Back in the 1970s, Jean Heise of Oak

 15 Ridge National Laboratories began pushing TVA to

 16 use a technology called high-intensity magnetic

 17 separation for removal of toxic materials from

 18 coal. This involved crushing coal into a fine

 19 powder, which we already knew to enhance

 20 combustion efficiency; then passing the coal

 21 through a high-intensity magnetic field which

 22 separates the elements, allowing for easy removal
 358

 1 of potential toxins.

 2 Also under development at Oak Ridge

 3 National Laboratories was a radically different

 4 combustion or furnace technology called fluidized

 5 bed combustion that had higher efficiency and

 6 provided cleaner combustion, first discovered in

 7 the 1920s but never developed to its full

 8 potential. Fluidized bed combustion not only

 9 allows for high-efficient burning of clean fuels,

 10 but also for the high- efficient burning of

 11 low-quality or dirty fuels, wet fuels, coal mine

 12 tailings, toxic fuels, and even allows for the

 13 better handling or concentration of nuclear waste.

 14 You see, most fires are horribly

 15 inefficient, creating smoke, plus the high

 16 temperature drives molecules together in an

 17 unnatural form that are pollution. Fluidized bed

 18 combustion operates below the temperature that

 19 fuses molecules unnaturally and below the

 20 temperature that fuses ash into the clinkers with

 21 other potentially toxic substances.

 22 Both of these useful technologies were
 359

 1 withheld from the 1982 Energy world's Fair by TVA

 2 Oak Ridge National Laboratories and University of

 3 Tennessee. When TVA took public comment for their

 4 nineteen -- for their Energy Vision 2020, TVA

 5 changed our comments concerning fluidized bed

 6 combustion so as to keep the public in the dark.

 7 TVA has a fluidized bed project, but it

 8 appears to be designed for failure. Please see

 9 United States Patent Number 4,580,505 for a

 10 fluidized bed design that shut down an $800

 11 million project slated for Anderson County, and

 12 caused a reorganization of Oak Ridge National

 13 Laboratories.

 14 This furnace, with a quadruple expander,

 15 is said to be more efficient that Bull Run Steam

 16 Plant, which is Oak Ridge's -- which is TVA's most

 17 efficient steam plant according to TVA engineers.

 18 Thank you.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. I noticed some

 21 people came in, and I don't know exactly what your

 22 numbers are. So 136, 137, 126, and 210, if
 360

 1 you-all would please come up. Thank you. Just

 2 you -- take your seats at the side, and you can

 3 just go in order.

 4 MS. ENNIS: Can I go ahead first?

 5 MS. DEVLIN: Yes.

 6 MS. ENNIS: Good afternoon. My name is

 7 Chelsea Ennis, and I'm a student at the University

 8 of Tennessee, Knoxville. I'm a member of sud --

 9 SPEAK, Students Promoting Environmental Action in

 10 Knoxville.

 11 Not only is allowing coal ash to go

 12 unregulated an environmental issue, but it is also

 13 a human rights violation. I find it absolutely

 14 absurd that such toxic materials are not wet yet

 15 -- not yet regulated.

 16 This leads me to believe one of -- of

 17 two things. Either the EPA does not have

 18 knowledge of the dangers of coal ash, or the EPA

 19 does not care about the detrimental and deadly

 20 effects that coal hash -- coal ash has on the

 21 environment and the people of Appalachia.

 22 Because of the jo -- because the job of
 361

 1 the EPA is to pretect -- protect, I deeply hope

 2 that the reason is not a lack of care for people

 3 and the environment, so I'm choosing to believe

 4 that the EPA is unaware of the effects of coal

 5 ash, so I will tell you.

 6 Coal ash con -- contains heavy metals,

 7 such as lead, mercury, selenium, and arsenic.

 8 Disturbingly, people living near unlined coal ash

 9 ponds where water is contaminated have an

 10 extremely high risk of cancer, up to 1 in 50.

 11 This is 2,000 times greater than EPs -- EPA's;

 12 acceptable cancer risk.

 13 Because of this serious environmental

 14 destruction and human rights violation, I asked

 15 the EPA to regular coal ash under Subtitle C of

 16 the RCRA as special waste. I'm doing to end with

 17 a quote, "Not only when the last tree has died and

 18 the last river has been poisoned and last fish has

 19 been caught will we realize we cannot eat money."

 20 (Applause)

 21 MS. DEVLIN: Number 136.

 22 MS. GERHARD: My name is Danielle
 362

 1 Gerhard, and I'm also a student at the University

 2 of Tennessee Knoxville and a member of the student

 3 organization SPEAK, Students Promoting

 4 Environmental Action in Knoxville.

 5 Over half of the coal plants in the

 6 country are surrounded by populations that exceed

 7 state averages in terms of low-income individuals.

 8 We are exploiting these low-income communities to

 9 fulfill the American dream. And how do we repay

 10 them? The coal companies are allowed to dispose

 11 of this toxic waste back into the lands of these

 12 communities. Coal ash consists of heavy metals,

 13 like mercury, lead and arsenic and don't belong in

 14 drinking water.

 15 In my college chemistry class, I have

 16 learned to dispose of certain solutions in a

 17 heavy-metals container instead of the sink, and I

 18 expect these coal industries to be smarter than an

 19 entry-level chemistry class. However, they appear

 20 not to be and, therefore, I encourage the EPA to

 21 choose Subtitle C of the RCRA because coal ash is

 22 toxic and should be treated as such. Furthermore,
 363

 1 my generation should not have to deal with your

 2 generation's mistakes.

 3 I will leave you with a quote by the

 4 philosopher Aldo Leopold. "Obligations have no

 5 meaning without conscience." Thank you.

 6 (Applause)

 7 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 137.

 8 MS. FLOWER: Hi, my name is Sarah

 9 Flower, and I'm also a student at UT and a member

 10 of SPEAK, Students Promoting Environmental Action

 11 in Knoxville.

 12 Coal ash is toxic. It contains heavy

 13 metals, including arsenic, mercury, lead, selenium

 14 and beryllium, all of which are toxic to our

 15 rivers and, more importantly, our communities.

 16 For me, it is hard to believe that these coal

 17 companies are taking shortcuts and, therefore,

 18 risking the lives of the thousands of people

 19 living in Appalachia.

 20 Coal ash needs to be regulated, and not

 21 just as garbage. It needs to be recognized as the

 22 hazardous waste it truly is. Choosing Subtitle C
 364

 1 is the only way to ensure, not only the health and

 2 safety of the people living in these currently

 3 contaminated areas now, but for the future

 4 generations, as well. Thank you.

 5 (Applause)

 6 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 210,

 7 please.

 8 MR. PINSKY: Good afternoon. My name is

 9 David Pinsky, and I'm a student organizer for

 10 Greenpeace USA, representing hundreds of students

 11 appalled by the crimes that dirty and dangerous

 12 coal has inflicted on people and our planet. I'm

 13 here, also, to have support your efforts to create

 14 a federal minimum coal ash disposal standard,

 15 treating coal ash as hazardous under subtitle C of

 16 RCRA.

 17 Nearly two years ago, over one billion

 18 gallons of toxic coal ash gushed from the TVA

 19 Kingston impoundment, devastating Roane County.

 20 As a native from Kentucky and someone who has seen

 21 the impacts of dirty coal, I was grief-stricken.

 22 This is not about industry profits. It's about
 365

 1 people's lives.

 2 It's about Steve Scarborough of Roane

 3 County. Nearly two years later, Steve is still

 4 shocked to find six-foot piles of coal ash sitting

 5 in once pristine waterways. He has personally

 6 lost hundreds of thousands of dollars from his

 7 property values plummeting. The coal industry

 8 tells residents that it will be cleaned up in five

 9 years. Do you think Steve has five years to wait

 10 when his community is still polluted with toxic

 11 coal ash?

 12 It's about Barbara Evans of Lownsdes

 13 County, Alabama. She drove eight hours by herself

 14 to speak on behalf of Perry County residents.

 15 This impoverished, African-American community is

 16 the current dump site for TVA's Kingston plant,

 17 and has drinking-water levels with arsenic

 18 contamination 80 times the safe-drinking-water

 19 standards. Folks are fearful of speaking out

 20 because of intimidation by the coal industry.

 21 Barbara said this to me: Quote, "After a life of

 22 hard work, Perry County residents are being
 366

 1 reduced to sickness and death from coal ash. They

 2 are trapped, and they need the EPA's help."

 3 The industry reps you hear today are

 4 concerned about money, not human life. This makes

 5 me sick. Show me the non-industry-funded research

 6 proving that heavy metals, carcinogens and known

 7 neurotoxins are safe for human consumption. The

 8 EPA needs to adopt Subtitle C.

 9 However, I want to be very clear.

 10 Subtitle C is a good start, but the EPA must taken

 11 even stronger action. The EPA must immediately

 12 shut down high hazardous impoundment sites. The

 13 EPA must do everything necessary to immediately

 14 inspect all sites and protect our communities from

 15 toxic coal ash. Please stand up to the heavy

 16 lobbying efforts of the billionaires of the coal

 17 industry. If you will not protect us, who will?

 18 It is a sad day for all Americans when

 19 our Environmental Protection Agency fails to act

 20 with swift and immediate action on this issue.

 21 You have the opportunity to save lives,

 22 communities, children, grandmothers, students, our
 367

 1 planet. You have the opportunity to stop this

 2 madness. Now, all I ask is for you to stand up,

 3 be bold, do what science tells us and what is

 4 ethically and morally right: Regulate coal ash

 5 under Subtitle C of RCRA and take whatever means

 6 necessary to protect our people, not the polluting

 7 coal industry.

 8 Now, let's get to work. Thank you.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Okay. May I

 11 have Numbers 146, 147, 148 and 149, please.

 12 If you're waiting, if you would sit on

 13 the side. And, Number 146, if you would just go

 14 to the podium and...

 15 MR. HARRISON: Good afternoon.

 16 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 17 MR. HARRISON: Thank you for allowing me

 18 this opportunity to speak. My name is Gary

 19 Harrison, and I'm the CEO/General Manager for

 20 Dixie Electric Cooperative, which is a non-profit

 21 rural electric cooperative serving about 22,000

 22 members in seven counties located in east central
 368

 1 Alabama. I also serve as Vice-Chairman of

 2 PowerSouth Electric Cooperative, which is a

 3 generation and power supplier cooperative for 12

 4 distribution cooperatives and 4 municipals in

 5 south Alabama, as well as 4 cooperatives in

 6 southwest (sic) Florida. This year, in Alabama,

 7 we experienced an unusually cold winter followed

 8 by an extended hot summer. The extreme

 9 temperatures caused a tremendous increase in

 10 kilowatt hour usage for our members. With many of

 11 them being low-income families living in

 12 substandard housing, this weather further

 13 magnified their already high usage patterns.

 14 Dealing with the effects of the recession, high

 15 unemployment and the increased electric costs

 16 inflicted a financial stress on many of our

 17 members. This has been the same throughout south

 18 Alabama and northwest Florida.

 19 Therefore, on behalf of our members, I'd

 20 like ask that you do not make any changes that

 21 could significantly increase the cost of

 22 production of electricity to our members.
 369

 1 PowerSouth's coal-fired units were built

 2 in 70s, in a time where electric generation was

 3 greatly needed. At a time where coal, to a large

 4 extent, was the only fuel available to the

 5 cooperative generation to use because of the Fuel

 6 Use Act and prevailing economic conditions. As a

 7 result of our dependence -- as a result of the

 8 dependency on generation from these coal-fired

 9 units, our cooperative, as well as other

 10 PowerSouth members, will be directly affected by

 11 the final CCR rule.

 12 We understand the need for the

 13 development of federal regulations that assure the

 14 safe disposal of CCRs, and we feel that the

 15 subtitle D prime option will meet this objective.

 16 On the other hand, we strongly oppose using the

 17 subtitle C approval. EPA can obtain a high level

 18 of protection for the environment and human health

 19 without resorting to the unnecessary and extreme

 20 measures of regulating CCRs under RCRA's

 21 hazardous-waste rules.

 22 PowerSouth has always worked with each
 370

 1 of our members since it was organized in 1951 to

 2 be environmentally conscious, and we've always

 3 taken care of our fly ash in a way that has --

 4 that we have produced over 30 years. From the

 5 information I obtained, the ash spill at TVA's

 6 Kingston plant was the result of safety issue with

 7 a dam, a pond dam. All we ask is that you use the

 8 appropriate government agency to regulate the dam

 9 safety.

 10 And in conclusion, with almost 60% of

 11 our generation of electricity produced by

 12 PowerSouth generated by coal, we feel that change

 13 with increased regulatory costs would cost our

 14 members financially and affect their current

 15 lifestyle.

 16 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 147,

 17 please.

 18 MR. MOORE: Good afternoon. My name is

 19 Ronald Moore. I'm the current president the

 20 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,

 21 Local 2298, in Washington County, Alabama. I'm

 22 here to represent more than 130 families in this
 371

 1 area who live in Clarke and Washington Counties.

 2 I have been an employee for PowerSouth

 3 Energy for 32 years. I was hired in 1978 with the

 4 construction of Units 2 and 3 at Charles R.

 5 Lowman power plant in Leroy, Alabama.

 6 The Lowman plant produces more than 500

 7 megawatts of coal-fired electricity. I have been

 8 an operator at this plant for -- since 1981. The

 9 plant has safely disposed of its coal ash for more

 10 than 30 years. In fact, much of the coal

 11 combustion residue from Lowman plant is used

 12 beneficially in concrete, road construction,

 13 agriculture and wall board.

 14 CCRs have been used for decades to

 15 enhance concrete and wall-board construction.

 16 CCRs have been used in construction of the Hoover

 17 Dam, San Francisco Oakland Bridge and the I-35

 18 Bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Concrete made

 19 with fly ash extends the life of construction

 20 projects by decades, minimizing the environmental

 21 impact of rebuilding.

 22 The nature of the CCRs does not warrant
 372

 1 its regulation as a hazardous waste. Such

 2 regulation would destroy the very successful

 3 recycle programs that greatly reduce the need for

 4 cost of disposal.

 5 Now, working at this plant, the Lowman

 6 plant, has provided me and my family and many of

 7 my friends well-paying jobs, benefits so we can

 8 enjoy a good standard of living. PowerSouth's

 9 average wage for its bargaining-unit employees is

 10 $60,000 per year, plus benefits. And most of this

 11 stays in the community.

 12 The coal combustion residual rule oppose

 13 -- proposed by the EPA and the subject of the

 14 today's hearing will ultimately have a significant

 15 impact on me, personally, and the people I am here

 16 to represent. So, please, make sure that the

 17 benefits of the decision you make about coal

 18 residue outweigh the costs of those decisions. If

 19 there's a problem with how some utilities store

 20 coal combustion residue, fix the storage problem,

 21 not by declaring coal ash as hazardous, but by

 22 regulating the dams and containment used to store
 373

 1 it.

 2 I'd like to thank you for your

 3 consideration on this issue and determine that

 4 coal combustion residue should not be regulated as

 5 hazardous. There are more than 130 families in

 6 Clarke and Washington County that are depending on

 7 you to make the right decision.

 8 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 148,

 9 please.

 10 MR. SINGLETON: Good afternoon, ladies

 11 and gentlemen. Thank you for allowing me to

 12 address you this afternoon.

 13 My name is Charles Singleton. I am the

 14 probate judge and chairman of the county

 15 commission of Washington County, Alabama. I

 16 retired after 35 years of service from the United

 17 States Army as rank of command sergeant major

 18 before I took this job.

 19 Washington County is the oldest county

 20 in the State of Alabama. We presently encompass a

 21 1,081 square miles. We have 18,000 residents. So

 22 that makes us a very large and sparsely populated
 374

 1 county in rural Alabama adjoining what is known

 2 nationally as the black belt. We had -- we were

 3 the first capital of the State of Alabama. We had

 4 the first school in the State of Alabama. We had

 5 the first bank in the State of Alabama. Today we

 6 enjoy a standard of living that is about the

 7 national average. We consider ourselves to be

 8 about-average Americans.

 9 We have in our county BASF, Olin,

 10 PowerSouth and Bay Gas as our prime employers.

 11 PowerSouth has been a tax-paying resident of my

 12 county since the 1960s, when they built their

 13 first coal-fired generator in the little town of

 14 Leroy. They have since added on several times.

 15 They now employ about 190 people. They are the

 16 largest single taxpayer for revenue in my county.

 17 The tax that they pay goes for schools, for roads,

 18 for bridges, for hospitals, for fire protection.

 19 The moneys that they pay to their employees, which

 20 they are a good-paying employer, is turned over

 21 five times before it leaves my county, so they

 22 make a significant contribution to my county.
 375

 1 PowerSouth has safely disposed of its

 2 ash since the 1960s. They continue to do so

 3 today. My only request of you is that you take

 4 into considerations the benefits versus the

 5 dangers. Regulate what needs to be regulated.

 6 Don't go too far as, sometimes, government

 7 agencies are prone to do.

 8 Thank you. The citizens of Washington

 9 thank you. And let's fix the problem, just don't

 10 damage the whole industry. Thank you.

 11 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 149,

 12 please.

 13 MR. MITCHELL: Thank you. Good

 14 afternoon. My name is Terry Mitchell, and I serve

 15 on the Board of Trustees of Central Alabama

 16 Electric Cooperative in Prattville, Alabama. I'm

 17 elected by my peers to oversee and govern a

 18 32,000-member cooperative providing electric

 19 service to 10 counties in the State of Alabama.

 20 I am also the probate judge of a rural

 21 county in Alabama, and I see people struggling on

 22 a daily basis in good times. I see them really
 376

 1 struggling under the current economic conditions

 2 that we're going through today.

 3 On behalf of the Board of Central

 4 Alabama Electric Cooperatives, I ask you not to

 5 make changes that would significantly impact the

 6 cost to produce electricity to the folks who are

 7 in need in Alabama.

 8 Electricity is the fuel of the

 9 Information Age, and coal accounts for more than

 10 half of the electricity produced in the United

 11 States. Over the past 30 years, utilities and

 12 specialty companies have found ways to increase

 13 the ability to recover coal residue. And I know

 14 for a fact that that is true, for my -- over a

 15 decade, my father fed, clothed and educated his

 16 family by working for a company that's an -- that

 17 -- that collected the fly ash in Wilsonville,

 18 Alabama.

 19 I can look each of you in the eye today

 20 and tell you that I have touched fly ash. I have

 21 washed it from my father's truck, and I have seen

 22 it on the clothes of my father when he came home
 377

 1 from work. I can tell you that fly ash is not and

 2 does not need to be considered a hazardous waste.

 3 For every ton of fly ash that is used is

 4 a ton that doesn't go into a landfill that we have

 5 to back up with our federal moneys and our local

 6 moneys. You know, using fly ash in something as

 7 simple as concrete is a great way to Build Green

 8 without sacrificing quality or cost.

 9 Central Alabama, as you've already

 10 heard, is a member of PowerSouth. It's an energy

 11 cooperative that, since 1941, has been able to

 12 handle its own fly ash and has done an outstanding

 13 job with it.

 14 But I ask each of you to think about

 15 Winfred and Mable Grogan, an older couple that

 16 lives close to my home. They have a modest home

 17 and they live on a fixed income. Seventy cents

 18 out of every dollar they pay for retail power --

 19 for purchase power, 60% of that comes from coal.

 20 They are the members who remember when the lights

 21 came on. They are not the type of people who

 22 would ask for help. In fact, they would forgo
 378

 1 medical treatment just to keep their power on.

 2 You know, from the information that I

 3 have obtained, the TVA Kingston ash spill was a

 4 dam safety issue, a pond failure. I ask you to

 5 fix the problem, allow the proper governmental

 6 agency to -- to govern the safety of the pond. It

 7 was the -- it was the container, ladies and

 8 gentlemen, not the product that caused the

 9 problem.

 10 So on behalf of Central Alabama, the

 11 Board of Trustees and its management, its

 12 employees and the 32,000 people, I ask you to --

 13 to not declare fly ash as a hazardous waste.

 14 Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 145.

 17 MR. STEPHENS: Good afternoon. My name

 18 is Keith Stephens. I'm the environmental services

 19 manager at PowerSouth Energy Cooperative.

 20 PowerSouth is a non-profit electric generation

 21 transmission cooperative that serves 20

 22 distribution systems in Alabama and northwest
 379

 1 Florida who, in turn, provide electric service to

 2 more than one million customers in mostly rural

 3 areas.

 4 PowerSouth recognizes public concern

 5 over the handling and disposal of coal combustion

 6 residuals, or CCRs, and the EPA's obligation to

 7 protect the environment. However, the issue of

 8 whether CCR should be regulated as a hazardous

 9 waste has been thoroughly evaluated and resolved.

 10 In its 2000 regulatory determination, the EPA

 11 found that coal ash does not warrant hazardous-

 12 waste regulation, concluding instead that the most

 13 appropriate mechanism for regulation would be

 14 under subtitle D, non-hazardous waste regulations.

 15 There's no basis or need for -- to regulate under

 16 subtitle C, so the final course of action that the

 17 EPA chooses must be carefully considered to avoid

 18 unintended counterproductive consequences that

 19 would jeopardize beneficial uses and increase

 20 energy costs with no real environmental benefit.

 21 PowerSouth owns and operates the Charles

 22 R. Lowman power plant in Leroy. The Lowman plant
 380

 1 produces about 125,000 tons of coal ash annually.

 2 75% of that is in beneficially used in the cement

 3 industry. Furthermore, the Lowman plant uses --

 4 produces 78,000 tons of gypsum annually, of which

 5 100% is beneficially used. That's over 172,000

 6 tons of material that did not end up in a

 7 landfill.

 8 PowerSouth disagrees with the EPA's

 9 supposition that regulation under subtitle C will

 10 spur additional beneficial uses of CCR and, in

 11 fact, that regulation would exactly have the

 12 opposite effect. By dissuading CCR customers from

 13 using this so-called hazardous material, utilities

 14 like us who are, even now, directing CCR to

 15 beneficial uses would be forced to begin

 16 landfilling all that material.

 17 PowerSouth is also concerned that EPA's

 18 proposed definition of CCR surface impoundments

 19 may inappropriately affect the impoundments that

 20 are not designed to receive solid waste. None of

 21 the Lowman plant CCR impoundments discharge

 22 directly into the river, but they're routed
 381

 1 through another surface impoundment before

 2 discharge. And our plant consistently meets all

 3 of its water- quality discharge requirements.

 4 Since the power plant operation requires water for

 5 various purposes, any adverse consequences would

 6 cripple essential power plant operations with no

 7 associated environmental benefits.

 8 For all these reasons, PowerSouth

 9 strongly opposes Subtitle C regulation of CCRs.

 10 Instead, the EPA should strongly consider

 11 addressing public concerns first with impoundment

 12 dam safety rules. And, furthermore, if the EPA

 13 determined that the regulation of landfills is

 14 needed, Subtitle D prime option should be pursued

 15 since it would provide equivalent environmental

 16 protection while still holing down costs, keeping

 17 beneficial use options available, and allow

 18 PowerSouth to continue to provide reliable,

 19 reasonably-priced power to its member owners.

 20 Thanks.

 21 MS. DEVLIN: One note to the -- to the

 22 speakers who just spoke: If you would leave a
 382

 1 copy of your written comments in the box over here

 2 by our court reporter, we'd appreciate it.

 3 Number 123 and Number 142, if I haven't

 4 gotten this .

 5 MS. GOSS: Thank you. My name is Sandra

 6 Goss. I'm the executive director of Tennessee

 7 Citizens for Wilderness Planning.

 8 Tennessee Citizens for Wilderness

 9 Planning is a statewide environmental advocacy

 10 group that's based in Oak Ridge. I speak on

 11 behalf of our members across the State.

 12 Regarding coal ash, there are currently

 13 no federally enforceable regulations specific to

 14 coal ash. And it should not be regulated under

 15 the weak protective standards provided by a

 16 Subtitle D designation. It is a hazardous waste,

 17 and it should be regulated as such. Therefore, I

 18 urge that coal ash be regulated under Subtitle C

 19 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as

 20 special waste. Subtitle D falls short of the

 21 regulatory rigor and enforcement needed.

 22 Please adopt Subtitle C and regulate
 383

 1 coal ash like the hazardous waste that it is.

 2 Thank you, and thank you for coming to Knoxville

 3 to hear our comments.

 4 (Applause)

 5 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 142,

 6 please.

 7 MR. BROWN: My name is Doug Brown. I'm

 8 employed by Harrison Construction Company in

 9 Alcoa, Tennessee. I've worked for Harrison's for

 10 the last 31 years.

 11 Old Castle Material owns our company.

 12 We're one of the largest Ready Mixed concrete

 13 producers in the nation. We've had lots of

 14 employees in the last 30 years come and go, and

 15 I've never known of one of our employees that had

 16 any issue working with or around fly ash. No

 17 health issues, nothing has ever came up from that.

 18 We've used in con -- fly ash in concrete

 19 for the past 25 years. We've produced hundreds of

 20 thousands of yards of concrete containing fly ash,

 21 which, by using it in the concrete, we've -- have

 22 not had to put it into any landfills anywhere.
 384

 1 All the used tons of fly ash that would have been

 2 and the fly ash that are in place, most of it on

 3 government jobs who always specify the use of fly

 4 ash.

 5 If fly ash is classified as a hazardous

 6 waste, we'll be forced to stop using it in our

 7 daily operations. We will not take the risk of

 8 having to handle or store in our many sites

 9 hazardous material. By us and other producers

 10 like us stopping the use of fly ash, the price of

 11 concrete will increase, which will, in turn, drive

 12 up the building cost, not to mention the amount of

 13 fly ash that we turned away from concrete plants

 14 and sent to landfills.

 15 As we go forward in our industry, we're

 16 constantly being asked to Go Green. We have many

 17 projects that are asking for increased use of fly

 18 ash, some as much as 40% as a replacement of

 19 cement instead of the customary 20 -- 20 to 25%.

 20 If fly ash is classified as a hazardous material,

 21 the use of fly ash going to the landfill will be

 22 increased much, much more than that. Thank you.
 385

 1 (Applause)

 2 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. May I have

 3 Numbers 169, 264 and 269.

 4 169, thank you.

 5 MR. GARDINER: Good afternoon. My name

 6 is Robert Gardiner, and I'm a Global Warming

 7 campaigner for Greenpeace USA, here today to

 8 support your efforts to create a federal minimum

 9 coal ash disposal standard; however, I do want to

 10 say that this is a floor and not a ceiling. We

 11 must do more.

 12 Coal ash should be treated as a special

 13 waste under subtitle C of RCRA. With that said,

 14 sound science dictates that we immediately shut

 15 down all coal ash ponds and unlined landfills

 16 until best available science is utilized to test

 17 the toxicity of these sites; immediately

 18 investigate all coal ash dump sites for potential

 19 leaching and other structural issues; immediately

 20 clean up all sites contaminated by coal ash when

 21 such contamination is discovered; immediately test

 22 fly ash, bottom ash, slag and Flue gas
 386

 1 desulfurization sludge using EPA's -- your LEAF

 2 test to determine the toxicity of each waste and

 3 disclose publicly all test results.

 4 We need stricter enforcement because

 5 subtitle C does not require the investigation or

 6 rapid closure of dangerous ash ponds. Subtitle C

 7 does not require immediate clean-up of all

 8 contaminated coal ash sites. Subtitles C does not

 9 require polluters to ensure the healthy air and

 10 water of communities near dumps or fill sites. We

 11 needs you to make sure it is not just shipped to

 12 the community where there is more lax standards.

 13 Ask the people of Perry County about that.

 14 That said, I do want to talk a little

 15 bit about the dreaded stigma effect. And it is

 16 ultimately a red herring to continue to burn coal

 17 unabated. The EPA's inspector general faulted the

 18 Coal Combustion Products Partnership with -- for

 19 ethics violations, including not containing

 20 general risk information concerning large-scale

 21 fill operations, including materials giving the

 22 appearance that you endorse the commercial coal
 387

 1 ash products. C2P2 is made up almost entirely of

 2 industry and must be dissolved absent any

 3 meaningful scientific or environmental presence.

 4 The stigma tech is -- the stigma effect

 5 is speculative at best, while the health effects

 6 of spreading coal are real, verifiable and are

 7 being witnessed throughout our country. I've

 8 spoken with people around the country with arsenic

 9 poisoning, cancer and asthma that are directly

 10 attributable to coal ash. We need a comprehensive

 11 reexamination of how these products are being

 12 utilized to make sure there are no environmental

 13 threats to health or welfare of society.

 14 That said, we have discovered that there

 15 -- there have been meetings between the OMB

 16 between October 2009 and April 2010, at least four

 17 months before these public hearings were

 18 announced, in which the industry representatives

 19 held 33 meetings. 33 meetings. That's more than

 20 three times environmental or scientists had on

 21 this -- this particular rule.

 22 We challenge the EPA to demonstrate that
 388

 1 this public hearing is not a sham, and that

 2 industry can't just gum up the gears of the OMB

 3 when regulating coal ash. It's clearly within

 4 your mandate. You must do what is right, and

 5 designate coal ash for what it is: Hazardous.

 6 Thanks.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 264,

 9 please.

 10 MS. PERRY: I'm Tori Perry, and I'm a

 11 Tennessee resident as well as an active high

 12 school student. Although I'm young, the issues we

 13 face today will be affecting my generation. And I

 14 will have to face those along with them, you know.

 15 And coal ash is a very serious issue. And over

 16 140 million tons of coal ash is produced every

 17 year.

 18 Some have different views, but the

 19 bottom line is coal ash is hazardous. Toxins such

 20 as arsenic, lead and chromium are present, and

 21 many who have been affected by coal ash have been

 22 devastated by its results: Cancer, respiratory
 389

 1 problems, and as far as nerve damage.

 2 I myself have not personally been

 3 affected, but this is a major crisis affecting

 4 many communities across the United States. The

 5 TVA Kingston spill is just one example and should

 6 not go unnoticed. The EPA Subtitle prime C

 7 regulations means more money, but the coal

 8 industry does not want to fork out their -- fork

 9 out their wallets.

 10 With regulations do come more money, but

 11 money to our people, money to help them recover

 12 from many things that have been taken from them

 13 due to coal ash, money to make sure incidents like

 14 this don't happen again. Does money really mean

 15 more than the health of our people?

 16 EPA, you were the -- you are supposed to

 17 be there to feel us for our protection (sic).

 18 Protect our environment and pass Subtitle C prime.

 19 Thank you.

 20 (Applause)

 21 MS. DEVLIN: Is Number 269 in the room?

 22 Again, we're running ahead of schedule.
 390

 1 Does anyone have a number that I have not called?

 2 Please come forward. 129. Thank you.

 3 MR. BYRNE:: My name is Russell Byrne.

 4 I'm in the fly ash business. I actually have some

 5 of it on my boots. I've just come from work. I

 6 don't have a speech. I figured I'd just wing it.

 7 I handle fly ash every day. You know,

 8 we put it in a landfill. It's dry fly ash. It's

 9 not slushed ash like the Kingston. That was a

 10 problem in itself. It pays my bills. I've got

 11 two kids in college, pays their tuition; it pays

 12 the taxes and all that other stuff.

 13 Is that not on? Sorry. Like I said, it

 14 pays my bills. I got two kids in college. It

 15 pays their tuition. I actually had a house there

 16 in Kingston when that spill occurred. I still own

 17 the house. I don't live there, but...

 18 I'm a bass fisherman. I fished that

 19 lake before and after so, you know, I don't see

 20 any dead fish floating around, if the -- if the

 21 stuff is so poisonous. You know, the birds there

 22 are. I know where there's a bald eagle nest right
 391

 1 there off of Caney Creek. If that eagle was

 2 having trouble catching fish, he wouldn't be

 3 hanging around still, so...

 4 You know, use your eyes. Get out there

 5 in a boat and go around the lake. Hell, I don't

 6 see nothing dead floating around. I certainly

 7 haven't heard any head-counts of dead fish or

 8 anything to that nature. I mean, we're talking

 9 about five million yards -- cubic yards, they

 10 said, spilled in there. Well, by God, if it was

 11 that toxic, you'd show effects of it in the

 12 wildlife around the area. And get in a boat and

 13 go look. I just don't see it. Thanks.

 14 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 139.

 15 MR. MCAMIS: Good afternoon. My name's

 16 Sam McAmis. I work for a Ready Mixed concrete

 17 producer here in east Tennessee. We have five

 18 locations from the Lowden County area down to the

 19 Hamilton County area along I-75. I'm the regional

 20 sales coordinator, but part of my job is to design

 21 the mixes that we use to make the buildings that

 22 we have around in this area. I'm also a certified
 392

 1 mix-design technician for the State of Tennessee,

 2 so I deal with our roadways and bridge decks when

 3 we're designing concrete to withstand the

 4 traveling that we're going to be doing over them

 5 with our vehicles.

 6 In the course of dealing with concrete,

 7 I do have some beneficial uses for how we design

 8 our concrete using the fly ash, on a road surface

 9 especially. The State of Tennessee allows us to

 10 use 25% replacement by volume of Portland cement

 11 with the dry ash. This is not the wet ash like at

 12 Kingston. This is a dry facility like they're

 13 running in Cumberland.

 14 We wouldn't have had the problem if we

 15 were allowed to use the ash their producing at the

 16 Kingston site. Speaking with the representatives

 17 who sell the coal ash to me, type F, is at least

 18 90% of the material produced at Kingston would be

 19 used by local vendors here in the Knoxville area.

 20 I would like to think that we, when making the

 21 concrete, offer a solution for recycling the coal

 22 ash material, which I'm sure you-guys have looked
 393

 1 into. I would -- I just want to let you know the

 2 impact it will have on my industry, as far as the

 3 designing for the construction projects we have

 4 and also how it will affect the people that work

 5 at my place of business.

 6 If we get into severe regulation of the

 7 ash where I have to take particular precautions at

 8 my site, over and above what we already have

 9 permitted in our air permitting that we run

 10 through the State of Tennessee anyway, I'm

 11 guessing that we will lose at least three jobs and

 12 possibly five in the transportation of material.

 13 And -- and then, as far as being able to recycle

 14 the coal ask material, I'm not sure there's a

 15 better way to recycle than encapsulating it in the

 16 concrete. It helps us gain credits in lead

 17 projects, which I help design and give the

 18 builders credit on their leads course to help

 19 build nice and green.

 20 I'm a fly fisherman. I fly-fish the

 21 waters in this area around here, and I, of course,

 22 don't want to see anything happen like happened in
 394

 1 Kingston. So if you're going to push for

 2 something, please push for these coal facilities

 3 to switch to dry so that we can use the concrete

 4 up and encapsulate it and recycle it.

 5 I thank you for your time, and good

 6 luck. Appreciate it.

 7 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Again, does

 8 anyone in the audience have a number 102 and 269?

 9 Okay.

 10 MR. CARRIGAN: All right. Members of

 11 the EPA, I know you've been here all day. You're

 12 probably a little bit bored, so I'll try to make

 13 this entertaining for you.

 14 You've heard a lot of coal-industry

 15 people come through here. They are set up

 16 upstairs in the Carolina Room. What generally

 17 happens is that they're given a little script to

 18 fill out; they say it, and it becomes a very

 19 boring affair. However, after watching the coal

 20 industry's -- the coal-industry representatives, I

 21 believe I have gotten down their script down talk

 22 science.
 395

 1 A, thank the EPA. B, say who you are.

 2 C, mention family. D, mention somebody else's

 3 family. E, mention a poor family that will

 4 clearly be negatively impacted by Subtitle C. F,

 5 use absolutely no evidence to back up your claims.

 6 G, squint decisively into space. D -- or whatever

 7 letter comes next, calls Kingston a mistake. I,

 8 mention recycle. J, mention recycle again; helps

 9 make the point even clearer. And finally, end by

 10 thanking the EPA after you have said virtually

 11 nothing of substance. Seriously, that has been

 12 pretty much what every single coal-industry

 13 representative has said over the last several

 14 hours.

 15 Here's what they won't say. They will

 16 not say anything about the health effects of coal

 17 ash. In fact, that's another part of their

 18 script: Ignore any and all health effects

 19 regardless of the scientific evidence. And yes,

 20 true, a lot of them have said that there's

 21 absolutely no claim that coal ash is toxic. Well,

 22 here's the claim right here. It's a wonderful
 396

 1 little report called, "In Harm's Way: Lack of

 2 Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers Americans

 3 and Their Environment."

 4 Here's some of the juicy bits. Okay.

 5 This is from the executive summary. Alpha

 6 particles, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium,

 7 lead, selenium and thallium in one, two, three,

 8 four, five, six, seven, eight different sites in

 9 about as many states, all posting severely,

 10 severely high levels of all of these metals. Far

 11 higher than what they ought to be allowed.

 12 And again, the use of language is

 13 interesting here. We call coal ash "ash" because

 14 that's what it actually is. They call it CCR, an

 15 attempt to basically ignore the true nature of the

 16 substance. We call Kingston not an accident, but

 17 a catastrophe, because that's what it very much

 18 was. Homes being carted away literally by tons

 19 and tons of coal ash which, today, still has not

 20 been picked up.

 21 Again, I know that you are going to have

 22 a lot of speakers here, and I know you were
 397

 1 probably maybe going to listen to some, maybe not

 2 listen to others, but please, I do hope that you

 3 will focus on the facts and ignore scripted,

 4 canned speeches for what they really are:

 5 Scripted, canned pieces of idiocy.

 6 Thank you very much.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 102,

 9 please.

 10 MS. LISENBY:: Well, ladies and

 11 gentlemen, after that, I don't want to speak from

 12 a script for sure. So my name is Donna Lisenby,

 13 the Watauga Riverkeeper.

 14 The Watauga River flows from Grandfather

 15 Mountain in North Carolina over to Johnson and

 16 Carter County, Tennessee. It crosses two states.

 17 And coal ash is treated very differently in North

 18 Carolina than it is in Tennessee. You've already

 19 heard our Tennessee Riverkeeper comment about need

 20 for federal regulations that balance and create a

 21 level playing field. I don't want to repeat

 22 those.
 398

 1 What I want to do today is talk to you

 2 from my role as a board member of Waterkeeper

 3 Alliance and from the perspective of all the

 4 waterkeepers. So let me just run through a few of

 5 the waterkeepers that have direct experience with

 6 coal ash ponds in their watershed, testing

 7 sediment, water and fish. Real direct live

 8 experience with it.

 9 That would be David Merryman on Catawba

 10 River, finding high levels of arsenics from Duke

 11 Power's discharges now and it's confirmed by

 12 government agencies. Hartwell Carson, the French

 13 Broad Riverkeeper, also testing and finding really

 14 high levels of metals in the water that discharges

 15 from the coal ash ponds of Progress Energy in

 16 Asheville, North Carolina. Kemp Burdette, the

 17 Cape Fear Riverkeeper, who worked the coal ash

 18 pond breach in the Cape Fear watershed near

 19 Wilmington two, three weeks ago, tried to get on

 20 site to see if that breach of that second coal ash

 21 pond had contaminated the Cape Fear River. Also

 22 has tests that are pending, not ready yet, but
 399

 1 will be soon, David Whiteside, the Tennessee

 2 Riverkeeper you heard from today. Dean Naujoks,

 3 the -- the Yadkin Pee Dee waterkeeper. Also

 4 testing, Ed Merrifield, the Potomac Riverkeeper.

 5 Via -- Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper.

 6 So let me just summarize our experience

 7 in our watersheds on our waterbodies' testing.

 8 Coal ash is toxic. It's putting heavy metals in

 9 our waterways repeatedly. It's poisoning our

 10 watersheds and our communities, period. It's our

 11 consistent experience. Not only is that area

 12 experienced, but three of us have been threatened

 13 with lawsuits and arrest by the coal companies for

 14 being on public navigable waterways and conducting

 15 lawful and legal tests of the United States

 16 waters.

 17 So I am tired of the coal industry

 18 harassing the hell out of us public advocates for

 19 trying to just find out the truth, test the waters

 20 and tell our communities what's in them. I want

 21 you-all to do your job. And the waterkeepers want

 22 you to do your job. Coal ash is poisoning our
 400

 1 waterways and our communities. You need to treat

 2 it as hazardous waste, regulate it, create a level

 3 playing field and remember: This is about people

 4 and communities being poisoned by heavy metals.

 5 This is not about profit for greedy corporations.

 6 It's about people. Do your job.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. May I have

 9 Numbers 158, 159, 160, 161 and 139.

 10 If you-all would please come forward,

 11 and 158 would come to the podium and the others

 12 would take a seat at the side.

 13 Thank you. You're number 158?

 14 MS. KELLY: Yes, I'm Number 158.

 15 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 16 MS. KELLY: My name is Mary Ellen

 17 Kelley, and I live in Wise, Virginia. And I'm

 18 here to advocate for coal ash to be declared

 19 hazardous waste.

 20 There is currently -- I guess, we're

 21 going to be one of the most affected because we

 22 have a waste-burning coal plant that is going to
 401

 1 be in our area, so we're going to have a huge coal

 2 ash dump. And like the lady said, you know,

 3 somebody needs to be doing their job.

 4 My water -- and I've got pictures, which

 5 I will leave out there in the comment box -- my

 6 water has been completely destroyed. I've been

 7 denied my rights to a formal hearing so far. I've

 8 been denied rights to public information. I have

 9 gone -- even though I've been crippled and very

 10 sick lately, I've gone and checked the files and

 11 nothing in the Department of Mines and Minerals

 12 and the OSM files are correct. They are showing

 13 roads going over high walls, through sludge ponds,

 14 and I actually had one friend that actually went

 15 over that and he came to my house all bloody.

 16 And about 20 coal companies used my home

 17 site and my neighbors', which is a residential

 18 area, as a strip mine, active strip mine. And I

 19 have a picture here from Department of Mines and

 20 Minerals which shows a small bit of pond left, and

 21 that actually dried up. And the poor mud turtles,

 22 one I stepped on thinking it was a rock, came out
 402

 1 of that thing cloaked in mud. And my young

 2 grandson and I had to get water and pour on the

 3 turtles so they could see to get somewhere else.

 4 So that is what's happening. I've got a

 5 picture of the water that was actually taken from

 6 the pond, even though I had a difficult time

 7 getting it. It's on file. So as I say, I've been

 8 affected tremendously, and I have a little story

 9 here, which I was going to leave with you, so

 10 you'll understand. And I do appreciate the

 11 opportunity to come here. And I tell you, we, in

 12 Wise, County in southwest Virginia and also in my

 13 native home of Kentucky need support and help.

 14 Thank you so much.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 159,

 17 please. 159?

 18 MS. TAULBEE: My name is Dorothy

 19 Taulbee, and I was a former resident of 15709

 20 Stone Eagle Road, which my home is buried by the

 21 slurry pond now. I put up with that six and a

 22 half years, three strip jobs blasted my house
 403

 1 clean before it. I got pictures and newspapers.

 2 And then I got lung cancer from it, and my right

 3 lung had to have the whole top of it removed.

 4 And I breathed this. You should see, I

 5 have jars of it at home, where I took it out of my

 6 bedroom, off of my porches. Me and my son had put

 7 double-paned windows in their house and it even

 8 come through that. And what I was going to tell

 9 you-all: Slurry is what -- where they washed the

 10 coal, and then, when they burn the coal, we have

 11 the fly ash. All of it is poison and toxic

 12 because they blast these mountains with that

 13 dynamite, and you know what dynamite's got in it.

 14 But what I was going to say: I'm so

 15 glad you- all give us opportunities to speak out

 16 against this, because of what we're leaving for

 17 our grandchildren and great-grandchildren. I have

 18 about 15 great-grandchildren, and one of my

 19 great-grandbabies was up there with me, and I

 20 worry about her because she breathed this all the

 21 time. I about raised her. And slurry and stuff

 22 and this fly ash is poison to the people. They're
 404

 1 poisoning our water and us, and now we have the

 2 millions built the coal power plant in Virginia

 3 City. And when they get it up and running, they

 4 say it's going to use 500 coal trucks a day and a

 5 million gallons of water. We don't have water,

 6 people, like that in Virginia over there, over and

 7 -- where it's at.

 8 And they will be wanting to take the

 9 people's drinking water. You know, this is

 10 terrible. You know, God said, "Do unto others as

 11 you would have them unto you." This is his

 12 creation. When you blow a mountain away, we can't

 13 put it back, can we? And they're making people

 14 poorer and poorer and wanting to close their

 15 schools down over there to get coal. Pound in

 16 Appalachia schools.

 17 Well, it's just trouble. We're voting

 18 for this -- this to be done away with. We don't

 19 need fly ash, and we don't need these slurry

 20 ponds. Yeah, my home was buried with a slurry

 21 pond today. You should see, and the whole big,

 22 beautiful mountain that was there is gone. And
 405

 1 they burned the trees they got off that land. And

 2 you should see what a huge mountain and what

 3 little bit of coal they got. It's crazy.

 4 And we appreciate you-all that we do

 5 need help and we need this stopped, and vote for

 6 the C to control this, because we don't need this.

 7 And I appreciate you-all.

 8 (Applause)

 9 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 160,

 10 please. 1-6-0.

 11 MR. RAMEY: Good evening. My name is

 12 Carl Pete Ramey, and I want to thank the EPA for

 13 allowing me, as a concerned citizen from Wise

 14 County, Virginia, where perhaps the source of fly

 15 ash begun, to speak on the serious threat of both

 16 fly ash and slurry ponds or to our air we breathe,

 17 the water we drink and to the health of our

 18 people. We, as a community, state and nation

 19 should be considered slow learners if we haven't

 20 learned a valuable lesson from all the

 21 environmental disasters.

 22 I want to mention a few tragedies that
 406

 1 have often been repeated due to the lack of

 2 regulations and enforcement. Number one, West

 3 Virginia Buffalo Creek happened in 1972 when a

 4 coal slurry dam burst, unleashing approximately

 5 132 million gallons of black waste over 30-foot

 6 high and killed 125 people, injured 1,121 and left

 7 4,000 homeless. There were 507 houses destroyed,

 8 in addition to 44 mobile homes and 30 businesses.

 9 Number two, the Appalachian power plant

 10 in Russell County, Virginia had a coal ash pond

 11 burst in the 1960s and contaminated the Clinch

 12 River, killing aquatic life for many miles.

 13 Number three, on October the 11th, 2000,

 14 Martin County, Kentucky had a 68-acre holding pond

 15 burst, sending goo washing through an underground

 16 and into two creeks. The 306 million gallons of

 17 sludge blackened 100 miles of waterway, polluted

 18 the water supplies of more than a dozen

 19 communities and killed aquatic life before it

 20 reached the Ohio River.

 21 Number four, this country's most recent

 22 sludge pond disaster happened December 22nd, 2008,
 407

 1 when a fly ash dike broke at TVA Kingston fossil

 2 plant, erupted and released 1.1 billion gallons of

 3 coal fly ash into the Clinch and Henry rivers,

 4 tributaries of the Tennessee River. It was the

 5 largest fly ash released in the history. How long

 6 must tragedy speak before we pass and enforce laws

 7 to control these disasters?

 8 Of the two options EPA has proposed, I

 9 support and recommended Subtitle C, that it be

 10 backed by strong federal enforcements. You know,

 11 we might as well put lead back in paint and

 12 asbestos back in insulation if we continue to

 13 ignore these disasters that are a crime against

 14 nature and a sin against humanity. Poison is

 15 poison in liquid or dry form. Thank you very

 16 much.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 161,

 19 please.

 20 MR. BUSH: Did you say 161?

 21 MS. DEVLIN: Yes please.

 22 MR. BUSH: Afternoon. My name's Larry
 408

 1 Bush, and I live in Appalachia, Virginia.

 2 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry. Can you move

 3 the microphone so I...

 4 MR. BUSH: Can you hear me now?

 5 THE REPORTER: Yes.

 6 MR. BUSH: Did you get my name?

 7 THE REPORTER: No, sir.

 8 MR. BUSH: Larry Bush, and I live in

 9 Appalachia, Virginia. And I don't need to -- I

 10 mean, your own studies show the poisons that's in

 11 this stuff that's dumped from these coal-burning

 12 power plants. I mean, EPA, I mean, I've got stuff

 13 here that's from your own studies, shows the

 14 poison that's in there: The mercury, lead,

 15 selenium, cadmium, thallium, antimony, mercury,

 16 boron, sulfate and other toxins exceeding

 17 drinking- water standards in 26 of 31 sites.

 18 These are your own studies. I mean, you -- you

 19 people know this already.

 20 They're destroying -- these -- these

 21 ponds and dumps are destroying waterways. It's

 22 leaching into our -- our own -- our very own water
 409

 1 supplies in these Appalachian states that are, I

 2 guess, central to the coal-mining area in our

 3 area, I guess. And it's -- it's a shame that --

 4 that it's not treated as it is, a toxic waste, and

 5 treated with whatever means possible, such as

 6 treated the same way, you know, a landfill would

 7 be, with liners and everything else that -- that

 8 it -- you know, it's not been done before. That

 9 -- but this needs -- it's -- I mean, people can

 10 talk about, you know, industry. They can talk

 11 about conservationists, environmentalists; call

 12 us, you know, whatever you want, I mean, as far as

 13 people.

 14 But it -- it -- what it boils down to is

 15 people. It's about people being -- homes and

 16 waterways and our kids growing up in this -- this

 17 filth and breathing this -- this toxic material,

 18 and people having to live in this. I mean, live

 19 right in -- in the heart of this area that's being

 20 -- that's being contaminated with these -- with

 21 these pollutants.

 22 And what it comes down to is people, and
 410

 1 I think you need to, first and foremost, think of

 2 people and think about the poison that -- that's

 3 being heaped on us and our -- our future and what

 4 -- what is being left for our children and

 5 grandchildren and their children to try to recover

 6 from, and not only recover, but try to repair it,

 7 if that's possible, the damage that's being done

 8 by these -- these dumps. And -- and the poison

 9 that's being dumped into our waterways and, you

 10 know, what's leaching in old and -- old and new

 11 dump sites are -- are leaching into our waterways.

 12 I worked in a coal mine for 13 years,

 13 and I was a coal-mine inspector for 13 years. And

 14 I've seen this everywhere, and it -- it's no good

 15 anywhere it -- anywhere it's at. So I appreciate

 16 your giving me the opportunity to speak, and I

 17 appreciate your -- your help. Like I say, you've

 18 got studies of your own. Just ask on them and --

 19 and let's stop this problem before it, you know,

 20 gets to -- to the point that we can't. And our

 21 kids -- like I say, our kids and grandkids and

 22 their kids are going to be the ones to suffer most
 411

 1 from it if something's not done. I appreciate it.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Numbers 139 and

 4 156, please. Okay.

 5 Say again, please?

 6 SPEAKER: I'm 156.

 7 MS. DEVLIN: Please come forward.

 8 MS. SELVAGE: My name is Kathy Selvage,

 9 and I live in Wise County, Virginia, where

 10 approximately 23% of our households are under the

 11 federal poverty level and more than 25% of our

 12 entire land surface in the county has been

 13 sacrificed for the energy needs of this country.

 14 A map is attached, and I will leave it for you.

 15 The problem we come here today to discuss begins

 16 in our backyard with the explosion and the

 17 obliteration of the mountains we once called home.

 18 Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you

 19 today.

 20 We produce somewhere between 100 and 136

 21 million tons of this hazardous waste every year,

 22 and much of it is buried in coal ash dumps of the
 412

 1 east. You should regulate it as it is, as a

 2 hazardous waste. While Subtitle C is not perfect,

 3 it is our best choice. I really wonder just how

 4 safe this toxic soup we lock up in the materials

 5 through beneficial use is. What happens if the

 6 key is turned and it is unlocked in some disaster?

 7 Perhaps even more frightful is the insertion of

 8 coal ash and sludge in hollowed-out mines where it

 9 is very likely to foul, poison and pollute

 10 underground aquifers.

 11 We simply cannot afford to delude

 12 ourselves any longer. It is hazardous and

 13 extremely dangerous to human health. The

 14 pollutants are linked, I'm sure you-all know, to

 15 numerous health problems. We are playing Russian

 16 roulette with our own lives and those of our

 17 future generations. Until such time as coal

 18 disappears, we must regulate coal ash on a federal

 19 level and recognize that it is dangerous to our

 20 environment and to our all-important drinking

 21 water.

 22 Many examples can be chosen, but none is
 413

 1 more blatant for us in the Commonwealth than the

 2 Chesapeake, Virginia golf course, made of coal

 3 ash. Housing sprang up around it, with private

 4 water supplies that are now fouled, and Dominion

 5 is being sued collectively for one billion

 6 dollars. That is the same Dominion coming to Wise

 7 County with a new coal-fired plant. Too many of

 8 the pieces are attached, and these will illuminate

 9 why states cannot be charged -- in charge of

 10 regulation.

 11 History will judge us, and our future

 12 generations will long remember what we do here.

 13 Right choices are very often not easy ones, but we

 14 must be determined to make them. If coal ash was

 15 appreciated as an art form or, indeed, was

 16 beneficial, we would likely see it floating in the

 17 reflecting pool between the Washington Monument

 18 and the Lincoln Memorial.

 19 And I thank you for your time.

 20 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 21 (Applause)

 22 MS. DEVLIN: Do we have any folks in the
 414

 1 audience who have numbers? Okay. We have been

 2 running a bit ahead of schedule, so at this point,

 3 I'm going to try taking about a 15-minute break.

 4 And so, by my watch, it's 5 to 5. We'll reconvene

 5 at 10 minutes past 5. Thank you.

 6 (Recess)

 7 MS. DEVLIN: Okay. Ladies and

 8 gentlemen, I think we're going to get started

 9 again.

 10 I want to announce we've had a couple of

 11 membership changes on our panel. We now have with

 12 me on the panel Frank Ney from our Region 4

 13 Office, and Region 4 is EPA’s Office in Atlanta,

 14 Georgia; we also have Alexander Livnat and Steve

 15 Hoffman, and Alex and Steve both work with me in

 16 headquarters in Washington, DC.

 17 Se we'll get started again. And we have

 18 a number of -- of folks who've signed in. Number

 19 135, Number 201, and we have a number of walk-

 20 ins, Numbers 270, 271, and 272. If I've called

 21 your number, if you could come up to the chairs on

 22 the side and -- and then get up.
 415

 1 AUDIENCE: Okay.

 2 SPEAKER: Yep.

 3 MR. CLARK: Both hands .

 4 MS. DEVLIN: So 135?

 5 MR. HOFFMAN: You're 135?

 6 MR. CLARK: That's me.

 7 MS. DEVLIN: Okay.

 8 MR. CLARK: Yeah. Let's see if I can

 9 get -- I didn't even have time to print my notes

 10 off here.

 11 MR. HOFFMAN: Do you want someone else

 12 to speak; give you some more time?

 13 MR. CLARK: No. I mean, I can read from

 14 them (laughs). Give me a few minutes to get

 15 composed here. Okay.

 16 Perry County, Alabama, is a poor,

 17 majority black community; it's rural and I don't

 18 look like the average Perry Countian (sic). But

 19 very few of them can afford to take two days off

 20 work and drive 700 miles just to talk to you-all

 21 for three minutes, so I'm who you get.

 22 A lot of Perry Countians have spent a
 416

 1 lot of time fighting against the shipments of coal

 2 ash from the Kingston disaster to private

 3 municipal solid waste landfill in the south end of

 4 our county. And I couldn't get anybody interested

 5 in to come up here with me today because most of

 6 them have given up the fight. It's hard to see --

 7 or it's not hard to see why. At are first meeting

 8 with EPA, before the shipments even started

 9 coming, and -- and actually before we even knew we

 10 were the place that was getting the coal ash, a

 11 representative met with some concerned citizens,

 12 I'd say about 100, and told us that while he

 13 appreciated us coming, he wanted us to understand

 14 he wasn't here to ask for our permission to -- to

 15 ship the coal ash here because he didn't need it.

 16 And there's nothing I can say here today that will

 17 change that fact.

 18 But as editor of the local newspaper,

 19 I've watched a lot of disconcerting things happen

 20 out of that Subtitle D landfill, handing coal ash.

 21 We've published on the front page photographs of

 22 80-foot high mounds of coal ash, uncovered,
 417

 1 against regulations, rising up out of flat prairie

 2 farmland, which is just a -- a massive change to

 3 -- to that landscape.

 4 We've published photographs of electric

 5 -- electric pumps set up to pump what was pretty

 6 clearly sludgy rain water that was contaminated

 7 with coal ash offsite and into the ditches around

 8 the property.

 9 If coal ash were regulated more firmly,

 10 we wouldn't have situations like we have in Perry

 11 County with potentially toxic heavy metals getting

 12 released into our groundwater by a shoddily run,

 13 poorly overseen Subtitle D landfill.

 14 And so I'm here to ask on behalf of the

 15 11,000 souls in Perry County that the EPA consider

 16 changing that regulation.

 17 Thank you.

 18 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Sir?

 19 (Applause)

 20 MS. DEVLIN: Sir? Sir?

 21 MR. CLARK: Yes, ma'am.

 22 MS. DEVLIN: Could you come and state
 418

 1 your name and affiliation for the record?

 2 MR. CLARK: Oh, Lord, I'm sorry.

 3 MS. DEVLIN: That's okay.

 4 MR. CLARK: John Alan Clark, and I'm

 5 publisher and editor of the Perry County Herald in

 6 Marion, Alabama.

 7 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you so much.

 8 MR. CLARK: Thank you.

 9 MS. DEVLIN: Number 201? No? 270, 271.

 10 271.

 11 MR. HOFFMAN: 271.

 12 MS. DEVLIN: 271. Thank you.

 13 MR. MCKINNEY: My name is Carson

 14 McKinney. I'm a freshman at the University of

 15 Tennessee, and I'll keep this short.

 16 I think the choice between jobs and

 17 coal, when it comes to regulation is a false

 18 choice. I think in order to protect our future,

 19 environmentally, we need to regulate the dangers

 20 -- the dangerous coal ash, which is unregulated

 21 right -- or -- and I think that we need to

 22 regulate coal ash.
 419

 1 Thank you.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Number 272?

 4 MR. MCQUEEN: Hello. My name is Matt

 5 McQueen. I am a freshman at the University of

 6 Tennessee here Knoxville.

 7 My generation is faced with finding

 8 solutions to the problems developed by past

 9 generations. Sustainability of our world -- world

 10 is a moral movement, not simply social. This is

 11 why I plead the EPA to enacted and enforce the

 12 highest amount of regulations on the coal industry

 13 for the good of my health and our environment. If

 14 these regulation are not strongly enforced, the

 15 current presiding generation, yours, will have the

 16 legacy of putting heavy metals into our public's

 17 drinking water and further highering (sic) the

 18 density of air pollution. Your generation will

 19 have the legacy of doing nothing but promoting the

 20 failing health of our public and the environment.

 21 Support Subtitle C to it's fullest

 22 potential. Thank you.
 420

 1 (Applause)

 2 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you. Is there anyone

 3 in the audience who has a number? Number 132

 4 please come forward. Is there anyone else in the

 5 audience who has a number whom I have not called?

 6 Okay. There's anyone in the audience who has number

 7 132? Come forward. There's anyone else in the lower

 8 who has a number that I have not called?

 9 MR. FRANKLIN: My name is Ben Franklin.

 10 I'm a concerned citizen, and I have 15 years in

 11 the coal combustion product industry.

 12 When I heard on the news of the spill

 13 that had happened in the Kingston -- the Kingston

 14 spill, my ni -- initial rec -- re -- reaction was,

 15 I hope everyone is okay. But then I got to

 16 thinking, Well, there's 500 million tons of these

 17 combustion residues spilled. It's obvious TVA had

 18 a major problem marketing this material and taking

 19 it offsite.

 20 Perhaps this spill will bring the issue

 21 to the forefront, and the EPA and congress will

 22 figure out a way to utilize more of these CCRs to
 421

 1 keep them out of the ponds and the landfills.

 2 After all, the EPA, since the mid 70s, has been

 3 encouraging my industry to utilize as much of the

 4 CCRs as possible. And why would the EPA not

 5 encourage CCR's utilization? The EPA is on record

 6 as considering CCRs as a non-hazardous and

 7 beneficial use material, recognizing that CCRs

 8 reduce CO2 by reducing Portland cement consumption

 9 and reducing pressure on other natural building

 10 materials, such as stone, sand and water.

 11 As I have sat through the last three EPA

 12 hearings, I have heard citizen after citizen

 13 complain that they are worried about the ponds of

 14 CCRs stored onsite at their local power plant.

 15 And they suggest the EPA rule in favor of Subtitle

 16 C.

 17 To be frank, I, too, am worried about

 18 the tons of ash stored on these plant sites, but I

 19 am also worried greatly about the EPA ruling in

 20 favor of Subtitle C. Why? Because if the EPA

 21 rules in favor of Subtitle C, the ruling will

 22 inadvertently cause more ash to be stored on site.
 422

 1 The reason is simple. The passing of Subtitle C

 2 will create liability and stigma for the

 3 industry; it creates liability for the power plant

 4 that we contract with to market these materials;

 5 and it creates liability for companies such as

 6 mine when we sell the materials to the end-user;

 7 Ready Mix concrete, shingle, tile companies, et

 8 cetera.

 9 I've personally spoken with a number of

 10 these companies and they all tell me they will not

 11 continue to use these CCRs in production of their

 12 products if we go with Subtitle C. Further, I've

 13 been told by a large majority of the power

 14 companies that they will not allow companies such

 15 as mine to market the ash. So that in and of

 16 itself creates more and larger ponds of CCRs in

 17 the future, which is counterintuitive to what both

 18 my industry, the EPA, and the citizens of this

 19 country are trying to accomplish.

 20 Let's be clear, even though we all love

 21 wind, solar and hydroelectricity, coal-fired power

 22 -- power plants are not going away for another 20
 423

 1 years in my opinion, which means that there will

 2 be CCRs left over. We do not have the land to

 3 bury it all. And when faced with liability, the

 4 EPA cannot make the building industry use the

 5 CCRs, and the EPA cannot make the power companies

 6 sell these CCRs.

 7 For proof of stigma, I have attached a

 8 copy of an invoice from a company that produces

 9 concrete block and is warranting their block to be

 10 free of coal ash, as coal ash is currently under

 11 investigation by the EPA to be classified as a

 12 hazardous waste, as they've placed on their

 13 invoice. And if that's not stigma, I don't know

 14 what is.

 15 Subtitle D is the only option.

 16 MS. DEVLIN: Thank you.

 17 MR. FRANKLIN: Thank you.

 18 MS. DEVLIN: Is there anyone else in the

 19 audience who has a number who wishes to speak at

 20 this time? Okay. Again, we're running ahead of

 21 schedule, and we have a great number of speakers

 22 who are signed up to speak at 6:00 or after. And
 424

 1 so given that, I am going to take a break. This

 2 time we'll take it for a half an hour. So we will

 3 con -- reconvene in this room at 6:00.

 4 Thank you.

 5 (Whereupon, an afternoon recess was

 6 taken.)

 7

 8

 9

 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

 20

 21

 22
 425

 1 E V E N I N G S E S S I O N

 2 MR. DELLINGER: We're calling the

 3 hearing to order again.

 4 And we'd like to call Numbers 173, 174

 5 and Numbers 273 and 274 to the podium.

 6 Is there anyone else in the room that

 7 has a number?

 8 MR. NEY: 274.

 9 MR. DELLINGER: Okay. Number 274.

 10 MS. MURPHY: Hi. Well, my name is Polly

 11 Murphy, and I'm a member of SOCM, which is

 12 Statewide Organizing for Community eMpowerment.

 13 I'm also -- have been a resident of Tennessee for

 14 over 40 years. And I --

 15 SPEAKER: Can you put the microphone

 16 down a little?

 17 MS. MURPHY: I should be short (laughs).

 18 It's Polly Murphy; it's with SOCM, Statewide

 19 Organizing for Community eMpowerment. And I've

 20 also been a teacher and lived in Tennessee for

 21 over 40 years.

 22 And I really strongly urge EPA to choose
 426

 1 option to have the coal ash to be a special

 2 hazardous waste. It's the health of people; it's

 3 extremely important for the groundwater. We've

 4 got mountaintop removal; we've got lots and lots

 5 of problems keeping our water clean. I mean, it's

 6 one of many threatening things and it's something

 7 that we can -- we can do something about right

 8 now.

 9 So I'm urging, it's for our whole

 10 environment and for everybody that's living in it.

 11 I urge you all to go with Subtitle C. And please,

 12 please take care of this for us.

 13 Thank you so much.

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 15 Number 274.

 16 MR. SHELTON: I'm 273.

 17 MR. DELLINGER: Okay.

 18 MR. HOFFMAN: Close enough.

 19 MR. DELLINGER: 273.

 20 MR. HOFFMAN: Whenever you're ready.

 21 MR. SHELTON: Okay. My name is Todd

 22 Shelton, and I live in Knox County.
 427

 1 I want to thank the EPA for adjusting

 2 your schedule and having a hearing here close to

 3 the spill in Harriman. We appreciate that.

 4 And I am hoping and asking the EPA to

 5 approve Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation

 6 Recovery Act (sic). And it would designate the

 7 coal ash as a toxic waste as far as its content

 8 and whatnot and how it's stored and managed and

 9 regulated. I just feel like this has been a long

 10 time coming.

 11 The facts are certainly there as far as

 12 the heavy metals are involved and the threat that

 13 can happen, as we've seen in Harriman when there

 14 was a spill not only in liquid form, but then in

 15 -- in -- in the air itself. It's also brought to

 16 life, as you-all were probably very aware of but I

 17 wasn't, ab -- about how many places there are like

 18 this and -- and how poorly they are stored.

 19 So the Subtitle C is not as strong as I

 20 would like it to be, and I would encourage EPA to

 21 continue to look at the testing that they've done

 22 recently that has shown the sot of toxins that are
 428

 1 there, and -- and consider the reuse and the

 2 recycling of the ash, as I understand does happen,

 3 for instance, in Sheetrock.

 4 I'm a builder; not a large builder, but

 5 I certainly don't want to be handling that sort of

 6 thing. And I certainly don't want to breathe the

 7 dust. I don't want my customers to then have to

 8 find out later that we have to tear out entire

 9 rooms in their house.

 10 So I'm hoping EPA will think about

 11 strengthening those regulations on the recycling,

 12 and be concerned that most of these -- so many of

 13 these waste collection areas are in minority and

 14 poor neighborhoods.

 15 So, once again, I am supporting Subtitle

 16 C. And I want to thank all of the -- the group

 17 that came together to put some pressure

 18 politically on EPA, and I knew to get you-all down

 19 here.

 20 Thank you.

 21 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 429

 1 MR. DELLINGER: Number 151.

 2 Please state your name and affiliation.

 3 MS. HAYES: My name is Meredith Hayes,

 4 and I'm with Students Promoting Environmental

 5 Action at Knoxville. I'm a UT student as well.

 6 And, first of all, I just want to thank

 7 you-all for coming out. You-all are taking the

 8 first step in wanting to protect America's

 9 citizens by having this hearing for us to come out

 10 and tell you why we think that you-all should vote

 11 on Subtitle C.

 12 I mean, I guess when it comes down to

 13 it, it's a matter of corporate dollars and

 14 people's lives and their health. And I think that

 15 the answer to that question, it's pretty obvious.

 16 You've heard, probably, from many people

 17 today about the heavy metals that are in the coal

 18 ash and they are very toxic. They seep into the

 19 groundwater, and these families are drinking them.

 20 And it's just very, very, very hazardous to their

 21 health.

 22 So I just want to ask you-all today to
 430

 1 please decide on Subtitle C -- on Subtitle C, just

 2 put in a lining and make sure that this doesn't

 3 get into the groundwater.

 4 Thank you again.

 5 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 6 (Applause)

 7 MR. DELLINGER: Is anyone else in the

 8 room that has a number?

 9 All right. 174?

 10 MS. MCCUE: That was easy .

 11 MR. DELLINGER: Well, you get to go

 12 first then (laughs).

 13 MS. MCCUE: That was easy. Thank you

 14 for holding the hearing. My name is Maureen

 15 McCue. I've worked in primary healthcare for the

 16 last 30 years and in public health. The last 15

 17 years I've worked international in global health,

 18 teaching and working.

 19 Today I'm speaking from my experience

 20 both in global health and about my concerns about

 21 the management of coal ash or coal combustion

 22 waste in Iowa. I speak in support of Subtitle C
 431

 1 in the current effort to regulate coal ash as a

 2 special hazardous waste. I believe this option

 3 provides the greatest likelihood to protect human

 4 health and the environment.

 5 Due to a lack of national enforceable

 6 standards in Iowa, we have large quantities of

 7 coal ash we imported. With at least 43 surface

 8 impoundments, we're second -- or rather, third

 9 behind Kentucky.

 10 Evaluation of downstream water sources

 11 is not done routinely, but a recent evaluation

 12 showed about 48% of our wells are co --

 13 contaminated with arsenic. However, 8% are above

 14 the safe water standards.

 15 As the scrubbers capture and concentrate

 16 more of the toxic by-products of burning coal,

 17 they will continue to accumulate in the

 18 environment.

 19 Iowa has experienced two 500-year floods

 20 in the last 15 years. That makes the risk of

 21 these impoundments overflowing much graver.

 22 I work also in Bangladesh, where the
 432

 1 devastating effects of arsenic poisoning from

 2 chronic water pollution are readily seen. The

 3 difference is, those people were effected

 4 accidentally when wells were dropped into

 5 arsenic-containing rock.

 6 If we continue to do what we're doing,

 7 it will be knowingly. And when our children and

 8 our families manifest these effects, we will have

 9 not done it by accident but knowingly.

 10 The health hazards posed by the toxic

 11 elements contained in the coal ash are well

 12 documented. Do we have to wait until we manifest

 13 the effects or can we do something now to protect

 14 our population? I think Subtitle C is at least a

 15 good beginning.

 16 Thank you.

 17 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MR. DELLINGER: 174?

 20 DR. RACHOW: Good after evening (sic).

 21 My name is Dr. John Rachow. I'm speaking on

 22 behalf of the Physicians for Social Responsibility
 433

 1 in my capacity as president-elect of the

 2 organization. And I'm here to voice Physicians

 3 for Social Responsibility's report -- support for

 4 Subtitle T -- Subsi -- Subtitle C as it has been

 5 proposed.

 6 I hold a doctorate in chemical

 7 engineering, and I'm a medical doctor with

 8 specialties in internal medicine, rheumatology and

 9 geriatrics. In these capacities, I am also

 10 deeply, personally concerned about the toxic

 11 threat to the health of us all posed by the

 12 failure to date to safely manage coal combustion

 13 wastes.

 14 We now live in an age of consequences.

 15 Previous clean air regulations effectively shifted

 16 some coal combustion products from stack emissions

 17 to create a poorly anticipated toxic waste

 18 disposal problem. Missing were the companion

 19 regulations to stipulate safe management of what

 20 has become a huge stream of wet and dry toxic coal

 21 ash.

 22 Business as usual will guarantee that
 434

 1 within a century or two, last century plus this

 2 century, most of heavy metals in accessible coal

 3 reserves on the planet will be permanently

 4 released into the thin veneer of life that we term

 5 the "biosphere."

 6 Heavy metal toxicity to humans is a

 7 (sic) established medical fact. And there is

 8 ample evidence of the mechanisms by which toxic

 9 heavy metals move from dumped coal ash into our

 10 soil and water to be taken up directly or, in more

 11 concentrated form, via the food chain.

 12 Current management practices vary

 13 markedly from state to state resulting in the dis

 14 -- disturbing interstate transport of coal ash to

 15 states where dumping is less strongly regulated.

 16 I am from Iowa, a state where -- with --

 17 that has become an importer of coal ash for

 18 disposal, often in open dump sites that were

 19 exposed to the two 500-year floods that we've

 20 recently had, in Iowa, just 15 years apart.

 21 Run-off enriched in leached heavy metals,

 22 certainly makes Iowa a leading contributor to the
 435

 1 toxic burden on the Mississippi River Watershed to

 2 the Dead -- Dead Zone in the Delta and to the

 3 invaluable Gulf fisheries.

 4 The cheapest, easiest methods of

 5 disposal are chosen by industry. In fact,

 6 industry even touts the beneficial uses of coal

 7 ash where benefits accrue to the industry, but at

 8 the same time, failing to accept responsibility.

 9 The health costs of mishandling of coal

 10 ash are clear. The safety of so-called beneficial

 11 uses of coal ash are unproved.

 12 Coal ash does not pose a -- a health

 13 risk in just an individual state, it is not just

 14 an interstate health issue, it is a grave national

 15 problem. Failure to safely, responsibly manage

 16 coal ash with the obvious consequences for human

 17 health is a growing national threat that requires

 18 federal regulation.

 19 Thank you.

 20 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 21 (Applause)

 22 MR. DELLINGER: Number 167?
 436

 1 SPEAKER: That's you.

 2 MR. HOCH: I'm sorry, 167?

 3 MR. DELLINGER: 167.

 4 MR. HOCH: Thanks. Should I just start?

 5 MR. DELLINGER: Sure.

 6 MR. HOCH: My name is Dave Hoch. I'm a

 7 member of both SOCM and United Mountain Defense,

 8 and I'm from Nashville, meaning the big coal would

 9 have my remarks dismissed as meaningless because I

 10 am an outsider, even though over half the mineral

 11 leases in central Appalachia are held and

 12 exploited by corporations outside the region.

 13 The issue before us tonight is not the

 14 ostensible question of whether coal ash is a

 15 hazardous or special waste, which everyone,

 16 including the EPA, and the coal industry already

 17 know it to be, based on long since documented

 18 scientific evidence, but whether the Obama EPA

 19 will fulfill its statutory mandate or continue the

 20 Bush-era sellout of both science and the public

 21 welfare to the coal industry.

 22 The agency is now at a momentous
 437

 1 crossroad with an opportunity to move beyond the

 2 anti-regulatory darkness of the Bush years and

 3 protect our lands, air, and water as is its legal

 4 and moral charge to do. But the Obama EPA has

 5 thus far shown political and regulatory

 6 ambivalence as evidenced by its failure to

 7 schedule a public hearing in Tennessee, in spite

 8 of the fact that the worse coal ash spill in

 9 history occurred in Kingston 35 miles from

 10 Knoxville. Only an ex officio citizen's hearing

 11 and pressure from Senator Lamar Alexander led to

 12 today's inquiry.

 13 So the public is understandably unsure

 14 of the EPA's future intentions; protect the people

 15 or protect corporate profits? Let us remember

 16 that all EPA personnel, including Administrator

 17 Jackson, are our employees. They work for us.

 18 Not the coal industry.

 19 Now is the time to regulate coal ash as

 20 the dangerously toxic hazardous and special waste

 21 that it is. The unconscionably lax D Prime

 22 designation being peddled by big coal and the
 438

 1 almost equally poor D designation, neither of

 2 which require federally enforceable regulations,

 3 are both clearly insufficient standards by which

 4 to effectively regulate coal ash.

 5 A C designation may show bona fide

 6 desire to curb egregious coal industry abuses, but

 7 even that designation is too lax. It fails to

 8 require rapid closure of dangerous ash ponds,

 9 timely investigation of all toxic coal ash dumps,

 10 and immediate cleanup of all toxic coal ash sites.

 11 It is far past time, scientifically,

 12 legally, ecologically, and ethically for the EPA

 13 to promulgate and vigilantly enforce stringent

 14 coal ash regulations pursuant to adoption of the

 15 only standard that can provide for efficacious

 16 regulation, that standard being a C Prime or

 17 "Super C" designation.

 18 Thank you.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 21 Is there anybody else in the room that

 22 has a number? You can come forward.
 439

 1 MR. WOOD: Okay.

 2 MR. DELLINGER: State your name and

 3 affiliation.

 4 MR. WOOD: Hello. My name is Bruce

 5 Wood, and I'm the president of -- of -- elected

 6 president of BURNT, a Nashville Citizens Group.

 7 I'm an elected member of the executive committee

 8 of the Nashville Branch of the NAACP. I'm the N

 9 doub -- State NAACP Liaison to Dickson County

 10 Landfill. And I'm also a two-year member of SOCM,

 11 which I very much appreciate.

 12 I'd like to say, first, I know there's

 13 very many nice and capable people who work for TVA

 14 and E -- EPA.

 15 I'd like to say, I think TVA has failed

 16 abysmally in one of their key goals, which is the

 17 economic development of the south. They have a

 18 mistaken belief that putting a ma -- a marina on a

 19 man-made lake that's destroyed property of people

 20 so that white males can go boating is economic

 21 development. Ye -- 40 years after TVA started, 70

 22 years after EPA started, look at the states that
 440

 1 are served by EPA to see that they se -- are -- at

 2 the bottom of every economic measure of hea -- in

 3 health measure in the state -- in -- in -- in the

 4 United States, and actually the world.

 5 We have to understand we are a very

 6 unhealthy country. We have a long -- life

 7 longevity; we're ranked 50th among all countries.

 8 And that's because of coal ash. That's because of

 9 the solid waste.

 10 I'd like to say, I certainly come here

 11 to talk in favor of Subtitle D and a stringent

 12 regulation of coal ash is possible. I think we

 13 have blown solid waste and landfill. We have a

 14 necklace of landfills across the country that

 15 leaking just like cavities and infected rooted

 16 canals.

 17 Dickson County is a 75-acre landfill

 18 that's now polluted, 12 square miles of water.

 19 And people are dying.

 20 I think individual states should have

 21 very little control over permitting and regulating

 22 landfill solid waste and coal waste. It's just to
 441

 1 dangerous, the chemicals in our food and our

 2 consumer goods.

 3 We -- again, we have to recognize the

 4 basic poor health of our country and where that

 5 comes from. That comes from what we eat and it

 6 comes from how we dispose our waste.

 7 And I've submitted, this is, again, an

 8 argument against state regulation, and the title

 9 of this is "How State Enforcement and Cover-Up

 10 Contributed Death in Dickson County." That's a

 11 liquid hazardous waste dump site. And they

 12 invented a whole new term to sidestep federal

 13 regulation, "Groundwater Protection Plan," and

 14 there's no such term in the federal or state

 15 regulations.

 16 Thank you very much.

 17 MR. DELLINGER: Could you --

 18 (Applause)

 19 MR. DELLINGER: -- could you tell me

 20 what your number was? The number that --

 21 MR. WOOD: Excuse me?

 22 MR. DELLINGER: The number that you had?
 442

 1 MR. WOOD: Yes.

 2 MR. DELLINGER: I'm just trying to keep

 3 --

 4 MR. WOOD: 192.

 5 MR. DELLINGER: Okay. Thank you very

 6 much.

 7 MR. WOOD: Yes. Thank you.

 8 MR. DELLINGER: Is there anyone else in

 9 the room that has a number? Betsy, is there

 10 anybody out in the -- at the table?

 11 We'll call a 15-minute break in the proceedings, and

 12 we'll -- let me check my... Let's make it 6:50,

 13 that'll be a 17-minute break. We'll reconvene in --

 14 in -- at -- what did I say (laughs)? Six -- 6:50.

 15 (Recess)

 16 MR. DELLINGER: I'll call the hearing to

 17 order.

 18 I'm going to go over the rules. We have

 19 a -- a (sic) influx of people who I don't think

 20 have heard the -- the logistics of the -- the way

 21 we operate.

 22 You get three minutes to speak. What
 443

 1 I'll do is call numbers in order. And -- and I'll

 2 usual -- usually do it for or five at a time. The

 3 spe -- those speakers would go over to those

 4 chairs to my right, your left, and then -- and

 5 then come to the podium in order. And then you

 6 would state your name and your affiliation. And

 7 -- and then what we -- we do is to remind you, we

 8 hold up cards; one at two minutes, one at one

 9 minute, one at 30 seconds, and then one -- when

 10 you get the red card you're supposed to quit

 11 talking -- or, you know, quit testifying. So

 12 that's -- that's pretty much the way it works.

 13 And we're going to get started right

 14 away. I'm starting with pre-registered people

 15 right now. That would be 116, 153, 202, and 208.

 16 The other thing is, is that if you have

 17 -- if you have written notes, it would be useful

 18 to -- to -- to us to have copies of those. And so

 19 there's a box that says "Written Comments" over

 20 here on my left, your right, and that makes it

 21 easier for us to make sure that we've captured

 22 your testimony as close to verbatim as possible.
 444

 1 116? 202?

 2 MS. KUEBBING: Okay. My name is Sara

 3 Kuebbing. I'm a resident here of Knoxville,

 4 Tennessee, so I'm coming to speak as a citizen.

 5 Thank you guys for coming down here. I

 6 really appreciate you giving me the opportunity to

 7 speak right here in my hometown.

 8 I've done a little research today and I

 9 was looking on Source Watch. And I realize I've

 10 lived -- I just recently moved to Knoxville,

 11 Tennessee. And I've lived in five different

 12 states along the eastern seaboard. And except for

 13 about four years when I lived in Vermont, the -- I

 14 have always lived within 40 miles of a coal plant,

 15 and I've also lived in a watershed that has a coal

 16 plant upstream of me. So it's a little fact that

 17 I figured out today, and it's something that

 18 interests me, and it sort of links in.

 19 When I moved to Knoxville about a

 20 year-and- a-half ago, there were two things that

 21 people up in Vermont said to me. The first was,

 22 "Hope you like the color orange because they
 445

 1 really like their football down there," and,

 2 second thing they said to me was, "Isn't that

 3 where that big coal ash spill was there? And

 4 isn't there a problem with the water?" And it's a

 5 really interesting perspective that the two things

 6 that people think about Knoxville are (a) the

 7 football team, which may be a good thing, but (b)

 8 is something that's -- that's pretty negative.

 9 So I'm here just as a repre -- as a

 10 citizen to tell you as I've drank 27 years of

 11 water from the east coast and all my five states,

 12 and I breathed the air, that I would like to you

 13 regulate coal ash. And I would like to you

 14 regulated it by using Subtitle C, because your

 15 mission as the EPA is to protect human health and

 16 protect the environment. And I see Subsitle (sic)

 17 C doing that. So as someone who has paid her

 18 taxes and supports the EPA's mission, I'd like you

 19 to continue to do your job to do that, and I

 20 support you in picking Subtitle C.

 21 So thank you guys for having us here

 22 today, and I hope you pick Subtitle C.
 446

 1 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Number 153.

 4 MS. JUDY: Hi. I'm Carol Judy, and I

 5 live up in Clear Fork Valley in Tennessee, it's

 6 the northeast corner up from here.

 7 I've raised my children there and now my

 8 children are raising their children and my

 9 great-grandchildren there. On one side of my

 10 family we've been there for generations and on the

 11 other side not quite so many generations.

 12 What's it like living near where the

 13 coal ash is in your yard? Well, I burn coal and

 14 wood. And I always have to think about every

 15 winter what we're going to do with that coal and

 16 wood. Now, mind you, we're just a small

 17 household, so I can't imagine what these coal ash

 18 disasters are having to deal with. It's mega

 19 households, I imagine, hot garbage.

 20 But I do know that when we think about

 21 it at home, we make sure that the wood ashes go

 22 near where we can do gardening or things like
 447

 1 that. And when it's coal ashes, we try not to

 2 burn it because it has "clankers" in it. You-all

 3 know what clankers are? It's them heavy pieces

 4 that will not burn and they'll cut you because

 5 they're so sharp when you dig them out. You can

 6 use them to build -- fill in holes in the road,

 7 long as you put something else on top because you

 8 don't want to cut your tires.

 9 And anything -- you know, and you can

 10 use a little of that in your flowerbeds. But the

 11 one thing I guarantee you is, we are not going to

 12 put a whole lot of coal ash in our garden spots or

 13 near where the water is. Because we may not know

 14 the right names of what's in it, but we dadgum

 15 sure know we don't want it in us within a few

 16 years.

 17 I live on the other side of the spectrum

 18 when it comes to disasters in environments and

 19 things like that because years ago, before there

 20 was some regulations, the mountains were left a

 21 disaster from strip-mining. We've had 40 years of

 22 figuring that out with government assistance. And
 448

 1 I would say that if we ha -- could turn back the

 2 hands of time, we would have implemented that from

 3 the beginning. I urge you to look at until coal

 4 ash disaster as an opportunity to work with folks

 5 who have been living with something very similar

 6 to that and benefit from some generational

 7 knowledge.

 8 I also am part of the Clear Fork

 9 Community Institute. In remodeling our building,

 10 we chose to go with geothermal. That place is a

 11 $500 a month debt burden on us and we accept it,

 12 because I have no idea what would -- we would do

 13 with coal ash if we were trying to heat with coal

 14 and wood because electricity is unaffordable, both

 15 for the bock -- pocketbook and for the

 16 environment.

 17 SPEAKER: Yeah.

 18 MS. JUDY: So I don't know what else to

 19 tell you except to say that we would be pleased to

 20 work with anyone who wants to work on the

 21 proactive.

 22 MR. HOFFMAN: Time.
 449

 1 MS. JUDY: Thank you.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Number 208.

 4 MR. MINCY: Hello. My name is Grant

 5 Mincy, and I am a graduate student at the

 6 University of Tennessee. I'm also a member of

 7 United Mountain Defense. I'm in the Earth and

 8 Planetary Sciences Department, and by training I'm

 9 an environmental geologist.

 10 And coal ash contains concentrations of

 11 -- of heavy metals that are -- have been linked to

 12 lung disease, heart disease, cancer, things like

 13 that. And I know that the industry continues to

 14 claim that coal ash is neither toxic nor poisonous

 15 and has no concern to the public. But there have

 16 been a lot of scientific studies done on -- done

 17 on this and -- and it's been proven false. The

 18 scientific community greatly believes that coal

 19 ash is of a toxic threat to -- to people.

 20 So, I mean, there's -- there's great

 21 threats posed to human health and -- and to the

 22 environment from decades of dumping toxic coal ash
 450

 1 and -- and this must end.

 2 The 30-year failure of state and federal

 3 governments to ensure safe disposal of coal ash

 4 requires swift and decisive action by the EPA to

 5 prevent future damage.

 6 Those whose health is at risk from coal

 7 ash and whose communities are threatened by -- by

 8 the next catastrophic collapse of a toxic pile and

 9 can't wait any longer.

 10 I believe that coal ash deserves a C

 11 Prime status and that there needs to be rapid

 12 closure of dangerous coal ash ponds, timely

 13 investigation of all toxic coal ash dumps,

 14 immediate cleanup of all contaminated coal ash.

 15 And because there is a great threat to the health

 16 of the environment from toxic waste and -- and,

 17 you know, right now there is no requirement of

 18 pollut -- the polluters to ensure the healthy air

 19 and water of communities. And I -- I believe this

 20 needs to be fixed.

 21 Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 451

 1 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 2 Numbers 275, 276, 277, 278, and 279.

 3 MS. FARNSWORTH: My name is Evan

 4 Farnsworth, and I'm here with Students Promoting

 5 Environmental Action in Knoxville. I'm also a

 6 student of UT.

 7 And like everyone else, I want to thank

 8 you for coming here because, obviously, this issue

 9 is very important to Knoxville specifically.

 10 I want to ask you to support Subtitle C

 11 for many reasons. One is because I have

 12 respiratory problems, and I don't live in

 13 Knoxville except for when I attend college here.

 14 And my problems kind of worsen whenever I'm here

 15 and it's very noticeable. And because of that, I

 16 think it's -- like if there are noticeable things

 17 like that happening, it would be important to

 18 recognize that things like coal ash are like a

 19 reason for that happening here.

 20 And I just want to ask you to support

 21 that. And that would be wonderful. And I

 22 appreciate your time here.
 452

 1 Thank you.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 4 MR. SMITH: First, I'd like to thank you

 5 for providing me the opportunity to speak here

 6 tonight.

 7 My name is Ryan Smith and I'm a student

 8 from Asheville, North Carolina. And I'm here to

 9 speak in favor of the regulation proposed under

 10 Subtitle C of the Resources Conservation and

 11 Recovery Act, which will provide the minimum

 12 standards and levels of enforcement we need for

 13 the storage of coal combustion residuals.

 14 Both the EPA and the Academy of Natural

 15 Sciences have years of research showing that coal

 16 is becoming increasingly toxic. The sou -- the --

 17 the thousands of toxic coal waste dump sites

 18 across the country pose serious threats to our

 19 heath. Improved testing methods reveal that coal

 20 ash toxins lead -- leach into waters at

 21 significantly higher rates than originally

 22 understood. Concentrations of metals and
 453

 1 chemicals in coal ash have been found at levels

 2 many times higher than what is currently

 3 considered hazardous wastes.

 4 The toxins found in coal ash have been

 5 linked to organ disease, cancer, respiratory

 6 illnesses. I have asthma, and so this affects me

 7 personally. People living with one mi -- within

 8 one mile of coal ash ponds have been found to have

 9 at least a 1 in 50 chance of developing cancer.

 10 And there's an estim -- or the EPA has -- has

 11 found out that there is ov -- are almost 2 million

 12 children living near coal ash sites.

 13 The environment -- en -- environmental

 14 impacts of currently unregulated coal ash are dire

 15 as well. Much of the toxins end up in rivers.

 16 And it's been proven to kill plants and animals,

 17 lower birth rates, cause tissue damage and slow

 18 development in organisms, unbalancing wildlife

 19 populations and destruct -- disrupting ecosystems.

 20 The toxins can accumulate to very high

 21 concentrations in animals as they pass through the

 22 food chain.
 454

 1 We find the need for coal ash to be

 2 regulated unquestionable. However, recognizing

 3 that the options proposed under Subtitle D,

 4 relying on suggested state guidelines is not

 5 substantially different from current policies and

 6 will re -- result in few, if any, changes.

 7 We support the changes proposed under

 8 Subtitle C. The common sense guidelines backed by

 9 federal en -- enforcement and financial

 10 accountability provide much needed environmental

 11 and public safeguards.

 12 Despite the known toxicity of coal ash,

 13 a vast majority of states do not even recognize --

 14 or do no -- do not even require monitoring to see

 15 if coal ash is polluting drinking water.

 16 Coal ash is not only toxic when put in a

 17 pond or landfill; it needs to be regulated from

 18 the cradle to the grave. If the recent BPA (sic)

 19 Oil disaster and the Tennessee TVA coal ash

 20 tragedy has taught us anything, is that we just

 21 can't believe the polluters words anymore. It's

 22 time for the federal government to step in.
 455

 1 For our future, regulate core ash --

 2 coal ash according to Subtitle C.

 3 (Applause)

 4 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 5 MR. WILLIAMS: Good evening. My name is

 6 Rhys Brydon-Williams and I am currently a student

 7 in Asheville, North Carolina.

 8 As a youth in Louisville, Kentucky, I

 9 spent much time involved with the citizen advocacy

 10 group, Kentuckians for the Commonwealth. During

 11 this time, we received testimonials from citizens

 12 on the outskirts of town in the Fern Creek area

 13 who had to live by a coal ash pond. The -- those

 14 stories we heard were sometimes tragic and

 15 sometimes quite infuriating. People described

 16 respiratory illnesses, sometimes new, sometimes

 17 old ones aggravated from the ash. So as other

 18 problems resultant from the poisons leached from

 19 the pond to their soil.

 20 I remember seeing that people had rashes

 21 occasionally that I would pop up. Sometimes

 22 family pets took ill by drinking water. The
 456

 1 health of the community was decreased multi-fold

 2 since the pond had been installed. And the metals

 3 derived from coal ash appeared to be poisoning the

 4 population. The situation was grim and only

 5 seemed to be worsening as the residents became

 6 irate over their illness.

 7 Is this what we want to have acc --

 8 across the nation, sick, angry citizens having to

 9 campaign simply to maintain their health? I think

 10 not.

 11 Thus, I urge you to pass Subtitle C,

 12 even though it does not require timely

 13 investigation or immediate cleanup of coal ash

 14 ponds. Even a little safety, a little increased

 15 safety for our citizens is better than letting

 16 them suffering like this.

 17 When economic interests come before the

 18 health of our citizens, we can know that the

 19 American spinguish -- spirit has been

 20 extinguished. Let's make sure that never happens.

 21 Thank you for your time.

 22 (Applause)
 457

 1 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 2 MS. SHOHADAE: My name is Roxanne

 3 Shohadae and I am a member of Students Promoting

 4 Environmental Action in Knoxville. I'm a student

 5 and I'm a young person. And I am here to tell you

 6 thank you for coming, for op -- giving us the

 7 opportunity to speak to you.

 8 It's your job. You are the environmen

 9 -- you are members of the Environmental Protection

 10 Agency and it's your job to protect the

 11 environment. And our environment is being

 12 polluted. Our lives are being polluted. And this

 13 is -- this has heavy metals that is -- that are

 14 poisoning the people. And it's -- it doesn't

 15 matter if you don't live here to ha -- you don't

 16 have to live here to see what's happening.

 17 And eventually you will experience it

 18 because in our lifetimes -- if it's not in your

 19 lifetime, it's in your children's lifetimes.

 20 There -- our water is going to be such a scarce

 21 resource. And our Highland Watersheds are being

 22 polluted. They're being polluted. And -- and we
 458

 1 -- we can't continue to have people in this region

 2 having children, living, and these children are --

 3 are -- are being poisoned from the minute that

 4 they're born. I ju -- it's not fair that we have

 5 to come and tell you. I mean, I appreciate that

 6 you're here. I appreciate so much that you're

 7 trying.

 8 And I think that Option C is a good

 9 start. But I think you need to do more than that.

 10 I think things happen -- need to happen

 11 immediately.

 12 A lot of the ash that was -- that

 13 spilled in Kingston is being shipped down to Ala

 14 -- was being -- wa -- was shipped down to Alabama

 15 to these poor communities. And it does -- it's

 16 not fair that they have to continue, just because

 17 they're already a poor community, to -- to have to

 18 be poisoned more.

 19 And it's -- and it's just -- I don't

 20 know. I'm shaking because I'm so furious and sad

 21 at the same time. But I just hope that you can

 22 hear us. And I hope that you can hear that each
 459

 1 of us here are speaking for all of the people who

 2 don't know, who don't know about this, who don't

 3 know how horrible this is. And (cries) we have to

 4 tell you so that you can do something. (cries)

 5 And I hope that you do something (cries).

 6 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MR. VARGAS: My name is Michael Vargas,

 9 and I came here to tell you the truth today.

 10 I'm no expert in just about anything

 11 really. And I didn't even really even plan on

 12 coming out here today, to tell you the truth. My

 13 girlfriend told me about it for community service

 14 hours. And so I was standing outside and there

 15 was this reoccurring theme of people telling me

 16 coal was bad. And, at first, to tell you the

 17 truth, I didn't have a stance, really, on it

 18 because I knew nothing about it.

 19 But they gave me a sheet of paper here

 20 outside, and it has lots of just common facts, I

 21 guess you would say. It's a -- common questions

 22 about coal. And, well, looking over it, it just
 460

 1 -- now, mind you, I don't know too much about the

 2 subject, but it convinced me instantly to realize

 3 that there's a problem situate -- or there's a

 4 problem that we're all being situated with, and

 5 that there's coal being -- coal ash being

 6 unregulated in Tennessee.

 7 And, you know, I -- I've always heard

 8 that Knoxville has bad pollution. But it really

 9 didn't like affect me at first, other than I would

 10 have to wipe my glasses down a little bit more for

 11 the -- the pollution in the air in -- compared to

 12 Nashville where I'm from.

 13 But what I've been convinced of so far

 14 today is that there's Subtitle C and that a lot of

 15 people here that know a lot more than me are

 16 advocates of it, and they've done their research,

 17 and they have their information. And that if they

 18 put this much effort and time into it to come up

 19 with a decision to support Subtitle C, I will also

 20 stand by them and say that Subtitle C is what you

 21 should vote for.

 22 Thank you and have a nice day.
 461

 1 (Applause)

 2 MR. DELLINGER: Numbers 116, 182, 175,

 3 179, and 198.

 4 MR. MOTTLEY: My name's Don Mottley.

 5 I'm spokesperson for a group called Save Our

 6 Rivers from southwest Indiana.

 7 MR. DELLINGER: What number are you?

 8 MR. MOTTLEY: 116.

 9 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 10 MR. MOTTLEY: I want to read a

 11 resolution. Resolution Number 210-01 (sic), Town

 12 of Somerville.

 13 WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of

 14 Somerville has established under Subtitle C of the

 15 Resource Conservation Recovery Act (sic), RCRA,

 16 would effectively regulate coal ash as hazardous

 17 waste with associated safeguards for storage,

 18 handling, transport, and disposal; and

 19 WHEREAS, Subtitle D would not establish

 20 any uniform, federally enforceable standards,

 21 leaving us with inadequate state regulations that

 22 have already failed us; and
 462

 1 WHEREAS, Subtitle C establishes

 2 requirements for our state through the Federal

 3 Enforcement Authority of the US EPA; and

 4 WHEREAS, Somerville is a town in Gibson

 5 County, Indiana, that has seen groundwater and

 6 dust issues in the coal combustion waste/fly ash

 7 at the Duke Energy Gibson Generating Station, and

 8 sees the need for federal regulation of coal

 9 combustion waste.

 10 THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town

 11 Council of Somerville on September the 20th, 2010,

 12 adopts said resolution to the US EPA Docket Number

 13 EPA HQ 2090640 (sic) in support of Subtitle C.

 14 Bill Huttchison, president, Mary A.

 15 Dyer, clerk treasurer; Rex O'Neal, and Tommy

 16 Carney.

 17 And I would like to submit that for the

 18 record.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you very much.

 21 Number 182?

 22 MS. SCHANER: Hi. I'm Jes. I'm from
 463

 1 Ohio.

 2 I know you guys are probably tired. But

 3 I just want -- thank you for listening what I have

 4 to say.

 5 Future generations will look back on our

 6 culture as the most destructive to ever exist. We

 7 believe we can infinitely burn non-renewable

 8 resources and fill the ground with toxins and

 9 somehow technology will fix everything. We live

 10 in a reality that doesn't exist.

 11 How many of you know someone who has

 12 cancer? Did you know cancer is the result of the

 13 total toxification of the environment?

 14 I am here for my grandpa, who worked in

 15 the coal mines, that is now dying of bone cancer.

 16 I want an environment free of intentionally

 17 released toxins.

 18 There is no waste in nature. And if we

 19 want to live on this planet, we must imitate it.

 20 I will not stand by as we continue to poison

 21 ourselves and all other life forms.

 22 If you really care about the
 464

 1 environment, you wouldn't just regulate coal ash;

 2 you would ban the burning of coal altogether.

 3 We can do better than Subtitle C.

 4 (Applause)

 5 MR. DELLINGER: Number 175.

 6 MS. HART: Hi. My name is Patricia

 7 Hart, and I'd like to thank you for coming to

 8 Knoxville to hear us.

 9 For over 32 years I've lived next to the

 10 Emory River in Roane County, a little over one

 11 mile downstream from the site of the ash spill

 12 disaster. My husband and I raised two sons here,

 13 and every summer our lives resolved around the

 14 lake.

 15 My older son bought a home on the river,

 16 upstream from the spill a few miles. He had

 17 planned to raise his family here, too, and enjoy

 18 the life just like we had. All that changed

 19 December the 22nd, 2008.

 20 Thousands of people's lives have been

 21 changed by this spill. Tens of thousands of God's

 22 creatures were killed by the spill. Most of them
 465

 1 buried alive or chocked to death by the millions

 2 of cubic yards of coal ash muck that walked o --

 3 washed over the land and clogged the waterways.

 4 Homes were destroyed, and for almost two years the

 5 people left behind have had to endure living in

 6 the wake of the spill.

 7 Seeing the devastation caused by the ash

 8 spill has been heartbreaking, and our lives have

 9 changed forever. We used to look forward to the

 10 spring and knowing that it was almost time to

 11 enjoy the lake again. Our families would come to

 12 visit us and we were proud to live here. Not

 13 anymore. Now when I look at the water, I can

 14 still see the swirls of the cenospheres floating

 15 among the leaves. And it's the ro -- reminder of

 16 all of the cubic -- thousands of cubic yards that

 17 are still in the river waiting to be removed, but

 18 they never will be.

 19 A trip up the Emory River to the site of

 20 the spill is even sadder. The beautiful white

 21 farmhouse, the poster child of the spill, is gone.

 22 The homes purchased by TVA sitting along the
 466

 1 shores of the Emory River are ghost homes telling

 2 the story of how lives used to be before the

 3 spill. There are no families, no children playing

 4 in the yards or the water (cries). The tall trees

 5 that lined the edge of the Emory, hiding the

 6 growing mountain of coal ash are gone, violently

 7 uprooted by the tsunami of the coal ash sludge.

 8 I only think of the "if onlys." If

 9 only regulations had been in place, that would

 10 have prevented TVA's ash mountain to grow so big

 11 that it eventually bust through the dikes to

 12 devastate over 400 acres of land and create an

 13 environmental disaster that will never be cleaned

 14 up, even though over a billion dollars has been

 15 spent.

 16 If only there had been regulations,

 17 homes and lives would not have been destroyed.

 18 And now, if only EPA will put in place

 19 regulations so this type of disaster will never

 20 happen again, we would all be grateful.

 21 I urge the EPA to adopt Subtitle C to

 22 ensure the safe and proper storage of fly ash.
 467

 1 Thank you.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 4 Number 179.

 5 MS. ENDERLE: Hi, there. My name is

 6 Emily Enderle. I work at Earthjustice in

 7 Washington, DC.

 8 First, I want to thank the EPA for

 9 hosting this hearing as well as the other hearings

 10 across the country. I know it's been a long

 11 process for you guys as well as activists, public

 12 interest folks, and regular citizens across the

 13 country.

 14 Basically, I wanted to get up here and

 15 say a lot of things that are very wonky and very

 16 technical. But actually it's been really

 17 inspirational to see so many young people come out

 18 and talk about this particular issue and why it

 19 matters to them. And why, I think, really it's

 20 evident that their generation shouldn't be the one

 21 that has to finally deal with this mess. We're at

 22 a point in time where we can actually deal with
 468

 1 coal ash in a way that's going to protect people

 2 across the country. And there's no better place,

 3 I think, to end this particular circuit than in

 4 Knoxville, Tennessee.

 5 And I say this because I spent several

 6 hours this weekend at about 1200 feet above a lot

 7 of Tennessee, looking at coal ash impoundment

 8 sites and coal-fired power plants across the

 9 country.

 10 And what I don't think is clear to a lot

 11 of people is these dams are enormous. The dam

 12 that broke at the TVA site is -- was 60 feet high.

 13 There are facilities across the country; some are

 14 as high or expected to be as high as 100 feet.

 15 There are facilities, dozens of them, that if they

 16 were to break, they would result in the loss of

 17 live. I think it's a miracle that nobody died in

 18 this case, and that there haven't been more losses

 19 of life.

 20 And we're at a point right now with

 21 regulations being proposed under C and D where we

 22 can actually regulate this in a way that will
 469

 1 protect not only the people that are dealing with

 2 it now but also generations to come, including the

 3 folks in this room.

 4 I did want to pass out just some of the

 5 pictures that were taken from aerial views. What

 6 I think they show is that houses are literally

 7 across the river way from these impoundment sites.

 8 If they were to break, they would knock out those

 9 beautiful homes; they would knock out those nice

 10 boats and docks; they would contaminate those

 11 river ways; and they potentially kill people. And

 12 that's absolutely evident from these sites across

 13 Tennessee. And there are multiple. So I just

 14 wanted to pass these out for you guys to check

 15 out.

 16 One point I also wanted to make is we --

 17 I don't think we've talked a lot about arsenic.

 18 Arsenic is a known carcinogen. We all know that.

 19 Science is coming out regularly that says that

 20 even small even smaller doses are contaminating

 21 people and leading to possible cancer across the

 22 country.
 470

 1 This is one particular contaminant of

 2 many that are in coal ash, and one that's been

 3 contaminating groundwater across the country.

 4 There are more than 100 proven damage cases either

 5 by the EPA or by public interest groups

 6 demonstrating that either the environment or

 7 public health has been compromised across the

 8 country.

 9 And here in Tennessee we've seen that

 10 not only one community has been devastated by this

 11 but two. If you look at Perry County and what

 12 they've been dealing with in terms of this ash

 13 being taken down there, the Arrowhead Landfill

 14 declaring bankruptcy, all of the things that

 15 they've had to deal with.

 16 So I just want to say thank you for opp

 17 -- providing the opportunity to so many people

 18 here in Knoxville to talk and for all of you young

 19 people for caring.

 20 Thanks.

 21 (Applause)

 22 MR. DELLINGER: Number 198. Is 198 in
 471

 1 the room?

 2 MS. BICKNESE: Hi. My name is Erin

 3 Bicknese. I'm a citizen of Knoxville.

 4 I grew up in Nashville, Tennessee. And

 5 one of the most important parts of my childhood

 6 was being able to play in the water and streams

 7 around my house. I don't have kids but I hope to

 8 in the next ten years. And I know that the world

 9 I live in right now is really different than the

 10 one my parents lived in in terms of what they

 11 could do outside, what water they could drink when

 12 they were hiking. And I know that it already is

 13 going to be vastly different for the children that

 14 I have. But I hope they live in a place where

 15 they're not poisoned by the air that's around them

 16 everyday and by the water that comes out of their

 17 tap and by the places that they'd like to be.

 18 I'm a young person right now. That's

 19 going to change. But I hope that the world I live

 20 in how and tomorrow and in the future is protected

 21 by the laws that we have.

 22 Subtitle C is going to be a great step,
 472

 1 but it concerns me that there are a lot of things

 2 that won't be done, a lot of things that won't be

 3 stopped. There's a lot of poison right now that

 4 could danger (sic) people from coal ash. And

 5 that's really care try to me.

 6 Thanks so much for coming here and

 7 listening.

 8 (Applause)

 9 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 10 Numbers 280, 281, 282, 283, and 284.

 11 MS. GILMORE: Hello, there. My name's

 12 Sara Gilmore, and I'm a student at the University

 13 of Tennessee.

 14 I'm thankful to be here today and talk

 15 to you, but at the same time I can't believe that

 16 it's necessary to be here, that this is even a

 17 (sic) issue of controversy. Because we have here

 18 this few facts about coal ash and the problems of

 19 it, and logically looking at it, it's undeniable

 20 that something has to be done about this.

 21 Picture, like, I have myself a

 22 9-year-old nephew, and if you have any kids, your
 473

 1 wife, your -- or children that you love dearly,

 2 you wouldn't want to submit (sic) them to drinking

 3 water which is supposed to sustain them, that

 4 could slowly kill them. You wouldn't do that to

 5 someone you love, so why make other people have to

 6 do that to their children.

 7 If we just think about it logically, the

 8 stuff on this sheet is evidence enough to us. And

 9 I think Subtitle C is step in the right direction,

 10 as many have said. But more needs to be done.

 11 And I hope you guys realize that and see it.

 12 Thank you.

 13 (Applause)

 14 MR. HOFFMAN: 281.

 15 MS. MCKEE: Hi. My name is Freesia

 16 Mckee, and I'm a student. And I would just like

 17 to thank you for sitting here this long day and

 18 listening to all of us speak.

 19 I'd like to ask everybody in the room:

 20 How many of you have asthma or other -- some other

 21 kind of respiratory problem? Raise your hand.

 22 AUDIENCE: (show of hands)
 474

 1 MS. MCKEE: How many of you have a loved

 2 one who has asthma or some other kind of

 3 respiratory problem?

 4 AUDIENCE: (show of hands)

 5 MS. MCKEE: There's a lot of people

 6 here. And while not all of us are coming from

 7 this, a lot of us are even coming from racial and

 8 economic and geographic privilege and still have

 9 people who have asthma or other respiratory

 10 problems.

 11 So I'm asking you today: Do you know

 12 what asthma is? And do you know what it is to

 13 wake up coughing or crying because you can't

 14 breathe or wanting to pull open your chest for

 15 some air or a breath or driving to the hospital

 16 for a breath or laying on the ground hoping for a

 17 breath with air machines and inhalers and masks

 18 and tests for a breath or plastic and chemicals on

 19 your 10-year- old face for a breath? Or you wake

 20 up in the hospital with dad praying over you and

 21 your mom crying because you need a breath? And

 22 all I wanted my whole childhood was a breath. I
 475

 1 have asthma. All I had was asthma.

 2 So I'm ste -- I'm asking you today --

 3 I'm telling you that it's in your hands. And it's

 4 in your lungs, the words that -- that you breathe

 5 out to choose Subtitle C so that you can give

 6 people like me a breath of fresh and clean air.

 7 So I'm asking you to make right decisions for kids

 8 who want to play sports outside, for kids who want

 9 to play outside, for kids who want to be healthy.

 10 Thank you.

 11 (Applause)

 12 MR. HOFFMAN: 282.

 13 MS. GOSNEY: Hi. I'm Jessica Gosney.

 14 I'm a student here at Knoxville.

 15 I've only lived in Knoxville a couple of

 16 years, but I really love it, and I worry a lot

 17 about the pollution here. Today I went on a -- a

 18 run by Three Rivers Creek, which is hugely

 19 polluted. And you just -- you can't -- you can't

 20 ever like get a full, deep, clear breath. And

 21 that worries me.

 22 And I also think that Subtitle C is not
 476

 1 quite enough. And I would just like to ask you

 2 guys to please do your job and protect the

 3 environment.

 4 (Applause)

 5 MR. HOFFMAN: 284.

 6 MR. PETSCHUBAT: My name test Sam

 7 Petschubat, and I'm also a student here in

 8 Knoxville.

 9 I'd -- I -- like everyone else, I'd,

 10 first, like to thank you guys for coming and just

 11 listening to all of our comments.

 12 But we live in a capitalist society here

 13 in the United States. People are basically free

 14 to do what they want. And in that society the

 15 government's role is, essentially, to keep us all

 16 from killing each other for money. Because, Lord

 17 knows we would do it if we could. That's why you

 18 guys have jobs, because we need a government to

 19 keep us from killing each other for profits. This

 20 is literally happening --

 21 (Applause)

 22 MR. PETSCHUBAT: -- every single day.
 477

 1 People living near unlined coal ash ponds have a

 2 risk of 1 in -- 1 in 50 -- the risk of cancer is 1

 3 in 50, which is 2000 times the EPA's standards,

 4 your standards.

 5 So something clearly needs to be done to

 6 -- to prevent this from happening. This needs to

 7 stop.

 8 And C is a start. A lot of people have

 9 been saying that C doesn't go far enough, it's not

 10 quite strong enough. But it's what we have right

 11 now. It's the best option. So for that reason,

 12 if nothing else, you -- it deserves your support,

 13 at least as a beginning point.

 14 A lot of the criticisms of C; I heard a

 15 guy argue earlier that he doesn't want Option C

 16 because he makes his living off coal ash; he's in

 17 the concrete industry. And he's paying his kids'

 18 college tuitions with the money he's making due to

 19 the deregulation. But that's not a good excuse.

 20 I mean, if he was an arms dealer, if he

 21 was a syndicated mobster or crime syndicate, would

 22 that be an equally valid excuse that he's doing
 478

 1 those things to support himself and his family and

 2 to send his col -- his kids through -- to college?

 3 It wouldn't be. And he would still go to jail.

 4 He would still face the repercussions that his

 5 actions were having on other people.

 6 People are also arguing that this will

 7 raise utilities costs and people that can't afford

 8 -- can barely pay their bills as it is, it's going

 9 to raise their electricity bills. But money is a

 10 short-term thing. Money is something that can be

 11 replaced. It's something -- if people lose money,

 12 they're resourceful. They go out, they find new

 13 ways to make money. If you lose your job due to

 14 your coal company that you work for is expense is

 15 rising, you'll be able to find a new job. But if

 16 your family member is killed by cancer from one of

 17 these ash deposits, there's no undoing that. It's

 18 completely permanent and irrevocable.

 19 And for that reason, I would encourage

 20 all of you to support Option C today.

 21 (Applause)

 22 MR. SMITH: My name is William Smith.
 479

 1 I'm from Murfreesboro, Tennessee. But I have a

 2 lot of family in the Appalachian area, in east

 3 Tennessee and Virginia and North Carolina and

 4 South Carolina, and their water supply, as the

 5 years go by is getting more and more toxic.

 6 As has been made very obvious by the

 7 Harriman County spill, current regulation on coal

 8 ash storage is not enough. We need tighter

 9 regulation.

 10 But I see a worse problem. And I would

 11 even go as far as to call it a crime. And that is

 12 an environmental justice problem. Nearly half of

 13 the high azard -- high hazard ash ponds in the

 14 southeast are described by the EPA as high hazard

 15 are in low-income areas.

 16 Another environmental crime I see is

 17 that the ash from the Harriman County spill is

 18 being moved to Per -- Perry County, Alabama, which

 19 is another low income and predominantly

 20 African-American community. The water in that

 21 community is so full of arsenic that it contains

 22 80 times the safe amount for drinking water.
 480

 1 Cancer, COPD, other respiratory

 2 illnesses, neurological damage, reproductive

 3 problems are the legacy that we're leaving our

 4 children right now. I'm a young person and I care

 5 about my future. I don't want to leave that

 6 legacy.

 7 So support Subtitle C.

 8 (Applause)

 9 MR. DELLINGER: Numbers 285, 286, 287,

 10 288, and 298.

 11 MR. NORTON: My name is Jordan Norton,

 12 and I come from the increasingly low-income area,

 13 the low-income town of Greeneville, Tennessee.

 14 Last time I checked we had about 15% unemployment

 15 rated and more and more manufacturing jobs are

 16 moving out and more people are losing their jobs

 17 every day. I bring this up because I know that

 18 unle -- that these coal -- this coal ash is

 19 shipped to low-income areas. It's a (sic)

 20 economic fact. If you're going to store it

 21 cheaper, you ship it to low-income communities.

 22 So this is what makes me afraid for my
 481

 1 community back home. I've lived there for 20

 2 years. Hopefully, I'll live there in the future

 3 sometime.

 4 But I just -- I would have it regulated

 5 so that we can avoid the types of things that go

 6 on in these communities where our wa -- our well

 7 water or our tap water is just contaminated beyond

 8 all belief, people have respiratory problems,

 9 cancer problems, things like that.

 10 So I'd ask you to support Subtitle C to

 11 su -- to help us in our future of these small

 12 communities.

 13 Thank you.

 14 (Applause)

 15 MS. DELHEIMER: Hi. My name is Sara

 16 Delheimer and I'm a student at UT.

 17 First, I want to thank you for coming

 18 here and holding this hearing and give us all the

 19 opportunity to speak.

 20 Coal ash is a health issue; it's a

 21 social issue, an environmental issue. As we've

 22 seen, it can be a disaster. It's an emergency.
 482

 1 And so I would strongly encourage you to listen to

 2 the voices of all the young people here today

 3 whose futures you can help protect, and all the

 4 locals who are being directly affected by this

 5 toxic waste.

 6 So please, please regulate coal ash as a

 7 hazardous waste, protect lives and the

 8 environment, and please support Subtitle C.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MS. LAVONE: Hi. My name is Michelle

 11 Lavone. I'm a junior at University of Tennessee.

 12 I'm here with SPEAK, Students Promoting

 13 Environmental Action Knoxville. I'm a science

 14 communications journalist at the university, and I

 15 just want to bring in this tiny little story.

 16 After one of my classes, after the

 17 Harriman ash spill, I went and I interviewed a

 18 couple of organic farmers, and I wanted to figure

 19 out, you know, how they were affected by the toxic

 20 ash. And they told me that what they do for

 21 organic farming is, they don't use conventional

 22 chickenfeed. They actually use fish, and they
 483

 1 ground up the fish and they feed their chicken

 2 (sic) the fish, which gives them the nutrition,

 3 because the eggs are nutrition. And then people

 4 eat the eggs and gain that nutrition from the

 5 eggs.

 6 And what's happening with the fish

 7 populations is the selenium is destroying the

 8 reproductive organs of the fish. And so basically

 9 what happens is that, you know, you don't have as

 10 many fish and the chicken (sic) don't get fed the

 11 nutrition.

 12 And so the point is, basically, that the

 13 people who are eating these chicken eggs, you

 14 know, have the potential to be eating this

 15 hazardous waste, this hazardous crap, basically,

 16 that's in the eggs. And nobody wants that.

 17 And so basically I just -- I'm asking

 18 you to regulate the coal ash under Subtitle C

 19 because it is hazardous, and it has been linked,

 20 as many people have said, to asthma and cancer and

 21 things like that. So I'm here to support that.

 22 Thank you.
 484

 1 (Applause)

 2 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 3 MS. NEGRETE: Hi. My name is Jackie

 4 Negrete and I'm a student.

 5 And I was going to come up here and read

 6 all these facts and stuff to you guys, but this is

 7 your job. You're in the EPA, so you guys probably

 8 already know all this stuff already or I'd like to

 9 think, you know, you've spent all this time being

 10 in the EPA, you know, you're going to get -- come

 11 about this information. So you guys know, you

 12 know, what's good and what's right.

 13 And I urge you guys to -- okay, you guys

 14 were given -- you guys are in a position of power;

 15 right. And with this power, you know, you have a

 16 responsibility and you were entrusted with this,

 17 you know, that you guys would do the right thing.

 18 So I'm just asking you, you know, to use

 19 your brains, because you guys are like smart

 20 people, and to do what you know is right and

 21 responsible because we're taking responsibility

 22 right now saying, you know, how we feel, that this
 485

 1 is wrong and coal ash is polluted. And you guys

 2 know it's polluted.

 3 So I urge you guys to do, you know -- do

 4 what's in your hearts. And you guys are, you

 5 know, getting up there in years and you have a

 6 legacy. And are you going to look back and say,

 7 Yeah, this is all I did, you know. Like you have

 8 to answer to yourselves ultimately. And you guys

 9 -- I urge you to take responsibility and use your

 10 brains and create something positive. Please do

 11 something for us. Because we -- we've done our

 12 part and now it's your turn, you know. This is

 13 your responsibility from now on. I'm putting it

 14 on you guys.

 15 So thank you.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MR. DELLINGER: Number 289, 290, 291,

 18 292, and 293.

 19 MS. PETERS: Hi. My name is Elyse

 20 Peters. I'm a sophomore at the University of

 21 Alabama, and I come today not only as a concerned

 22 student but to take a stand to protect my future.
 486

 1 I come here in solidarity with the families in

 2 Kingston and Perry County in Coal River Valley to

 3 force the EPA, the industry, and America to look

 4 at this problem straight in the eye.

 5 Founded on the principles of John Locke,

 6 we Americans believe it is our right to liberty,

 7 to life, and to property. Our possessions are

 8 being -- our possessions (sic) of these rights is

 9 deeply engraved in the American psyche. It is --

 10 that is why it is shocking to me to see how

 11 Americans, specifically the government, an

 12 instituted cre -- an institution created for the

 13 sole purpose of protecting and promoting these

 14 rights can allow for the coal industry to strip us

 15 of these rights and justly do it.

 16 It is cheaper for companies to break the

 17 law than it is to follow it. Lax regulations of

 18 the coal industry have continued to show direct

 19 ramifications on local communities. Coal ash

 20 communities need water brought because their

 21 groundwater has such high level of heavy metals.

 22 There are increased health problems, such as high
 487

 1 cancer and asthma due to the chronic exposure of

 2 these toxins. Their ability to live promised by

 3 our society is destroyed.

 4 Subtitle D will do more than harm,

 5 giving the states the rights to regulate these

 6 companies. ADEM, the Alabama Department of

 7 Environmental Management is currently under review

 8 by the EPA due to its continual violation of the

 9 Clean Water Act. How can the government think

 10 about granting such power to a state agency that

 11 is already not following its regulation?

 12 Currently there is a proposed strip mine

 13 at Shepherd's Bend on the Black Warrior River in

 14 Alabama. The -- the waste is allowed by a permit

 15 passed by ADEM to be dumped into the Black Warrior

 16 River. Birmingham Water Works Board issued a

 17 letter stating the proximity of the disposal site

 18 only 800 feet in regards to one of its main water

 19 intakes was incompatible and unprecedented. It

 20 takes -- it -- this intake provides water to over

 21 200,000 residents in Birmingham, the city's -- the

 22 state's largest city.
 488

 1 If we continue to allow local

 2 communities to expire in the name of industry, we

 3 will continue to show the degradation of our

 4 American morals. Stricter regulations will

 5 illustrate to our society the government's care

 6 and consideration for the values its people hold

 7 so dear.

 8 It is in our -- it's -- we are in a

 9 state of reaction. That is why newer, stronger,

 10 more scientifically based regulations, ones even

 11 stronger than those proposed by Subtitle C, must

 12 be enforced. The immoral acts of the ind -- of

 13 the oil -- of the coal industry must be called

 14 out. EPA's recognition of that co -- of coal ash

 15 as a hazardous waste is the first step to

 16 rebuilding a just, moral society that our Founding

 17 Fathers has en -- have envisioned for us.

 18 Thank you.

 19 (Applause)

 20 MS. OWENS: Hi. My name is Sabrina

 21 Owens. I'm a student. I come from Murfreesboro,

 22 Tennessee.
 489

 1 I could stand up here and just tell you

 2 everything that everyone else has told you, that

 3 you've heard at least a million times just said

 4 differently.

 5 I think Subtitle C is a good step, but

 6 it's really not enough. You know, I -- I might

 7 have kids in the future. I know all of you are

 8 probably going to have families. And you guys

 9 have grandkids, kids.

 10 Our water, our natural resources are

 11 greatly affected by coal ash. We need to work

 12 like the earth works and learn how to use natural

 13 -- I mean, like something more natural than -- and

 14 coal ash is -- is polluting our earth and it's not

 15 really giving us anything back.

 16 So I just want to point out a few

 17 things. Subtitle C does not require rapid closure

 18 of the ash in the ponds and it does not require

 19 investigation of all toxins a -- in coal ash

 20 dumps. Immediate clean up of contaminated coal

 21 ash site deposit, which is a threat to health and

 22 environment from toxic waste, this is not required
 490

 1 as well. Like, you know, this stuff is important.

 2 So we really need to just fin -- I know

 3 -- and I understand coal ash workers also need a

 4 job as well. So we need to think of other ideas

 5 rather than just saying, "Oh, hey, by the way, you

 6 can't work here anymore because of this." So we

 7 need to think there, too.

 8 We also just need to work together to

 9 figure out how we can clean up our environment. I

 10 don't know where to start but, you know, there's

 11 group of people in here that are all working

 12 towards the same thing. And I think if we all put

 13 our heads together, including you guys, we can

 14 come up with something really good. So that's all

 15 I have to say.

 16 Thank you very much.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 19 MS. HASHOP: My name is Macy Hashop, and

 20 I'm a student at UTC.

 21 Okay. Well, I wanted to start off by

 22 saying that I really care about my health. I try
 491

 1 not to -- well, I do not smoke, I do not drink, I

 2 regularly exercise and I don't know what that's --

 3 what the point of that if it -- if the water that

 4 I'm drinking is polluted and the air that I'm

 5 breathing is polluted.

 6 Even though I live in Chattanooga and

 7 this is Knoxville. I know that water and wind

 8 travels and it's circulates. And I have pet fish,

 9 and the water in my in tanks, even though I put

 10 the -- sorry, I'm nervous. I don't speak publicly

 11 but I'm doing this because I feel it's an

 12 important thing.

 13 (Applause)

 14 MS. HASHOP: But -- but my fish -- I

 15 first really realized it when I was drinking the

 16 water and I noticed that it tasted funny. And no

 17 matter how much water I drink, I don't feel

 18 quenched. I feel like -- almost like it's acidic,

 19 like I'm being dried out or something.

 20 So my fish, I noticed them. I put the

 21 drops in there that are supposed to get rid of the

 22 chemicals and get rid of the chlorine and help,
 492

 1 but they still -- I had four fish already that

 2 have died. And I don't know what's going on. But

 3 I know that I want to be healthy. I care about

 4 our environment. I care about our animals. I

 5 care about you. I care about myself. And I just

 6 want some changes to be made so that we can be

 7 healthy and -- and we can all support a healthy

 8 environment in the community.

 9 So thanks for listening.

 10 (Applause)

 11 MS. RICHMOND: Hi. My name is Reagan

 12 Richmond. I'm a recent graduate of the University

 13 of Tennessee. Go Vols.

 14 And thank you, first, for allowing us to

 15 take this time to speak.

 16 I will say that I'm with other people

 17 and not surprised anymore, but should be, that we

 18 do have to have this hearing to decide whether we

 19 should regulate coal ash or not. We have a very,

 20 very real event that has happened here in Kingston

 21 that shows us that coal ash is dangerous, that

 22 it's not being taken care of correctly by the
 493

 1 states, and it's certainly not being taken care of

 2 correctly by the industries that are supposed to

 3 be doing it.

 4 So I won't bore with you all that. I

 5 also won't call you old. I apologize.

 6 But I will let you know that as a young

 7 person, I care very much about the legacy. It --

 8 well, one, about just my life, but the quality of

 9 life that I'm going to have moving forward, also

 10 about the legacy that is left. And many young

 11 people in this room are with me on this, too.

 12 You've seen several of us with crazy

 13 costumes, face paint -- I'm sorry I don't have

 14 mine on -- but we were outside and we want to let

 15 knew that we were saying coal ash is scary. We

 16 had a big rally. It was really fun. And -- but

 17 it's true, we're not just having fun with this.

 18 Coal ash is a scary thing for our future, thinking

 19 about having to deal with this toxic waste in

 20 just, you know, any old impoundment or being

 21 stored somewhere and not properly being regulated.

 22 That's not right. And that -- that makes me
 494

 1 fearful about like the communities that I live in

 2 or have the -- the drinking water that we have.

 3 It's just -- it's a scary thing to think about

 4 this hazardous waste not actually being regulated.

 5 You-all know what impacts there are.

 6 So with that, I'll just say, so we have

 7 Option C. You guys have put this on the table.

 8 And Option is C is good, but it's not good enough.

 9 I've always been taught my whole life to

 10 never settle for the least. That -- that's what

 11 it's about. It's about reaching for the stars;

 12 right. Doing the best that you can. So that's

 13 what I'm really pushing for. C is great; please

 14 adopt it, at minimum. But let's do more.

 15 I have worked with young people across

 16 this country, across the region. I have done

 17 everything I can possibly do. When I first found

 18 out about our issues, I was really sad. And then

 19 I got really angry. But now I'm just really

 20 active. I have done everything I can from going

 21 to -- and picking up trash to meeting at the UN.

 22 Everything you could possibly want me to do. I
 495

 1 regularly engage in conference calls with the EPA

 2 administrators and with the White House. I have

 3 the privilege to do that. Not everyone in the

 4 room has that privilege.

 5 So I'm asking you, please, step up, do

 6 what is right for my generation and for our

 7 future, regulate. At minimum C. But let's do

 8 better. We know we can.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MR. DELLINGER: Number 185, 201, 188,

 11 and is 292 in the room?

 12 AUDIENCE: No response.

 13 MS. HOPKINS: I'm Flo Hopkins. Thank

 14 you guys for listening. You must be really tired.

 15 So I'm going to tell and you little story, a

 16 personal story.

 17 My husband and I have been fighting a

 18 coal ash landfill for about a year-and-a-half. We

 19 retired to Tennessee because we wanted to live in

 20 the country in Cumberland County and build a house

 21 there. Well, as soon as we decided to build, we

 22 discovered that there was a coal ash landfill
 496

 1 being proposed on our mountain.

 2 Because there are no regulations in

 3 Tennessee in regard to coal ash, we had to suspend

 4 our plans for retirement and building and actic --

 5 actively engage in educating ourselves about what

 6 coal ash was, what -- wha -- and what our rights

 7 were in regard to it and what our responsibilities

 8 to our community were in regard to it.

 9 Some of the first things we learned is

 10 that there are no regulations in regard to

 11 transportation of coal ash. What was proposed on

 12 our mountain was 5- to 600 trucks of coal ash

 13 coming up and down our eight narrow winding miles

 14 of mountain roads during all daylight hours, six

 15 days a week for years without end. There were no

 16 transportation requirements for safety, for road

 17 width, for -- there was no protection for airborne

 18 coal ash, for covering the coal ash and transport.

 19 There was no protection for us because there are

 20 no regulations. If there had been a spill on the

 21 roads, going up there to clean up the spill or to

 22 -- or -- or for liability for taking care of
 497

 1 financial responsibility for the spills because

 2 there were independent truckers involved, there

 3 was no consistent -- there was go -- no sig --

 4 consistent financial assurances that anyone would

 5 be responsible for the mess.

 6 On thing we did res -- discover from all

 7 our interaction with coal ash and with local

 8 politics is that you guys at EPA may very well

 9 have studied a lot and have a lot of science

 10 behind you on the constituents of coal ash and the

 11 effects of it, but you don't know nearly as much

 12 as my community does. There's an expert on every

 13 corner. And everyone is either sure that it's

 14 entirely hazardous and toxic or else that you can

 15 put it on your breakfast cereal.

 16 And what we want is for the EPA to use

 17 the -- the science and the expertise that you have

 18 to protect us and pro -- provide the citizens some

 19 consistency so that we can live our lives with

 20 more predictability.

 21 And thank you for stepping up to that

 22 responsibility.
 498

 1 (Applause)

 2 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 3 MR. HOFFMAN: 201.

 4 MS. SCARANO: Hi. My name is Rachael

 5 Scarano. I'm from Asheville, North Carolina. I'm

 6 a student out there. Thanks for calling my

 7 number.

 8 I go to Warren Wilson College. We're

 9 about 15 or so miles from two coal ash ponds that

 10 have been rated poor, and if they broke, they

 11 would spill into the French Broad River.

 12 And I'm here to state my support of

 13 classifying coal ash under Subtitle C as a

 14 hazardous waste. As a young person, I'm concerned

 15 with the health of both the planet and myself as

 16 we move into the future.

 17 Regulations under Subtitle C will

 18 require safer containment of coal ash protecting

 19 the surrounding environment from contamination.

 20 And this is in direct contrast to the unlined

 21 ponds of today, basically holes in the ground

 22 where they keep the coal ash, where toxic metals
 499

 1 are able to leach straight into the ground,

 2 eventually reaching the groundwater.

 3 So I believe that it makes sense to

 4 label something that has already been determined

 5 as hazardous waste as hazardous waste, regardless

 6 of the ramifications, economic or otherwise. For

 7 I don't understand how we could place a dollar

 8 value on human health or environmental health.

 9 And I hope you, the EPA, will remember that you're

 10 acronym doesn't stand for the "Economy Protection

 11 Agency," and that you'll do your job to protect

 12 the environment, the Environmental Protection

 13 Agency, and its people by classifying coal ash as

 14 the hazardous waste that you, the EPA, has already

 15 told us that it is.

 16 Thank you.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Number 185, 188, 178. I

 19 -- I thought I just -- I called 185; right?

 20 SPEAKER: Yep.

 21 MR. DELLINGER: All right.

 22 SPEAKER: You got it?
 500

 1 MR. DELLINGER: Yeah. I'm sorry. I

 2 didn't see -- I didn't -- I didn't check the box.

 3 You're -- you're fine. Here's 185.

 4 MR. HOFFMAN: 178.

 5 MR. MORTIMER: Hello. First of all,

 6 thanks for coming down to Tennessee today and

 7 adding this to your regular schedule programs.

 8 My name is Samuel Mortimer. I'm a

 9 recent graduate of the University of Tennessee, a

 10 20-year resident of the state, and an architect in

 11 the Knoxville area.

 12 I'll keep this relatively short. But

 13 the good people of Tennessee have suffered enough

 14 from the affects of coal. I would ask you to

 15 please classify fly ash as a toxic waste and make

 16 every effort to ensure that disasters -- and let's

 17 not kid anyone, it was a disaster -- at (sic) the

 18 Kingston spill never happen again. This is

 19 certainly an issue of protecting the environment

 20 and not the bottom line.

 21 Thank you.

 22 (Applause)
 501

 1 MR. HOFFMAN: What number are you?

 2 MS. CHEELY: 188.

 3 MR. DELLINGER: What was --

 4 MS. CHEELY: I'm Jean Cheely.

 5 MR. DELLINGER: What was -- what was the

 6 last person's number? One --

 7 MS. CHEELY: He was --

 8 MR. DELLINGER: -- seventy --

 9 MS. CHEELY: -- walk-in.

 10 MR. DELLINGER: -- eight.

 11 MS. CHEELY: He was 178.

 12 MR. DELLINGER: All right. Thank you.

 13 MS. CHEELY: Yeah. Okay. I'm a member

 14 of SOCM, previously Save Our Cumberland Mountains.

 15 I was a previous resident of Kingston for ten

 16 years; presently live in Cumberland County. I'm

 17 one of the authorities on coal ash. We've been

 18 working against having that coal ash landfill

 19 brought up to our mountain at the -- our headwater

 20 streams. I also grew up in Clinton, Tennessee.

 21 And the points I would like to raise

 22 with you, I'm going to address -- even though I've
 502

 1 been fighting the Cumberland County coal ash

 2 landfill for two years now, I was dismayed to find

 3 that in my hometown of Clinton on the Clinch River

 4 there's a legendary coal ash fill that was unlined

 5 called Lost Ridge.

 6 In our many forays with EPA and TDEC and

 7 O -- OSM during this last two-year event I got

 8 some of the records from the Clinton coal ash

 9 landfill. That was a 44-acre landfill that was

 10 done permit by rule, and that there was no public

 11 input into creating that site.

 12 In Tennessee we have a lovely law called

 13 the "Jackson Law," which gives communities the

 14 opportunity to say "yes" or "no" to having any

 15 sort of a landfill. Permit by rule circumvents

 16 this opportunity for the public to speak out.

 17 Let me regress and say that I do support

 18 Subtitle C and let it be stronger. I would like

 19 it to address the site selection and that no

 20 permits by rule be granted. The public process in

 21 a community needs to be present and utilized.

 22 Transportation considerations need to be addressed
 503

 1 and regulated. Legacy sites that have been closed

 2 need continuous monitoring.

 3 The site -- the Clinch River was one of

 4 the top eight clear bodies of water in the world.

 5 Today this site, the hydrological reports, which I

 6 will submit, from TDEC before this site was built

 7 showed that there was a stream running through

 8 there, there were springs, that this was one of

 9 the worse possible sites you could put a landfill.

 10 For some reason, it was placed there. It's been

 11 reclaimed, and now it's been granted to the City

 12 of Clinton, if they want to build a recreational

 13 park there for their children to play.

 14 There's a large culvert going directly

 15 into the Clinch River that drains a steady stream

 16 of water even during dry weather. There is not

 17 ongoing monitoring of this culvert.

 18 MR. HOFFMAN: Your time is up.

 19 MS. CHEELY: Okay. I just want to say

 20 that EPA has -- ha -- has refused -- they said, We

 21 are monitoring the Clinch River downstream.

 22 And so this culvert of water coming from
 504

 1 this landfill, it's -- has not been tested. I

 2 went to my congressional member, who finally got

 3 DOE to do a testing. We haven't gotten the

 4 results in yet. But the legacy landfills need to

 5 be addressed as well.

 6 Thank you.

 7 (Applause)

 8 MR. DELLINGER: Numbers 294 and 295.

 9 MS. GRANT: 295. Do you want me to go

 10 ahead?

 11 MR. HOFFMAN: What number? 295?

 12 MS. GRANT: My name is Anna and I'm a

 13 student outside Asheville, North Carolina. I just

 14 moved there from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where

 15 I worked with advocacy groups to pressure Region 3

 16 EPA to deny permits for mountaintop removal coal

 17 mining and valley fills in Virginia, and West

 18 Virginia.

 19 I learned a lot about the process of

 20 coal production throughout this work, and I see

 21 the decision to regulate coal ash, a known hazard

 22 to human and ecological health as a simple choice.
 505

 1 Tennessee residents remember the TVA to

 2 -- atrocity that was the coal ash flood that led

 3 to horrific property destruction and severe

 4 ecological di -- damage.

 5 I implore the industry and EPA to learn

 6 from the past and act now to regulate coal ash as

 7 a hazardous waste through Subtitle C. Subtitle C

 8 means accountability of the industry that local

 9 communities are in great need of. Subtitle C

 10 means that drinking water will be taken into

 11 account and monitored, which is crucial to

 12 positive community growth.

 13 I strongly urge the EPA to reject

 14 Subtitle D because arsenic and selenium are not

 15 household wastes; they are known carcinogens. To

 16 reject the research that shows people who are --

 17 who live within one mile of the coal ash ponds

 18 have a 1 in 50 chance of developing cancer is

 19 simply unethical.

 20 EPA, please review the statistic that

 21 you published and please protect the environment,

 22 not the polluting industries.
 506

 1 Thank you for your time.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 4 MR. HOFFMAN: 294.

 5 MR. MARSHMAN: My name is Herman

 6 Marshman. I'm the president of IBEW Local 272,

 7 that's in Shippingport, Pennsylvania.

 8 I'm here today to address several

 9 issues, and one of the issue (sic) is in regards

 10 to the regulation of fly ash. I have 30 years

 11 experience working with fly ash. I have worked in

 12 the power industry for FirstEnergy Corporation in

 13 the collection and removal of fly ash. Before fly

 14 ash is seen by anyone in the public, I see it

 15 first. I see it when it's hot. I see it when

 16 it's in the -- the finest raw form. Am I afraid

 17 of fly ash? No. Is it hazardous waste? Yes.

 18 Okay. Everyone knows that fly ash has heavy

 19 metals in it. Under OSHA regulations, I must wear

 20 a respirator and protective clothing to work with

 21 fly ash because of the hazards.

 22 Now I'm not here to debate, and that's
 507

 1 for the EPA to decide, which regulation, C or D.

 2 It's doesn't matter. It's still hazardous.

 3 My issue is the workers. Individuals

 4 like myself who have spent 30 years in the power

 5 industry. Companies now are taking away our

 6 health benefits. And I'm proposing any mandate

 7 under the new regulation that there be provisions

 8 that the profits from the reuse of fly ash goes

 9 for the safeguard of the public and the

 10 environment and maintain healthcare coverage for

 11 the workers that are directly and indirectly

 12 exposed to fly ash.

 13 Thank you.

 14 (Applause)

 15 MS. CERULEAN: Hello. I'm Jeannie

 16 Cerulean and I'm from Chattanooga, Tennessee.

 17 And being down river from that spill,

 18 you know, caused a lot of people in Chattanooga to

 19 want to know what's in our water. And so I was

 20 really thankful that there were labs that were

 21 doing independent testing, that felt really good

 22 to us to have you guys, TVA, and some independent
 508

 1 labs. And I know that a lot of people raised, you

 2 know, some money to make sure that those test

 3 results could be in. So I just really want those

 4 test results to also be considered.

 5 And speaking of -- we just heard about

 6 like profits from what you turn the fly ash into.

 7 Well, what you rule on and how toxic you say it

 8 is, then they're going to put in certain things,

 9 like sidewalks in Nashville. Well, what about

 10 playgrounds? So what you classify this fly ash

 11 as, will it go into landfills? Will they be

 12 lined? You the classification of it becomes the

 13 protection so that you don't have like more

 14 problems down the line. And I would just like to

 15 see us, like, front load that whole thing, not

 16 have to pay at the end so much. But to pay at the

 17 front so that we're figuring out like how it's

 18 connected, where it's going, what we're doing.

 19 And if we're going to mine coal, then,

 20 you know, make sure that those coal miners are

 21 protected and, you know, that their -- they don't

 22 have really bad working conditions because their
 509

 1 union has suffered. And then stop blowing up the

 2 top; right. So that means less coal. So like

 3 slow it down. You know, maybe that energy should

 4 be used to build renewables. That's energy

 5 intensive. And I -- you know, what are we going

 6 to do with that power? Could we use it to make a

 7 front loaded energy system?

 8 And when you identify what the true cost

 9 of coal, what is the real cost to these people and

 10 to our mountains and our streams and the people

 11 directly affected who don't have clean drinking

 12 water, you get to decide.

 13 And I'm so glad that you've listened to

 14 all of us today about it. And it's a big wait.

 15 But we want our shirt clean, all right?

 16 Thank you.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Numbers 168, 181, 133

 19 and 186.

 20 MR. FORTNER: My name is Larry Fortner

 21 from Mount Carmel, Illinois.

 22 And the only reason why I'm here is to
 510

 1 my brother is sick all the time. And as soon as

 2 they move him north to go to a hospital, he gets

 3 well. Soon as he gets back home, he's sick a --

 4 again.

 5 And the people was -- is sick all the

 6 time around here. And people's got to wash cars

 7 and stuff.

 8 And my wife has -- has got hay fever all

 9 the time. While she's in the house, she's okay.

 10 Soon as she goes out of the house, she's sick.

 11 And it just -- you've got to do something about

 12 this ash flying around in the air all the time.

 13 And we -- soon as we get this ash problem took

 14 care of and get the rules changed everybody will

 15 be well.

 16 Thank you.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Do you -- do you

 19 remember what number, 168?

 20 MR. HOFFMAN: Let me look .

 21 MR. DELLINGER: 198?

 22 MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah.
 511

 1 MR. DELLINGER: No. It looks like 168.

 2 MR. HOFFMAN: We're okay? Okay. His --

 3 his number is 181.

 4 MR. BAILEY: My name is Emanuel Bailey,

 5 and I'm here today to speak as a concerned

 6 citizen, an engineer, a person with a

 7 technological orientation and perspective, a

 8 former TVA employee, a rate payer who was affected

 9 by the spill, a member of the Tennessee Renewable

 10 Energy and Economic Development Council, who's

 11 concerned about the environment, technology, and

 12 the economy.

 13 Through my testimony, I intend to urge

 14 EPA to develop rules and incentives which advocate

 15 the application of existing remediation

 16 neutralization technologies to reduce future costs

 17 of risks associated with not addressing fly ash

 18 issues now. I suggest that EPA fund

 19 demonstrations and partner in the development of

 20 funding mechanisms to demonstrate and apply

 21 applicable technologies to troubled fly ash sites.

 22 The -- TREDC is an organization which is
 512

 1 -- basically supports renewable technology, and

 2 its membership is open to the mayors and other

 3 entities in the State of Tennessee across the

 4 state. It's got representatives from industry and

 5 technology. We were instrumental in working will

 6 the mayors around Kingston, Harriman, and Roane

 7 County with the original spill. We desi --

 8 developed facilitation services to assist the

 9 community. But as a part of our work also, we

 10 worked with a firm in west Tennessee that -- that

 11 develops green technologies and independently to

 12 try and veri -- validate those green technologies

 13 that they market.

 14 One of the -- one of the things that

 15 they market are inorganic hazardous waste

 16 treatment reagents.

 17 When we started working with this

 18 organization, we became aware of the experience

 19 that this firm and some of its founders have had

 20 in working with some of the most hazardous sites

 21 around -- around the country. They have been

 22 involved in neutralizing waste at those sites.
 513

 1 They've work on solidification stabilization

 2 techniques, and they have worked to try to do

 3 this. This is a technology that EPA says is safe

 4 and has validated as a way of microencapsulating

 5 the waste and can be used right on site with

 6 applications.

 7 Part of what we do is, we're trying to

 8 urge you to, in fact, incentivize the development

 9 and application of these kind of technologies --

 10 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm sorry.

 11 MR. BAILEY: -- because they can be --

 12 MR. HOFFMAN: You're out of time.

 13 MR. BAILEY: Okay. Thank you.

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MR. DELLINGER: 133 or 186.

 17 MS. THEW: I have 186.

 18 MR. DELLINGER: Okay.

 19 MS. THEW: I'm Margaret Thew. I have

 20 severe asthma, and we live about two blocks away

 21 from the ash spill in Roane County. TVA said that

 22 we lived two far from the steam plan to get help.
 514

 1 They had us file a claim and I spoke to

 2 Tennessee's chief public health doctor. He told

 3 me that they were waiting to see what the EPA

 4 would do under a new administration. He referred

 5 me to TDEC.

 6 TDEC sent a letter saying that they

 7 couldn't see any fly ash hanging off those trucks.

 8 Air quality, locally, is measured with

 9 industrial standards. At a meeting Tom Kilgore

 10 said that TVA wasn't transporting fly ash off TVA

 11 property and that the public hadn't been exposed

 12 to fly ash before the spill.

 13 We took a picture of a truck on a

 14 Harriman Road with fly ash along the top. And we

 15 watched as the dike went up and saw plenty of

 16 exposed fly ash. My family has seen moving train

 17 cars with exposed fly ash.

 18 My pulmonologist has found more density

 19 and blood in my lungs than a year ago. I deal

 20 with daily airway inflammation, almost daily sinus

 21 pressure and headaches, coughing up stuff daily,

 22 and frequent hoarseness.
 515

 1 TVA is calling themselves a branch of

 2 government and trying to get lawsuits dismissed.

 3 The EPA sent us flyer saying that the

 4 ash spill was almost cleaned up. No, it isn't.

 5 The EPA says EPA's mission is to protect

 6 human health and to safeguard the natural

 7 environment, air, water, and land, upon which life

 8 depends.

 9 So if government branches are all busy

 10 cooperating with each other and patting each other

 11 on the back for a job well done, then who is

 12 protecting our health and our children's and

 13 grandchildren's future.

 14 Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MR. DELLINGER: 133.

 17 MR. BARTLEY: Good evening. Thank you

 18 for the opportunity of speaking tonight. I am

 19 Gary Bartley. I am from Sullivan, Indiana.

 20 My family and I are adjacent landowners

 21 to Hoosier Energy's Merom Station power plant. We

 22 have a serious problem with airborne coal ash from
 516

 1 their open landfill.

 2 We have neighbors and friends that won't

 3 allow their children out to play anymore because

 4 their toys are coated with coal ash. Several of

 5 those children recently have been have been tested

 6 and diagnosed with high lead. We have tests to

 7 prove that.

 8 We cannot open the windows on our new

 9 house, because on a windy day the coal ash fogs

 10 in.

 11 My 13-year-old son is having respiratory

 12 and intestinal problems, as well as my wife and

 13 myself. Our neighbors are also complaining of

 14 intestinal problems, respiratory problems, and

 15 aches and pains that didn't start until the coal

 16 ash at Hoosier Energy got high enough to blow in

 17 the wind everyday.

 18 I can watch this from my back door.

 19 Every time they dump a load, there is a big plume

 20 of coal ash that goes up that can be seen for two

 21 miles away.

 22 On October 18th, 2010 the Sullivan
 517

 1 County Commissioners met at their annual meeting

 2 with five representatives from Hoosier Energy.

 3 These representatives were asked to pay for half

 4 of the tests on adjoining properties and to see

 5 what kind of toxins we actually have. Hoosier

 6 Energy's employees, their lawyer and their

 7 environmentalist, after 15 minutes of discussion,

 8 said, no, they would not participate with the

 9 county commissioners to do this testing.

 10 At that point the county commissioners

 11 passed the resolution to ask for Subtitle C to be

 12 adopted. One commissioner did recli -- or did

 13 decline to vote because he is an employee of

 14 Hoosier Energy.

 15 My family and I also raise national

 16 champion show sheep and pigs. We are seeing in

 17 the last five years an extremely high rate of

 18 birth defects. In 2008, we had lambs with crooked

 19 backs; we had pigs with no ears. In 2009, we had

 20 a lamb born with five legs. In 2010, we had a

 21 lamb born with nine ears, five on one side, four

 22 on the other. I'm sure as most of you know, this
 518

 1 is not normal. It never started until Hoosier

 2 Energy went wild dumping the coal ash.

 3 My 13-year-old son asked me a month ago

 4 to get involved. And he said, "Dad, how many of

 5 my baby pig and baby lambs this winter are going

 6 to be deformed?"

 7 Please protect us. Help us get through

 8 this. Adopt Subtitle C so that we are safe.

 9 Thank you.

 10 (Applause)

 11 MR. DELLINGER: I've run out of numbers.

 12 Is there anybody in the room that has a number?

 13 Oh. I actually didn't run out. I do have your

 14 number here, 296. Sorry.

 15 MR. FLENNER: Thank you. My name is Sam

 16 Flenner.

 17 I do grassroots outreach work with

 18 Environmental Integrity Project. I've been

 19 working in southwest Indiana. I have testified in

 20 Chicago. I testified in Louisville. I really

 21 wasn't planning to testify here but I'm just going

 22 to sort of wing it because there's just one thing
 519

 1 that I think needs to be made very clear. The

 2 people that came and testified from the Mount

 3 Carmel area, including people from east Mount

 4 Carmel or Princeton area, Duke Energy ran

 5 municipal water out to a number of people because

 6 it was clear that they contaminated their wells.

 7 They had to stop fishing in the pond that they

 8 had, and that's when they started the dry

 9 landfill.

 10 There are several other neighbors down

 11 the highway from where they ran water to, their

 12 wells are, we believe, contaminated. We don't

 13 have the means to do the testing at this point in

 14 time. We're trying to raise the means so that we

 15 can make this further than hearsay.

 16 This is the reason why we need Subtitle

 17 C. We need somebody other than the Indiana state

 18 regulatory regulators who will not do anything

 19 about this.

 20 Duke will not do anything about this.

 21 And, in fact, one person who had a lawsuit and

 22 dropped it against Duke, who owns a bait shop that
 520

 1 is in east Mount Carmel, has constantly told us,

 2 as we've asked him to testify, "You can't beat

 3 Duke. Duke's got the politicians bought." And,

 4 you know -- and this is just they way people are.

 5 The apathy is just absolutely terrible.

 6 Now we go to Mount Carmel, across the

 7 river, to look for some support. Larry here, his

 8 wife was ill today, she was going to come and

 9 speak. She speaks a little bit better. But he

 10 just handed in 250 petitions from people in Mount

 11 Carmel who asked their city council to pass a

 12 resolution and -- endorsing Subtitle C. And they

 13 didn't. And I've heard rumors as to why they

 14 didn't but it's hearsay, so I really can't testify

 15 to it with any accuracy.

 16 But, you know, one person who told us he

 17 was going to come here and then didn't come here,

 18 though, told us the -- that Duke's outreach is

 19 very, very and deep.

 20 And so we had somebody here who told us

 21 he was going testify, then for some reason,

 22 because of Duke's influence in the area there,
 521

 1 decided not to testify.

 2 So, this is -- this is why I'm

 3 testifying today. I know there's just a little

 4 bit of time left. But without Subtitle C, without

 5 federal enforceability, without the federal

 6 government being able to say, yes, you will go out

 7 and see that these, you know -- that you will do

 8 the testing, that you will document and make --

 9 and -- and make explicit or transparent what's

 10 going on, thi -- it's not going to happen. And

 11 the Indiana's regulatory commission, they're not

 12 going to do anything. If the EPA doesn't do it,

 13 then the number of damage cases will continue to

 14 rise.

 15 There's a huge cancer cluster in Mount

 16 Carmel right now. And, again, we have to get more

 17 documentation. It's there. It's just going to

 18 take some time.

 19 Thank you.

 20 (Applause)

 21 MS. SWINFORD: EPA, I'd like to thank

 22 you for choosing to hold a coal ash hearing here
 522

 1 in the State of Tennessee. I'd also like to

 2 remind you that there was a citizen's coal ash

 3 hearing that was held about a month ago. And this

 4 morning Sara McCoin submitted comments from that

 5 hearing. And I would ask that you consider those

 6 comments as closely as you would consider comments

 7 of anyone that was able to attend the hearing

 8 today.

 9 My name is Bonnie Swinford. I'm a

 10 volunteer with United Mountain Defense, which is a

 11 non- profit based here in Knoxville, Tennessee.

 12 I'm also a schoolteacher by training.

 13 I used to be an environmental educator

 14 at a place called John Knox River Ridge

 15 Environmental Education Center, which is a place

 16 that's located just a few miles downstream from

 17 the TVA disaster site.

 18 Later, after this job, I became a

 19 teacher in Knoxville, Tennessee. And each fall I

 20 would travel with my students to go back to River

 21 Ridge, where my students -- you know, would enjoy

 22 this place as a special place to learn about
 523

 1 science and nature. And it saddens me that --

 2 that this watershed has been degraded and that my

 3 students will no longer swim in the water or be

 4 able to experience hand (sic) on learning about

 5 lake ecology in the same way as did previously.

 6 Directly after the disaster I began

 7 organizing with the Roane County community as a

 8 volunteer with United Mountain Defense. I went

 9 door-to-door and met survivors and became

 10 intimately acquainted with their concerns, their

 11 fears, and the devastation that this catastrophic

 12 event created in their lives.

 13 I met terrified families who were

 14 evacuated from their homes in the middle of the

 15 night. I met children who could no longer play

 16 outside and who were suffering from breathing

 17 issues, families who were worried about the dust

 18 settling in their homes and who were suffering

 19 from headaches and stress and other related

 20 illness. I cannot even begin to speak to you

 21 about all of the stress and concerns faced by this

 22 community in the aftermath of the disaster.
 524

 1 Many Roane County community members

 2 could not be at this hearing tonight because they

 3 have been faced with the hard choice of either

 4 selling their home to TVA and signing a contract

 5 which will not allow them to speak about that

 6 issue any longer, or they continue to be silenced

 7 by the fear that's involved in their pending

 8 lawsuits against the Tennessee Valley Authority.

 9 So, EPA, it is your job to protect other

 10 communities from disasters like this one.

 11 Subtitle C will provide inadequate protection

 12 because of its unreasonably long time lines and

 13 limited scope. Therefore, I want the EPA to adopt

 14 the stronger option of Subtitle C Prime, or Super

 15 C, which is outlined in my written comments.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MS. OVERTON: Hello. Thanks for letting

 18 me speak today.

 19 My name is Cornelia Overton, and I'm a

 20 student at UT, but I've also lived in this region

 21 my entire life. And my family has lived here for

 22 generations. And I love this region and I care a
 525

 1 lot about it. And -- and I want to be able to

 2 know that I can live on the farm that my great,

 3 great, great, great grandparents lived on, and be

 4 able to swim in the water and drink from the well

 5 and grow things. And so that's why I would like

 6 you-all to please regulate coal ash as a hazardous

 7 waste.

 8 Thank you.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MR. DELLINGER: 297.

 11 MR. BRYANT: Thank you for coming. My

 12 name is Adam Bryant, and I'm a resident of

 13 Tennessee. And I just came up to say that I

 14 encourage you to adopt Subtitle C.

 15 Thank you.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MR. DELLINGER: 207.

 18 MR. CASTLEMAN: Hi. My name is John

 19 Castleman. I'm with -- I'm a process engineer

 20 with the SEFA Group, and I develop technologies to

 21 utilize fly ash for the clean, safe, and

 22 non-hazardous applications.
 526

 1 Based on my experience, fly ash in and

 2 of itself is not a hazardous material, and the

 3 disposable of fly ash should not be regulated

 4 under Subtitle C. To do so will significantly

 5 reduce, or possibly even eliminate, the beneficial

 6 use of ash.

 7 EPA is proposing to label coal fly ash a

 8 "special waste" under Subtitle C, the hazardous

 9 waste section of the law, because it is, in EPA's

 10 words, "capable of posing a potential hazard to

 11 human health when improperly disposed of or ma --

 12 or managed." The EPA position is that fly ash

 13 could pose a potential hazard if it is mismanaged.

 14 I do not disagree with this assessment. And

 15 further, I agree with EPA that the disposal of fly

 16 ash should be properly regulated in such a way to

 17 prevent mismanagement. However, coal a -- go --

 18 coal fly ash does not need to be listed and

 19 regulated under the hazardous waste section of the

 20 law.

 21 Of critical concern is that listing and

 22 regulating fly ash under Subtitle C will reduce
 527

 1 the amount of fly ash that can be beneficially

 2 used. If the EPA lists coal fly ash as a "special

 3 waste" under Subtitle C, then it will be

 4 considered a hazardous waste by the general

 5 public. The potential for litigation is enormous.

 6 The failure of any concrete structure will be

 7 blamed on the hazardous waste used in the

 8 construction, even though the failure was not do

 9 to the fly ash in the concrete. Just the threat

 10 of such litigation will pres -- prevent any fly

 11 ash use on an industrial project.

 12 Fly ash has been used beneficially in

 13 construction applications for thousands of years.

 14 These applications have demonstrated the safe,

 15 reliable use of fly ash and the lack of any

 16 hazardous issues associated with the applications.

 17 Beneficial use of fly ash results in lower costs

 18 of production, reduced raw materials, reduced

 19 greenhouse gases, increased quality of projects --

 20 products, among many other benefits. If fly ash

 21 is regulated under Subtitle C under any name, this

 22 use and these benefits will be eliminated.
 528

 1 Thank you.

 2 (Applause)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 4 199.

 5 MR. CUMMINGS: My name is Matt Cummings.

 6 I'm from Knoxville, Tennessee.

 7 As student in a religious institution

 8 and a future leader of a religious community, I

 9 heed these words of wisdom and advisement towards

 10 choosing Subtitle C as the legislation for coal

 11 combustion. In Christianity, the least of these

 12 in society are given preferial (sic) treatment and

 13 an elevated status throughout the narrative of

 14 Jesus.

 15 Islam teaches that a moment of justice

 16 is better than 70 years of worship.

 17 The Dalai Lama states that there's no

 18 basis for human hope if there's no justice.

 19 In (sic) the New York Times, on

 20 September 12th, 2009, ran a (sic) article about

 21 how clean water laws were being neglected and were

 22 creating harmful circumstances for residents in
 529

 1 these areas.

 2 In Pines, Indiana -- and I'm a native

 3 Hoosier -- it's a community living next to a coal

 4 ash landfill, watched as children were being born

 5 with hearing impairments and rare bowel diseases.

 6 Locally, as we have all in Tennessee

 7 have seen, the TVA spill has destroyed ecosystems

 8 and caused loss in property values for the peoples

 9 in affected areas.

 10 NPR has reported that the clean up

 11 located in predominately poor African-American

 12 community in Alabama, where the landfills are

 13 being located, amounts to environmental racism.

 14 So the question from a religious

 15 perspective is: How will the EPA's policy affect

 16 the least of these in society?

 17 Recent events from the TVA spill to the

 18 BP incident show that corporate businesses do not

 19 always have the interest of creation or the poor

 20 as part of their policy. And it's left to the

 21 government regulations, such as Si -- Subtitle C

 22 to help establish some form of justice for the
 530

 1 voiceless.

 2 I depart these with the words of

 3 Christian theologian, Jacques Ellul, he says, in

 4 the 1960s: We know the implications of pollution,

 5 but we go on calming polluting the air, the rivers

 6 and the oceans. We know the dangers of pesticides

 7 and chemical fertilizers, but we continue to use

 8 them in increasingly massive doses. We know all

 9 this, but we are like the masochist who knows

 10 others have put a little arsenic in each bowl of

 11 soup he eats but who goes on eating it day after

 12 day as -- as though impelled by an irresistible

 13 force. We cannot build a just society by unjust

 14 means.

 15 Thank you.

 16 (Applause)

 17 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 18 Is there anybody else in the room that

 19 has a number? We'll take a short break to -- to

 20 double-check and see if there is another crowd

 21 that is seeking to speak here at the hearing. And

 22 if -- if -- if that's not the case, we'll lengthen
 531

 1 the break for a few minutes.

 2 We'll -- we'll sta -- we'll do it for

 3 ten minutes and then may ha -- may elongate the --

 4 SPEAKER: May I make a quick point? Why

 5 do we have so much light in this room? That's the

 6 problem. In this room, in this hotel, in the

 7 world, we are wasting energy.

 8 Thank you.

 9 (Applause)

 10 MR. DELLINGER: We'll reconvene at --

 11 we'll reconvene at 8:40 and then decide what we're

 12 going to do next.

 13 (Recess)

 14 MR. DELLINGER: We're going to reconvene

 15 the public hearing.

 16 We have two (sic) speakers. Number 298,

 17 Number 214 and Number 216.

 18 MS. HENDERSON: Good evening. Good

 19 evening, everybody. Thanks for -- for being here.

 20 I appreciate that.

 21 My name is Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson. I

 22 was born and raised in the Tennessee Valley. And
 532

 1 I'm a student at east Tennessee State University,

 2 a member of the Initiative for Clean Energy

 3 Mountain Justice and United Mountain Defense.

 4 I -- I really wasn't going to speak, but

 5 I feel called to because I have met folks from

 6 Harriman, Tennessee. I've seen the rashes on

 7 their hands from the water. I've heard

 8 15-year-olds talk about not being able to have

 9 kids that aren't going to be affected by heavy

 10 metals because of the coal ash disaster.

 11 And, as a person of color, I'm also very

 12 concerned about the health impacts for people

 13 Perry County, who mostly look like me, and are

 14 going to have to deal with having ash sent to

 15 them, which not many of them are asking for, from

 16 my understanding.

 17 So I really, really want to compel you

 18 to take all of the really awesome information that

 19 the young activists here have shared with you and

 20 that the amazing scientist who spent a long of

 21 time researching these issues and like the health

 22 impacts that -- that people are having because of
 533

 1 this coal ash.

 2 And I'm especially begging you to take

 3 into consideration that people of color

 4 communities and poorer working class communities

 5 are the ones that take the most impacts from our

 6 environmental decisions. And this upcoming

 7 decision that you're going to have to make is one

 8 that's going to affect us, and to -- to seriously

 9 take into account the fact that we're already

 10 taking the brunt of a lot of the environmental

 11 impacts that are happening in the world.

 12 So we appreciate you for being here and

 13 -- and look forward to you making the right

 14 decision.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 17 (Applause)

 18 MR. HOFFMAN: 216.

 19 MR. DELLINGER: 216?

 20 MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, 216.

 21 MS. ROSALES: My name is Maria Rosales.

 22 I'm a senior in Environmental Studies at the
 534

 1 University of Tennessee.

 2 First, I want to thank you for holding

 3 the hearing here in Knoxville. Only three days

 4 before Christmas in 2008, east Tennessee

 5 experienced the largest and worst coal ash spill

 6 in the history of the United States. Therefore,

 7 it is very important for the people and students

 8 to be part of this hearing.

 9 As a resident and -- and a student of

 10 Knoxville, I want to be part of a generation who

 11 refuses to settle for anything less than strong

 12 regulation. I care about future generations and I

 13 believe that toxic coal ash is scary. I recognize

 14 that we'll be facing new transitions and

 15 challenges so it is time to take action.

 16 As a minority, I am aware that there is

 17 an environmental injustice when it comes to coal.

 18 The ash that devastated Roane County, Tennessee,

 19 after TVA's Kingston coal ash pond failure is now

 20 being shipped to Perry County, Alabama, a largely

 21 minority group community where arsenic

 22 contamination has risen to levels 80 times the
 535

 1 safe drinking water standards.

 2 Coal ash contamination

 3 disproportionately impacts the poorest

 4 communities. Almost half of the EPA high hazard

 5 ash ponds in the southeast are low-income areas.

 6 Finally, as a Christian I believe in a

 7 holy God who created all the heavens and the earth

 8 to be perfect and good, yet we have exploited them

 9 through our greed, selfishness, and pride. We are

 10 called to be good stewards in the environment

 11 because He has entrusted us with the earth and we

 12 are to glorify Him by caring for his creation.

 13 Although the EPA's strongest legislation

 14 Subtitle C is a good start, it is not enough.

 15 Subtitle C docs not require rapid closure of

 16 dangerous ash ponds, it does not require immediate

 17 cleanup, despite the threat to health and the

 18 environment from toxic waste, and it does not

 19 require polluters to ensure healthy air and water.

 20 That is why I support a stronger Subtitle C Plus

 21 in which the N -- EPA should immediately shutdown

 22 all ca -- coal ash ponds and unlined landfills,
 536

 1 investigate all coal ash dump sites, and clean up

 2 all contaminated sites.

 3 In addition, the EPA needs to determine

 4 the nature and extent of exposure to human -- of

 5 human and to the toxic material in coal ash,

 6 including instituting medical monitoring, when co

 7 -- contamination is discovered.

 8 Moreover, all shipments of coal ash

 9 should also comply with hazardous material

 10 transportation requirements and it should require

 11 all fly ash, bottom ash, slag, and FGD sludge to

 12 be tested under the EPA's new leach test, LEAF, to

 13 determine toxicity.

 14 Finally, we should immediately cease use

 15 of coal ash as fill and install composite liners

 16 for all -- for all expanded and new landfills.

 17 Thank you for your time.

 18 (Applause)

 19 MS. WHITE: Good evening. My name is --

 20 you have me listed as Patricia White, but I prefer

 21 to be called Naeema, so I'm going to introduce

 22 myself as Naeema Muhammad. I'm with the North
 537

 1 Carolina Environmental Justice Network. I live in

 2 Rocky Mountain, North Carolina.

 3 And I am here to night because in 1999,

 4 when Hurricane Floyd tore up eastern North

 5 Carolina, there was a group of citizens out of a

 6 little town called Princeville, North Carolina,

 7 who was underwater for seven days. As a result of

 8 the Hurricane Floyd many, many people in eastern

 9 North Carolina had to be placed in temporary

 10 housing sites. And as a result of that, in

 11 October of 1999, FEMA, the Federal Emer --

 12 Emergency Management Agency, along with some state

 13 agencies out of North Carolina and the local

 14 government of Edgecombe County, North Carolina, ta

 15 -- took the citizens from Princeville, brought

 16 them over to Rocky Mount and put them in indust --

 17 and set up their housing at an industrial landfill

 18 site that had been receiving coal ash right up

 19 until the day of the flood.

 20 And the problem with that, they did not

 21 inform people that this had been a coal ash site,

 22 which was a basic denial of peoples right to know,
 538

 1 as well as, you know, a denial of peoples human

 2 rights to clean air and clean water.

 3 And when the citizens found out about

 4 this site, one of the things that happened was --

 5 I'm a -- I'm a community organizer, first of all.

 6 As a community organizer, I was working with the

 7 Hurricane Floyd survivors and trying to get them

 8 through the recovery process, which was very

 9 discriminating at the time. And so people were

 10 sent to Rocky Mount, placed on this coal ash

 11 landfill without being informed that this had been

 12 a coal ash landfill.

 13 When they brought the trailers to the to

 14 site, they had to tear up the ground and stuff.

 15 So that means they were uncovering the ash that

 16 had been being placed there for many, many years.

 17 And the industry that was dumping there was right

 18 across the street from this site that was -- that

 19 citizen (sic) were placed on. So they put them

 20 there, they didn't tell them. And when the

 21 citizens we -- some of the workers -- there is a

 22 prison right back there as well. And some of the
 539

 1 workers from the prison came over to the site and

 2 told us -- you know, reminded us that that had

 3 been a landfill site and they had seen numerous

 4 trucks constantly coming in and out of that site

 5 dumping -- dumping stuff. And so they were

 6 concerned about what exactly was there.

 7 So as we began to investigate, that's

 8 when we found out about the coal ash. And we went

 9 to our local government of Edgecombe County and

 10 they would not talk to us. We talked to FEMA,

 11 they would not talk to us. The state would not

 12 talk to us.

 13 So the citizens --

 14 MR. HOFFMAN: Your time is up.

 15 MS. WHITE: It's up already?

 16 SPEAKER: M-hm.

 17 MS. WHITE: No. That's not fair. Okay.

 18 Well, anyway, to make a long story short, they did

 19 nothing about it. And the citizens were never

 20 informed and they -- to this date, we still don't

 21 know what kind of impact that coal ash had on the

 22 citizens of Princeville.
 540

 1 We do support Subtitle C and -- even

 2 though we believe it could be stronger than it is.

 3 And -- and the last thing I will say is,

 4 because I've been wanting to tell you this all

 5 day, we have a broken regulatory system in this

 6 country. And I'm not sure how it's going to be

 7 fixed. I -- sometimes I say, I think we can't fix

 8 it. But we have to take some greater steps than

 9 this.

 10 (Applause)

 11 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 12 Is there anyone else in the room who has

 13 a number? Let me check my watch. We'll take a

 14 break until 9:15.

 15 MS. WHITE: I have documents -- I have

 16 documents from what happened at that site in North

 17 Carolina.

 18 MR. HOFFMAN: Just put your -- your name

 19 on it and put them -- it right here.

 20 MS. WHITE: It was done by the

 21 Department of -- University of --

 22 MR. HOFFMAN: Do you -- do you have your
 541

 1 name on it so -- that?

 2 MS. WHITE: Yes, I do.

 3 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you very much.

 4 So we'll -- we'll reconvene at 9:15.

 5 (Recess)

 6 MR. DELLINGER: We're reconvening and --

 7 long enough for me to ask if there are anymore

 8 people who ha -- are in the room that have

 9 numbers.

 10 So we are now going to un-reconvene and

 11 -- for -- for -- we'll recon -- re -- we'll

 12 reconvene at 9:30.

 13 (Recess)

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Is there anybody in the

 15 room that has a number and hasn't spoken? We're

 16 going to -- we're going to stay around for another

 17 10 or 15 minutes in case somebody comes in. But

 18 it's not going to be a full panel. We're going to

 19 let -- we're going to let people go so they can

 20 get some dinner right now before the restaurants

 21 close. But we'll wait here until 9:45. And --

 22 that's when people are supposed to have been here
 542

 1 for the -- for the last group of -- of speakers.

 2 (Recess)

 3 MR. DELLINGER: We're reconvening. We

 4 have a -- a new speaker. A -- and so I'm calling

 5 Number 213.

 6 What you -- what you would do is state

 7 your name and your affiliation. And we'll -- you

 8 have three minutes to speak. And we'll -- we'll

 9 kind of coach you along with that, you'll have --

 10 you'll have a warning -- well, you'll -- at --

 11 you'll have a two -- one -- one card will at -- at

 12 two minutes, one at one minute, another one at 30

 13 seconds and then the red one means you summarize

 14 real, real quick, if you haven't finished.

 15 MR. NEY: Ready?

 16 MR. DELLINGER: Sure.

 17 MR. NEY: Ready?

 18 MR. ZUGER: Good evening. Yes, I am

 19 ready. Thank you.

 20 My name is Ed Zuger. I am a

 21 Kentucky-licensed environmental attorney and a

 22 volunteer member of the Sierra Club, Cumberland
 543

 1 Chapter's Energy Committee. And I am here today

 2 and submitting my comment in order to express my

 3 overarching comment that is in support of the US

 4 EPA's proposal to regular CCR under Subtitle C.

 5 CCR should no longer be considered

 6 exempt waste because the exemption promotes

 7 illegal industry practices, it ignores the ethical

 8 duties of the US EPA and SIP-state regulators, and

 9 demonstrates a blind-eyed model of regulation.

 10 Ongoing business concerns must make

 11 decisions that satisfy portfolio managers and, you

 12 know, foreign investors, and employees. And most

 13 firms also consider locally impacted economies,

 14 social and health issues, and even environmental

 15 results of their activities.

 16 However, without the legal obligations

 17 that Subtitle C would impose, where do these

 18 competing indus -- interests fall along the

 19 continuum? Kingston maybe illustrates the answer

 20 to that.

 21 Right now the decades-old ponds and

 22 landfills regularly leach CCR, and even without a
 544

 1 glaring example of Kingston, show how pervasive

 2 the problem has become. Of course -- because

 3 only, for example, US EPA presents the resources

 4 and the knowledge and impartiality to force the

 5 industry to stop causing the destruction of

 6 precious assets through CCR mismanagement. We

 7 need to rely on you USPE -- EPA and -- and Subchap

 8 -- Subtitle C to control the waste.

 9 The industry, of course, is not so

 10 beholden to our rights. That's a good thing. But

 11 things need to be regulated in order to

 12 reintroduce the protection we need.

 13 Regulating CCR as an exempt waste flies

 14 in the face of both language and logic. Exempt,

 15 as a status, implies that, at least conceptually,

 16 everybody knows that the subject of the exemption

 17 would not have become exempt but for some forces,

 18 outside forces. CCR is not harmless, and we know

 19 that in spades. Rather, CCR is hazardous. And a

 20 lesson equally understood by living near a coal

 21 processing facility or observing water quality in

 22 the region.
 545

 1 So just in closing, I want to point out

 2 that, despite the US EPA's administrative status

 3 as opposed to the dem -- democratic process of

 4 legislative elections, the EPA must see how

 5 heavily weighted the public has been toward

 6 Subtitle C throughout these hearings from all over

 7 the region. Families, scientists, experts,

 8 educators, lawyers, doctors, we've all expressed

 9 our favor of Subtitle C.

 10 I urge you to make the legal, ethical

 11 and logical choice of regulating CCR under

 12 Subtitle C of RCRA.

 13 Thank you very much.

 14 MR. DELLINGER: Thank you.

 15 (Applause)

 16 MR. DELLINGER: Hang on. We have to

 17 ask. We have to ask.

 18 Is there anywell -- anyone else in the

 19 room who ha -- who has a number and wants to

 20 speak? Going once. Going twice. Going three

 21 times.

 22 SPEAKER: Sold.
 546

 1 MR. DELLINGER: Steve, you're the --

 2 MR. HOFFMAN: I am Stephen D. Hoffman,

 3 US EPA. I'm officially closing this hearing.

 4 (Whereupon, at 9:45 p.m., the

 5 PROCEEDINGS were adjourned.)

 6 * * * * *

 7

 8

 9

 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

 20

 21

 22
 547

 1 CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLIC

 2 STATE OF KENTUCKY

 3 I, ROSE MARY KITHCART, notary public in

 4 and for the State of Kentucky, do hereby certify

 5 that the forgoing PROCEEDING was duly recorded and

 6 thereafter reduced to print under my direction;

 7 that the witnesses were sworn to tell the truth

 8 under penalty of perjury; that said transcript is a

 9 true record of the testimony given by witnesses;

 10 that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor

 11 employed by any of the parties to the action in

 12 which this proceeding was called; and, furthermore,

 13 that I am not a relative or employee of any

 14 attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto,

 15 nor financially or otherwise interested in the

 16 outcome of this action.

 17

 18

 19 -----------------------------------

 20 Notary Public ID: 402347

 21 My Commission Expires: August 27, 2013

 22