December 2014

Response to Comments

EPA’s 2010 Proposed CCR Rule

Volume 16:

Public Comments on EPA’s 

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) 

for the 2010 Proposed CCR Rule

Final

Prepared by:

Economics and Risk Analysis Staff

Program Management, Communications, and Analysis Office

Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ii

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction and Prefatory Notes........................................................................................... 1

2.0 General Comments................................................................................................................. 3

3.0 Comments Related to Regulatory Costs................................................................................. 15

3.1 Historical/Baseline Costs............................................................................................... 24

3.2 Incorrect Cost Assumptions........................................................................................... 25

3.3 Landfill and Surface Impoundment Liner Costs............................................................ 28

3.4 Groundwater Monitoring Costs ..................................................................................... 28

3.5 Fugitive Dust Control Costs........................................................................................... 29

3.6 Wet-to-Dry Handling Conversion Costs........................................................................ 29

3.7 Costs to Specific Groups................................................................................................ 29

3.8 Corrective Action (Groundwater Cleanup) Costs.......................................................... 30

3.9 Impoundment Failure/Spill Cleanup Costs.................................................................... 31

3.10 Storage Costs ............................................................................................................... 31

3.11 Other Cost-Related Comments.................................................................................... 31

4.0 Comments Related to Environmental, Human Health, and Economic Benefits ................. 33

4.1 Monetization Issues .................................................................................................... 35

4.2 Avoided Cancer Benefits............................................................................................ 36

4.3 Avoided Structural Failure/Spill Benefits................................................................... 36

4.4 Avoided Groundwater Remediation Benefits............................................................. 39

4.5 Other Benefit-Related Comments............................................................................... 39

5.0 Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Uses.............................................................. 40

5.1 Accuracy of Life Cycle Benefits................................................................................. 48

5.2 Industry-Specific Economic Data for the RIA............................................................ 50

5.3 Future Beneficial Use Impact Scenarios..................................................................... 50

6.0 Comments Relating to Net Benefits .................................................................................... 52

6.1 Cost/Benefits Scaling under Subtitle D Option .......................................................... 53

6.2 Comparison of Benefits to Costs ................................................................................ 53

7.0 Comments Related to Supplemental Analyses.................................................................... 55

7.1 Energy Impact Analysis: EO 13211 ........................................................................... 57

7.2 Small Business Impact Analysis: RFA/SBREFA....................................................... 57

7.3 Environmental Justice Analysis: EO 12898 ............................................................... 58

7.4 Children’s Health Analysis: EO 13045....................................................................... 59

7.5 Paperwork Reduction Act and Comments on ICR ..................................................... 60

7.6 Unfunded Mandates Analysis/UMRA........................................................................ 60

7.7 Federalism Analysis: EO 13132 ................................................................................. 60

7.8 Consultation/Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments: EO 13175................... 61

7.9 Other Comments on Supplemental Analyses ............................................................. 62

8.0 References............................................................................................................................ 63
1

1.0Introduction and Prefatory Notes

In 2010 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed a regulatory impact analysis (RIA)1

which estimated the potential future costs and benefits of EPA’s June 21, 2010 proposed rule2to establish 

environmental and human health protection regulations for coal combustion residual (CCR) landfills and 

surface impoundments used by coal-fired electric utility plants. This document addresses public comments 

Public comments on EPA’s 2010 RIA, which consist of two comment sets:

 Docket comments: 431 organizations submitted 1,067 RIA-related comments during the 5-month 

(June 21 to November 19, 2010) public comment period3for the 2010 proposed CCR rule.

 Hearings comments: 170 organizations submitted 288 RIA-related comments at EPA’s eight 

public hearings4on the 2010 proposed CCR rule held sequentially between August and October 

2010 in VA, CO, TX, NC, IL, PA, KY, and TN.

Both the docket and hearings comment sets are co-mingled in the summaries and responses provided in 

this document. For the purpose of this document an “organization” is defined as a commenting 

organization and its spokesperson (or an individual citizen without organization affiliation provided). For 

example, if two separate spokespeople affiliated with the same organization, submitted two comments, it 

is counted as two organizations for purpose of this document. If one organization commented individually 

and also commented jointly with other organizations, the two comments are counted as separate 

organizations.

For each comment category, this document provides a table that summarizes the docket ID, commenter 

name and organizational affiliation (if any). Following each table, this document presents a summary of 

the major comments, followed by EPA responses to the major comment themes for each subsection.

Lastly, EPA’s 2010 RIA evaluated both of the two co-proposed regulatory options of the June 2010 

proposed rule: RCRA Subtitle C “special waste” (hazardous waste) option, and RCRA Subtitle D “solid 

waste” (non-hazardous waste) option, as well as a “D-prime” regulatory approach. Since EPA’s 2015 

CCR final rule is based on RCRA Subtitle D authority, this document addresses only those public 

comments submitted on the 2010 RIA’s evaluation of (a) the Subtitle D option and “D-prime” approach, 

 

1 “Regulatory Impact Analysis for EPA’s Proposed RCRA Regulation of Coal Combustion Residues (CCR) Generated by 

the Electric Utility Industry,” prepared by the EPA Office of Conservation and Recovery, 30 April 2010, 242 pages, available 

as document ID nr. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-0003 at http://www.regulations.gov (a separate Appendix document to the 

RIA is available as document ID nr. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-0003.1).

2 “Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Identification and Listing of Special Wastes; Disposal of Coal 

Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities; Proposed Rule,” Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 118, June 21, 2010, pages 

35128 to 35264.

3 On page 35128 of EPA’s Federal Register notice (Vol. 75, No. 118, June 21, 2010) for the 2010 CCR proposed rule, EPA 

initially provided a 3-month public comment period spanning June 21 to September 20, 2010. In addition to publishing on 

August 20, 2010 in the Federal Register (Vol. 75, No. 161, pages 51434 to 51436) several administrative corrections to the 

proposed rule, EPA also in that same notice extended the public comment period by 60-days to November 19, 2010. The 

docket ID number for written public comments on the 2010 CCR proposed rule is EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640 at 

http://www.regulations.gov

4 Transcripts from EPA’s eight public hearings on the 2010 CCR proposed rule are available at the following EPA website: 

http://www.epa.gov/waste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccr-rule/ccr-hearing.htm
2

and (b) the Subtitle C “special waste” option only if the comment was also applicable by logical extension 

to the RIA’s evaluation of the Subtitle D option or “D-prime” approach.
3

2.0General Comments

The public stakeholders submitted comments about economic issues generally.

Table 2A – General Comments (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09828 Indiana Office of Utility Consumer 

Counselor A. David Stippler State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09850 Montana-Dakota Utilities Company 

(Montana-Dakota) Abbie Krebsbach Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06836 Stone Restoration of America Adam Babbidge Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05905 Bull Concrete Adam Pinto Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09423 Masonry Wall Systems Alan C. Ferguson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05805 Mathis-Akins Concrete Block Co., Inc. Alice S. Kuncaitis Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07001 Vectren Corporation Angila M. Reinerford Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08089

Private Citizen Annely Noble Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08784

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06859 Private Citizen Antoinette Stein, Ph.D. Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08836 Underground Services Co. d/b/a USC 

Technologies

Barb DeBusk on behalf of 

Ritchie Benninghoven Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08847

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06422 Dynegy Inc Ben C. Trammell Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09236

National Tribal Air Association (NTAA) Bill Thompson Tribal Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09237

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10520 Palmetto Agribusiness Council (PABC) Bob Battle Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06871 Restore Painting & Waterproofing, Inc. Brenda Camacho on behalf of 

Norge Araniz Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05906 Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. 

(AECI) Brent Ross Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09995 Private Citizen Bruce Boggs Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09333

Gibbco, Inc. Bruce N. Kazich Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09334

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10520 Florida Electronic Power Coordinating 

Group, Inc. (FCG) Carl Eldred Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08857 Department of Electric, City of 

Hamilton, Ohio Charles Young Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08861

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03053 Private Citizen Chris Barnes Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09716

Specialized Transport LLC Christopher D. Benna Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09718

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09656 CK Transport Chuck Kitchens Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05935 The Concrete Works Sweeney Mining 

Co., LLC Cleta Sweeney Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07859 Private Citizen Clint Wald Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10299 LA Ash, Inc. Danielle King Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06863 Avista Corp. Darrell Soyars Electric Utility
4

Table 2A – General Comments (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06816 Moapa Band of Paiutes Darren Daboda Tribal Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03738 Private Citizen David E. Lawrence Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06547 North American Concrete Alliance 

(NACA)

David Hubbard on behalf of 

North American Concrete 

Alliance (NACA)

Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09350 Texas Industries, Inc. (TXI) Operations

David Perkins, Texas 

Industries, Inc. (TXI) 

Operations

Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06296

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06296 Alabama Coal Association (ACA) David Roberson Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06296

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10535

New York Construction Materials 

Association (NY Materials) EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10538 David S. Hamling Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10553

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06876 Tennessee Riverkeeper, Inc. David Whiteside Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08270

Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. (Cliffs) David Z. Skolasinski Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08418

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10509 Bode Concrete LLC Dennis Broderick Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10569 Coastwide Ready-Mix Dennis Johnson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08225 MeadWestvaco Dirk J. Krouskop Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10189

Specialty Materials, Inc. Dot McClurg Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10192

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10564 Wilsonville Concrete Products 

Commercial Redi Mix (WCP) Doug Gilmer Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08857 Michigan Chamber of Commerce Doug Roberts Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06993 Oglethorpe Power Corporation Douglas J. Fulle Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06554 University of Pittsburgh Department of 

Public Health Dr. Conrad Daniel Volz Academia

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08072 Silica Fume Drew DeCarlo Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08258

Heartland Consumers Power District Eli D. Eilbott Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08270

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07798 Citizens Against Ruining the 

Environment

Ellen Rendulich and Sandy 

Burcenski Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10518 Earthjustice, et. al. Emily Greenlee, on behalf of 

Lisa Evans Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07047 Great River Energy Erik Silvola Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06388 Louisiana Public Service Commission Eve Kahao Gonzalez State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09514 Otter Tail Power Company Farren Richard Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06538 South Carolina Office of Regulatory 

Staff (ORS) Florence P. Belser State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06546

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06988 Missouri Joint Municipal Electric Utility 

Commission Floyd Gilzow State Government
5

Table 2A – General Comments (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06728 West Virginia Department of 

Environmental Protection (WVDEP)

Gary Casto on behalf of 

Randy C. Huffman State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08216

Dixie Electric Cooperative Gary Harrison Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08219

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04047 Conco Companies - Ready Mix 

Division/ACME

Gaylene Anderson on behalf 

of John Holiman Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06291 Labadie Environmental Organization Ginger Gambaro Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10205 Croell Redi-Mix, Inc. Harlan Taylor Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08856 Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) Henry Eby Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06823 Native Community Action Council 

(NCAC) Ian Zabarte Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06327 Tennessee Valley Public Power 

Association, Inc. (TVPPA) Jack W. Simmons Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06351 Mettiki Coal, LLC James C. Ashby Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08258 Massachusetts Department of 

Environmental Protection James C. Colman State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06396 National Rural Electronic Cooperative 

Association (NRECA) James F. Stine Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09226 Private Citizen James J. Rohrbach, P.E. Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06122 Port Aggregates, Inc. James P. Guinn Sr. Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05901 Southern Crushed Concrete LLC James R. Miller Jr. Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09750

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09807 American Coal Council (ACC) Janet Gellici Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09814

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08251 Institute for Policy Integrity Jason A. Schwartz Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06360 ARIPPA Jeff A. McNelly Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06275

Lansing Board of Water and Light 

(BWL) and Michigan State University 

(MSU)

Jeffrey L. Woolstrum Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07680

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn 

LLP on behalf of Lansing Board of 

Water and Light (LBWL) and Michigan 

State University (MSU)

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09750 Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. 

(CEC) Jeremy S. Ousley Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-

10564

Construction Aggregates of West 

Virginia, L.L.C. Jerri V. Kiral Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03935 Miles Sand and Gravel Company Jerry Trudeau Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10133 Private Citizen Jim Cox Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06526 Utility Solid Waste Activities Group 

(USWAG)

Jim Roewer, Utility Solid 

Waste Activities Group 

(USWAG) ([9.1.1] [9.4.2] 

[9.4.3])

Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-00905 The SEFA Group Jimmy Knowless Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06829 Improving Kids' Environment Jodi Perras Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08229 Alabama Public Service Commission John D. Free State Government
6

Table 2A – General Comments (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08230

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02399 Cranesville Block Company, Inc. John Tesiero Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06723 Arkansas Electric Cooperative 

Corporation (AECC) Jonathan Oliver Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03722 Howard Concrete Pumping Company, 

Inc. Joseph E. Bonetti Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06987 Entergy Services, Inc. Joseph Hantz Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06226 Pennsylvania Coal Association (PCA) Josie Gaskey Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04142 Kentucky Association of Manufacturers 

(KAM)

Karen F. Ellis on behalf of 

Charles Gregory Higdon Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09362 West Virginia Manufacturers 

Association (WVMA) Karen S. Price Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06849 Little Village Environmental Justice 

Organization (LVEJO) Keith Harley Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06992 National Association of Manufacturers Keith W. McCoy Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02878 Bismarck-Mandan Chamber of 

Commerce Kelvin L. Hullet Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06128 Owensboro Municipal Utilities Kevin D. Frizzell Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09694 Structural Rehabilitation Group, LLC Kirby L. McCleary Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03707 Green Century Capital Management Kristina Curtis Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06556 Private Citizen Kristina Keeling Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06840

Nebraska Ash Company

L. E. "Tex" Leber

Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09235 L. E. Leber

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06548 Navajo Tribal member L. Goodman Tribal Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08850 Lansing Board of Water & 

Light (BWL) Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08853

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04022 Private Citizen Larry D. Conley Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10324 Enduracon Technologies Larry Nelson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06857 CertainTeed Gypsum, Inc. Lauren P. Alterman Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05794 South Carolina Manufacturers Alliance 

(SCMA) Lewis F. Gossett Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06313 Earthjustice et. al. Lisa Evans Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09886

PMI Ash Technologies, LLC (PMI) Lisa I. Cooper Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09935

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06833 Dominion Resources Services, Inc. Lisa J. Keck on behalf of 

Pamela Faggert Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04036 Offshore Express, Inc. Marcia Mann on behalf of 

Scott Kisilywicz Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10262 Standard Cements Materials, Inc. Mario A. Tamez Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09870 McDonald Farms Enterprises Marjorie McDonald Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09707 Private Citizen Mark Morgan Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03736 Bayview Redi-Mix, Inc. Marvin Prince Beneficial User
7

Table 2A – General Comments (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07806

Mass Comment Campaign 

sponsoring by Earthjustice 

(165 signatures) Part 1 of 2

Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06807 Private Citizen

Mass Comment Campaign 

sponsoring organization 

unknown (47)

Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06416

Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources (WI DNR) and Public Service 

Commission of Wisconsin (WI PSC)

Matthew Frank (WI DNR) and 

Eric Callisto (WI PSC) State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08227 Minnesota Power (ALLETE) Michael G. Cashin Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08229 Gypsum Association Michael Gardner Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07002 Alabama Environmental Council Michael J. Churchman Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06259 Iowa Association of Business and 

Industry (ABI) Michael Ralston Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09276 Ohio Coal Association Michael T.W. Carey Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08246 Wisconsin Ready-Mix Concrete 

Association (WRMCA) Mitch Mariotti Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10520 Materials Handling and Transportation Name illegible Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10529 LeGrand Johnson Construction Co. name illegible Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10573 C&C Ready Mix Corporation Nicholas Cerretani Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09639 National Council of Coal Lessors (NCCL) Nick Carter Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02196 Private Citizen Nick Mankle Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09351 Manitowoc Public Utilities (MPU) Nilaksh Kothari Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09815 FLSmidth, Inc. Ove L. Jepsen Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04007 Western Governors' Association Pam Inmann on behalf of 

Brian Schweitzer State Elected Official

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08246 Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP on behalf 

of Kansas City Board of Public Utilities

Parthenia B. Evans and 

Dennis Lane Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08248

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03708 Indiana Manufacturers Association, 

Inc. (IMA) Patrick Bennett Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06722 Private Citizen Paul Benedict Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02828 Colonial Construction Inc Paul Bigness Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06254

Sunflower Electric Power Corporation Paul E. Reynolds Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06912

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06298 Tennessee Department of 

Environment and Conservation (TDEC) Paul L. Sloan State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09431 American Forest and Paper Association 

(AF&PA) Paul Noe Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09723 Texas Aggregates & Concrete 

Association (TACA) R. Szecsy Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06842 Michigan Manufacturers Association Randall Gross Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05676 Folsom Ready Mix, Inc. Randy Barnes Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10569 Private Citizen Raymond von Drehle Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06845 Arizona Chamber of Commerce and 

Industry

Rebecca Hudson on behalf of 

Glenn Hamer Trade Association
8

Table 2A – General Comments (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06384 Public Utilities Commission of Ohio Rebecca L. Hussey State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06807 Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers 

Association (ARMA) Reed Hitchcock Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06809

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08850 Center for Progressive Reform, 

University of Maryland School of Law Rena Steinzor Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06589 Private Citizen Renee Reber Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07755 Rob Carryl Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09236 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association (NRMCA) Robert A. Garbini Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09276 National Concrete Masonry 

Association (NCMA) Robert D. Thomas Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09333

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09432 Alstom Power, Inc. Robert G. Hilton Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06817 Portland Cement Association Robert Hirsch Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05899 B&G Materials Robert L. Beck Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08863 Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan Inc. Robin Clark Tribal Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06816

Phoenix Cement Company (PCC), Salt 

River and Rock, Salt River Materials 

Group

Roger R. Smith Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02823 Partners Bulk Logistics (PBL) Ron Heller Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08216 International Brotherhood of Electrical 

Workers Ronald Moore Union

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10573 Great Lakes Concrete Products, LLC Rosanne DiPizio Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08784

Alabama Pulp & Paper Council Roy McAuley Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08787

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06196 Comite Dialogo Ambiental Ruth Santiago Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09886 Western Rock Products Scott Sidlow Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06832 SCANA Corporation Shirley M. Ruffin Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10498 Bert & Wetta Abilene, Inc. Stan Foltz Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08836

Association of State and Territorial 

Solid Waste Management Officials 

(ASTSWMO)

Stephen A. Cobb (Al) State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10573 Arizona Rock Products Association 

(ARPA) Steve Trussell Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07487 American Road and Transportation 

Builders Association (ARTBA) T. Peter Ruane Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08223 Pozzi-Tech, Inc. Terry E. Watson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08213 Central Alabama Electric Cooperative Terry Miller Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10496 Abode Check, LLC Thomas E. Murley Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04038 KMR Concrete, Inc. Tim Fletcher Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09707 Kerkstra Precast Tim Skiba Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06404 Organic and Mineral Systems Inc. Timothy J. Nicholson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06380 SSE, Inc. Timothy R. Unger Beneficial User
9

Table 2A – General Comments (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03313 Mathis-Akins Concrete Block Co. Inc Tina Sheffield Kuncaitis Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06034 Morandin Concrete Tippy Cosuello Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06872 State of Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection Todd M. Wallace State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06793 Greater Phoenix Chamber of 

Commerce Todd Sanders Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05689 Gresham Transfer, Inc. Tom Welch Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06011 Public Service Commission (PSC) -

State of North Dakota Tony Clark State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06959

Prairie Rivers Network, Illinois Chapter 

of the Sierra Club, American Bottom 

Conservancy

Traci L. Barkley Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06847 Commerce Lexington Inc. Tyler Campbell Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07742 Phoenix Cement Company Verle C. Martz Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09750 Sierra Club - Las Vegas Field Office Vinny Spotleson Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09891 Otter Tail Power Company W. Uggerud Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10207 Lexington Concrete and Block Watt Ervin Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10133 Professional Engineering Consultants 

(PEC) Wes Britson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07788 BVU Anthony Wes Rosenbalm Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09815 Indiana Economic Development 

Association (IEDA) William A. Dory Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-01118 Novinda Corporation William D. Byers on behalf of 

Michael P. Maloney Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10517 Public Service Company of New 

Hampshire (PSNH) William H. Smagula Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10558 Glasgow EPB William J. Ray Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08240 Small Business Administration's Office 

of Advocacy (SBA) Winslow Sargeant Federal Agency

Table 2B – General Comments (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10662_DC-101 Earthjustice Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11198_CHI-029 Little Village Environmental 

Justice Organization Abigail Singer Advocacy Group

TRANS-CHI-0050

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10681_DC-069 American Forest & Paper 

Association (AF&PA) Amy E. Schaffer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10734_DEN-046 Colorado Interfaith Power and 

Light Betty Goebel Community Group

TRANS-DEN-0015

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11339_P-052 Alpha Natural Resources Bill Schloemer Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11165_CHA-118 Boral Composites, Inc. (BCI) Brian M. Below Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11553_L-001 NuForm Materials Brock Marrs Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11612_K-026

Trans Ash, Inc. Bruce Kazich Beneficial User

TRANS-KNX-0060
10

Table 2B – General Comments (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11574_L-022

Gibbco, Inc.

TRANS-LVL-0007

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11477_L-054 Duke Energy Indiana Bryan Walsh Electric Utility

TRANS-CLT-0108 Richland County Council Calvin Washington Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11651_K-066 Kentucky Chamber of Commerce Chad A. Harpole Trade Association

TRANS-CLT-0016 Working People For Fair Energy Charles Steele, Jr. Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10727_DEN-039 Tri-State Generation and 

Transmission Association Inc. (TriState)Chris Gilbreath Electric Utility

TRANS-DEN-0006

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10774_DA-005 Precast Concrete Manufacturers 

Association of Texas Chris Lechner Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11276_CHI-048 Protestants for the Common 

Good (PCG) Courtney Eccles Community Group

TRANS-CHI-0092

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11485_L-066 American Electric Power Dana Sheets Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11659_K-074 Headwaters Resources (spoke as 

employee) David Lawrence Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10735_DEN-047

Flashfill Services LLC Doug Hernandez Beneficial User

TRANS-DEN-0023

TRANS-CLT-0047 Tennessee Interfaith Power and 

Light Douglas Hunt Community Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11424_P-155 Electric Power Generation 

Association Douglas L. Biden Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10612_DC-026

Earthjustice Emily Greenlee Advocacy Group

TRANS-ARL-0107

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11705_K-126

Dixie Electric Cooperative Gary Harrison Electric Utility

TRANS-KNX-0125

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10788_DA-019 Western Farmers Electric 

Cooperative (Western Farmers) Gerald Butcher Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0060

TRANS-PIT-0030

Boral Composites Inc. (BCI) Gregory J. Glander Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11318_P-028

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11203_CHI-071

Illinois Energy Association James Monk Trade Association

TRANS-CHI-0133

TRANS-ARL-0003 National Rural Electric 

Cooperative Association James Stine Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11054_CHA-089 American Coal Council (ACC) Janet Gellici Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11199_CHI-030 Beneficial Reuse Management Jeffrey H. Ulrey Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11196_CHI-027 Ecologic Tech Jerry Liu Beneficial User

TRANS-DAL-0075 Jimmy Lambert Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11695_K-116 Headwaters Resources, Inc. 

(spoke as employee) John Van Ham Private Citizen

TRANS-ARL-0015 Citizens Coal Council John Wathen Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10741_DEN-053 Great River Energy (GRE) John Weeda Electric Utility

TRANS-ARL-0125 Jonathan Barker Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10699_DEN-011 Navajo FlexCrete Building 

Systems, Inc. Jonathan S. Robertson Beneficial User
11

Table 2B – General Comments (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

TRANS-DEN-0030 Colorado Interfaith Power and 

Light Joy Jamison Community Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10806_DA-036 Luminant Julie Prejean Electric Utility

TRANS-LVL-0017 Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Katie Holmes Community Group

TRANS-CHI-0147 Little Village Environmental 

Justice Organization

Kimberly WassermanNieto Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10647_DC-087A Sierra Club Lena Moffett Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11233_CHI-104 Southern Illinois Power 

Cooperative Leonard Hopkins Electric Utility

TRANS-ARL-0141 Sierra Club Leslie Fields Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10636_DC-076 Sierra Club Leslie G. Fields Advocacy Group

TRANS-DAL-0094 Lev Guter Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10771_DA-002 Dynegy Inc. Linda Whelan Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11687_K-109 Maria Rosales Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11506_L-087 American Coal Ash Association Mark Bryant Trade Association

TRANS-ARL-0080 Matt Durning and N' 

Jeri Eaton Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10674_DC-061

TRANS-ARL-0006 Michael Jackson Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10603_DC-017 Synthetic Materials LLC Michael W. Beck Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11430_P-023 International Brotherhood of 

Electrical Workers (IBEW) Michael Welsh Union

TRANS-PIT-0034

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11286_CHI-064 Hoosier Energy Rural Electric 

Cooperative, Inc. Michalene Reilly Electric Utility

TRANS-DEN-0101 San Juan Citizens Alliance Mike Eisenfel Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11281_CHI-055 LifeTime Composites, LLC Mike Thorpe Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10651_DC-090 Center for Environment, 

Commerce & Energy (Center) Norris McDonald Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10653_DC-092 Vermont Law School Patrick Parenteau Academia

TRANS-DEN-0025 Sunflower Electric Power 

Corporation Paul Reynolds Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11178_CHI-009 Chicago Chapter of Physicians for 

Social Responsibility Peter Orris Advocacy Group

TRANS-DEN-0086 Eco-Justice Ministries Peter Sawtell Community Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11521_L-139 Kentucky Ready-Mixed Concrete 

Association (KRMCA) R. Finley Messick Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10601_DC-015

Rebecca Kolberg Private Citizen

TRANS-ARL-0037

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10711_DEN-023 Eco-Justice Ministries Rev. Peter S. Sawtell Community Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11194_CHI-025 Great River Energy (GRE) Richard Lancaster Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10790_DA-021 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association (NRMCA) Robert Garbini Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11481_L-058 Sphere One, Inc. Ryan Brownhill Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10610_DC-024 New Age Fastening Systems Stephen Swartz Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11611_K-025

Full Circle Solutions, Inc. Steve Critchfield Beneficial User

TRANS-KNX-0062
12

Table 2B – General Comments (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11437_P-178 American Electric Power (AEP) Steven Orenchuk Electric Utility

TRANS-CLT-0138 South Carolina Chapter of Sierra 

Club Susan Corbett Advocacy Group

TRANS-LVL-0016 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association Terry Jones Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11667_K-082 Central Alabama Electric 

Cooperative Terry Mitchell Electric Utility

TRANS-DEN-0016 Nebraska Ash Company Tex Leber Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11201_CHI-069 Boral Composites Inc Thomas D. Zimmerman Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11564_L-012

American Coal Ash Association Thomas H. Adams Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11669_K-088

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11512_L-093 University of Kentucky Center for 

Applied Energy Research Thomas Robl Academia

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11336_P-049 Congress of the United States, 

House of Representatives

Tim Holden, et al. [121 

signatures] Federal Elected Official

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11335_P-048

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11373_P-092 Congress of the United States, 

House of Representatives Tim Murphy Federal Elected Official

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11600_K-014 Full Circle Solutions, Inc. Tyler Farrar Beneficial User

TRANS-ARL-0073 Maryland Commission on 

Environmental Justice and 

Sustainable Communities

Vernice Miller Travis Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10670_DC-055

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10707_DEN-019 Colorado Interfaith Power & Light Vicente Roldan Community Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10820_DA-050 Association of Electric Companies 

of Texas (AECT) Walt Baum Trade Association

TRANS-KNX-0171 William Smith Private Citizen

Comment Summary 

EPA received numerous, general comments on the 2010 RIA. These included broad 

comments regarding electricity prices, jobs, competitiveness, and the economy in general, 

or tended to express general support or disapproval for the RIA methodology, data, or 

results. 

One commenter finds that a 14-year period of analysis is inappropriate, and suggests that 

a 30-year period be used to align with utility planning horizons. The same commenter finds 

that EPA’s use of 2005 data biases the results because that year had unusually high CCR 

beneficial use.

Another commenter accuses EPA of failing to follow OMB Circular A-4 for conducting 

Federal regulatory analyses. First, the commenter finds issue with EPA’s description of the 

regulatory problem in the RIA because the discussion (1) doesn’t provide a statutory 

requirement that EPA act, (2) misidentifies externalities as the compelling public need for 

the regulation, and (3) fails to show that Federal government action (as opposed to state 

government action) is required. Second, the commenter finds Circular A-4 to be violated 

by EPA’s failure to consider sufficient regulatory alternatives for the 2010 proposed CCR 
13

rule. Finally, the commenter feels that EPA should have accounted for state government 

regulatory programs more thoroughly.

In addition, EPA received numerous economic comments discussing the following nontechnical or non-RIA-related categories: beneficial reuse, regulatory comments including 

EPA’s RCRA Subtitle C versus Subtitle D regulatory authorities, legal comments, 

monitoring requirements, cost considerations and population risk, direct discharge of CCR 

impoundments and associated permitting, CCR impoundment structural integrity, 

environmental remediation, sand and gravel pits, coal mining, and the receipt of sitespecific data.

EPA Response

EPA appreciates the overwhelming interest of the public regarding the 2010 RIA. In response to general 

comments about electricity prices/reliability and jobs, EPA has included these analyses in Appendix X of 

EPA’s December 2014 RIA5for the CCR final rule. Appendix X is a report about the design and results 

of EPA using the Integrated Planning Model (IPM) to estimate future electricity market effects of the CCR 

final rule. However, without more specific comment directed at the contents of the 2010 RIA (i.e., the 

data, methods, calculations, and results of the RIA), EPA could not alter the 2014 RIA for the final rule 

in response to these more general comments. 

With regard to the period of analysis, the 2010 RIA applied a 50-year period of analysis (2012-2061) to 

both cost estimates and benefit estimates, not 14 years. However, because the expected benefit of reduction 

in groundwater contamination may extend out well beyond 50 years and because some CCR management 

units are believed to operate for over 80 year lifespans (e.g., vertical expansion CCR landfills), EPA 

extended the period of analysis to 100 years for the CCR final rule 2014 RIA.

With regard to comments on input data for the 2010 RIA, the most recent year that CCR tonnage data 

were available from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) for electric utility plants at the year of the 

proposed rule was for year 2005. However, while formulating the 2014 RIA, EIA released 2012 CCR 

tonnage data which EPA incorporated to replace the older 2005 data.

With respect to comments about not following OMB Circular A-4 for the formulation of 2010 RIA 

Chapter 1 “Problem Statement: The Need for RCRA Regulation of CCR Disposal,” the 2010 RIA 

contained a summary of the legal and economic rationales for this Federal rulemaking. Furthermore, EPA 

presented a full discussion of these factors, among others, in the “I. Background” section (pages 35132 to 

35142) of the June 21, 2010 Federal Register CCR proposed rule notice. That Federal Register section 

explains why EPA is revisiting its 2000 regulatory determination for CCR, and why EPA co-proposed 

two regulatory options (i.e., Subtitle C and Subtitle D options). In addition, the Federal Register section 

titled “II. New Information on the Placement of CCRs in Landfills and Surface Impoundments" provides 

information on new developments since EPA’s 2000 CCR regulatory determination, including additional 

CCR disposal damage cases, CCR disposal environmental leakage/release risk modeling, updated 

information on current CCR management practices, and updated information on current state government 

 

5 EPA’s December 2014 RIA is available to the public for viewing/downloading in docket no. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640 

at http://www.regulations.gov
14

regulations associated with CCR disposal, and petitions from environmental and citizens groups for EPA 

to develop rules for CCR management. EPA’s 2014 RIA incorporates more of this comprehensive 

information from both Section I and Section II of the June 2010 Federal Register notice, into its Chapter 

1. Furthermore, in the 2014 RIA, EPA revised Chapter 1 to focus on the public need for the CCR rule in 

accordance with Section B of OMB Circular A-4.

Finally, to the extent that any commenter mentioned substantive issues regarding a specific aspect of the 

RIA, these comments are further addressed in subsequent sections of this document. To the extent that the 

comments are general and not germane to the RIA, no EPA responses are provided in this document.
15

3.0 Comments Related to Regulatory Costs

The public submitted comments related to regulatory cost estimates in the 2010 RIA, which are grouped 

into 11 cost subcategories in this section:

1. Historical/Baseline Costs

2. Incorrect Cost Assumptions

3. Liner Costs

4. GW Monitoring Costs

5. Fugitive Dust Control Costs

6. Wet-to-Dry Conversion Costs

7. Costs to Specific Groups 

8. Corrective Action Costs

9. Response/Cleanup Costs

10. Storage Costs

11. Other Cost-Related Comments

Table 3A – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10506 Texas Department of Transportation A. Saenz, Jr. State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06852 Green Delaware Alan Muller Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05805 Mathis-Akins Concrete Block Co., Inc. Alice S. Kuncaitis Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07001 Vectren Corporation Angila M. Reinerford Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06410 Anonymous Anonymous

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06251 We Energies Art Covi Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06418 Virginia Independent Power Producers, Inc. 

(VIPP) August Wallmeyer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09796 City of Morristown, Tennessee Barbara C. Barile Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08244 Edison Mission Energy, LLC Basil G. Constantelos Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06422 Dynegy Inc Ben C. Trammell Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09337 Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality (ADEQ) Benjamin H. Grumbles State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07486 System Council U-19 IBEW Bill Frederick Union

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06868 Cleco Corporation Bill Matthews Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07803 GDF SUEZ Energy Generation North America Bradley J. Cooley Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08228 Detroit Regional Chamber Brian A. Kandler Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09333 Gibbco, Inc. Bruce N. Kazich Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10497 Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc. 

(Seminole) Carl Eldred Electric Utility
16

Table 3A – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10498 Florida Electronic Power Coordinating 

Group, Inc. (FCG)

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08260 Citizens Against Ruining the Environment 

(C.A.R.E.) Carol Stark et al. Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09885 Progress Energy, Inc. Caroline Choi Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06299 MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company 

(MidAmerican) Cathy S. Woollums Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06865 Constellation Energy Charlene Zaruba on 

behalf of Paul Allen Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08234 Colorado Department of Public Health and 

Environment

Charles G. Johnson on 

behalf of Joe Schieffelin State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08235 Usibelli Coal Mine Incorporated (UCM) Charles P. Boddy Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08217 Washington County, Alabama; Washington 

County Commission Charles Singleton Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08857 Department of Electric, City of Hamilton, 

Ohio Charles Young Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06300

Southern Company behalf of itself and its 

four subsidiaries: Alabama Power Company, 

Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power 

Company, and Mississippi Power Company

Chris M. Hobson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09712 Basin Electric Power Cooperative (BEPC) Claire M. Olson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07859 Private Citizen Clint Wald Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07786

Nevada Department of Conservation and 

Natural Resources, Nevada Division of 

Environmerital Protection (NDEP)

Collen Cripps State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09322 Ash Development Association of Australia 

(ADAA) Craig Heidrich Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06915 Alcoa Inc. Curt Wells Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06529 NiSource Corporate Services Dale A. Helmers Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10348 Bryan Texas Utilities (BTU) Dan Wilkerson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10017 Salt River Project (SRP) Daniel J. Casiraro Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09799 Choctaw County, Oklahoma, Board of 

County Commissioners Danny Antwine Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06280 South Carolina Department of Health and 

Environmental Control Daphne Neel State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06863 Avista Corp. Darrell Soyars Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06547 North American Concrete Alliance (NACA)

David Hubbard on behalf 

of North American 

Concrete Alliance 

(NACA)

Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06860 South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, 

Environmental Technical Committee David M. Comen Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06296 Alabama Coal Association (ACA) David Roberson Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08270 Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. (Cliffs) David Z. Skolasinski Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09618

Waste Permits Division, Louisiana 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(LDEQ)

Don Caffery State Government
17

Table 3A – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06385 New York State Department of 

Transportation (NYSDOT)

Donald A. Streeter, on 

behalf of Gary A. 

Frederick

State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08856 Michigan Chamber of Commerce Doug Roberts Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06993 Oglethorpe Power Corporation Douglas J. Fulle Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08840 Electric Power Generation Association Douglas L. Biden Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10548 Mobile Abrasives - Alabama Edward J. Serda Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10496 Earthjustice, et. al. Emily Greenlee, on 

behalf of Lisa Evans Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09994 Department of Water and Power the City of 

Los Angeles (LADWP)

Eric J. Tharp and Mark J. 

Sedlacek Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07047 Great River Energy Erik Silvola Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06388 Louisiana Public Service Commission Eve Kahao Gonzalez State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09431 Otter Tail Power Company Farren Richard Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06533 Empire District Electric Company George G. Thullesen Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10178 Elite Ready Mix Greg Bridges Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08853 Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) Henry Eby Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06820 Western Business Roundtable Holly Propst Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08841 Deseret Generation and Transmission Cooperative Howard Vickers Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10545 South Carolina Department of Agriculture Hugh E. Weathers State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03308 City of Merriam, Kansas Hye Jin Lee Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10547 City of Sheffield, Alabama Ian T. Sanford Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04145 Weber Sustainability Consulting Ivan Weber Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06327 Tennessee Valley Public Power Association, 

Inc. (TVPPA) Jack W. Simmons Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06844 Intermountain Power Agency (IPA) James A. Hewlett Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08251 Massachusetts Department of 

Environmental Protection James C. Colman State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06396 National Rural Electronic Cooperative 

Association (NRECA) James F. Stine Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10534 Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) James G. Toscas Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08863 Private Citizen James J. Rohrbach, P.E. Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10483 Utility Solid Waste Activities Group 

(USWAG) et al. James R. Roewer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10182 Texas Municipal Power Agency Jan K. Horbaczewski Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08248 Institute for Policy Integrity Jason A. Schwartz Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09349 Santee Cooper Jay Hudson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09284 Virginia Department of Environmental 

Quality Jeffery A. Steers State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06275 Lansing Board of Water and Light (BWL) and 

Michigan State University (MSU) Jeffrey L. Woolstrum Electric Utility
18

Table 3A – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07680

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP on 

behalf of Lansing Board of Water and Light 

(LBWL) and Michigan State University (MSU)

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06991 East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Jerry Purvis Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06325 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania House of 

Representatives

Jessica R. Guyer on 

behalf of Scott E. 

Hutchinson

State Elected Official

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08229 Alabama Public Service Commission John D. Free State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08267 United States Gypsum Company (USG) John Donahue on behalf 

of Joseph W. Holmes Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06851 American Electric Power (AEP) John M. McManus Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09827 Kansas City Board of Public Utilities (BPU) John Pettey Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06415 The Virginia Coal Association, Inc. (VCA) John T. Heard Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06248 Lignite Energy Council John W. Dwyer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09536 Tennessee Valley Authority John W. Myers Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09728 Intermountain Power Service Corporation 

(IPSC) Jon A. Finlinson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06822 Unified Government of Wyandotte 

County/Kansas City, Kansas Joseph F. Reardon Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09427 San Miguel Electric Cooperative, Inc. (San 

Miguel) Joseph G. Eutizi Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06987 Entergy Services, Inc. Joseph Hantz Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06355 Birchwood Power Partners, L.P. Julie Caiafa Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06062 Ohio Department of Transportation Juliet Denniss State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09351 West Virginia Manufacturers Association 

(WVMA) Karen S. Price Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06361 Twin Valleys Public Power District Karen Workmeister for 

Bruce A. Lam et. al. Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09358

Interstate Life Power and Light Company 

(IPL) and Wisconsin Power and Light 

Company (WPL)

Kathleen A. Lipp Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04039 United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) Katy Owen on behalf of 

Cecil E. Roberts Union

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09239 Prairie State Generating Company, LLC 

(PSGC) Keith Bastian Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06992 National Association of Manufacturers Keith W. McCoy Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02878 Bismarck-Mandan Chamber of Commerce Kelvin L. Hullet Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09765 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Ken Ladwig Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06128 Owensboro Municipal Utilities Kevin D. Frizzell Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10500 Connecticut Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association, Inc. (CRMCA) Kevin Miller Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06409 State of Alaska Kristin J. Ryan State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08850 Lansing Board of Water 

& Light (BWL) Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06814 Rochester Public Utilities (RPU) Larry J. Koshire Electric Utility
19

Table 3A – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06555 Saint-Gobain Corporation / CertainTeed 

Corporation Lauren P. Alterman Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06857 CertainTeed Gypsum, Inc.

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06532 Southern Illinois Power Cooperative Leonard F. Hopkins Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04003 Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) Lia Parisien on behalf of 

John W. Mitchell State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06311

Earthjustice et. al. Lisa Evans Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06313

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06315

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10495

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06190 Lafayette Utilities System Lisa G. Dowden and 

Steven C. Pearson Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09886 PMI Ash Technologies, LLC (PMI) Lisa I. Cooper Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07048 TransAlta Centralia Generation Lou Florence Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03936 Association of State and Territorial Solid 

Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO) Mary T. Zdanowicz State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06793 Private Citizen

Mass Comment 

Campaign sponsoring 

organization unknown 

(47)

Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06416

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

(WI DNR) and Public Service Commission of 

Wisconsin (WI PSC)

Matthew Frank (WI 

DNR) and Eric Callisto 

(WI PSC)

State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10510 Village of Clinton, Michigan Merlin Mowery Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08225 Minnesota Power (ALLETE) Michael G. Cashin Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07002 Alabama Environmental Council Michael J. Churchman Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07395 Texas Coal Combustion Products Coalition 

(TCCPC) Michael J. Nasi Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09265 CPS Energy Michael M. Malone Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09278 Colorado Springs Utilities Michael P. Brady Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09681 Minnesota Chamber of Commerce Michael Robertson Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09237 Ohio Coal Association Michael T.W. Carey Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06446 Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative 

(REC), Inc. Michalene Reilly Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06398 Duke Energy Mike Stroben Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08240 Wisconsin Ready-Mix Concrete Association 

(WRMCA) Mitch Mariotti Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03934 Kentuckians For The Commonwealth (KFTC) Nancy L. Reinhart Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06305 Clean Water Network Natalie Roy Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09334 Manitowoc Public Utilities (MPU) Nilaksh Kothari Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08246 Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP on behalf of 

Kansas City Board of Public Utilities

Parthenia B. Evans and 

Dennis Lane Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06528 Buckeye Power, Inc. Patrick O'Loughlin Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08848 American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity 

(ACCCE) Paul Bailey Advocacy Group
20

Table 3A – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06912 Sunflower Electric Power Corporation Paul E. Reynolds Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06298 Tennessee Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC) Paul L. Sloan State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09423 American Forest and Paper Association 

(AF&PA) Paul Noe Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06260 Kentucky Department for Environmental 

Protection R. Bruce Scott State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08855 Colstrip Energy Limited Partnership (CELP) R. Lee Roberts Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08854 Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) R. Steven Brown State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07781 Private Citizen Rafic Minkara, Ph.D., P.E. Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07797 Granger III and Associates, LLC (Granger) Ralph Nurenberg Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10542 U.S. House of Presentatives Randy Stewart Federal Elected Official

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10428 Garland Power & Light (GPL) Ray Schwertner Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06384 Public Utilities Commission of Ohio Rebecca L. Hussey State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08847 Center for Progressive Reform, University of 

Maryland School of Law Rena Steinzor Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06846 Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection (FDEP)

Richard B. Tedder on 

behalf Mary Jean Yon State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09235 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association 

(NRMCA) Robert A. Garbini Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07489 Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO) Robert D. Bessette Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06817 Portland Cement Association Robert Hirsch Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08255 LG&E and KU Energy LLC

Robert J. Ehrler on 

behalf of Dorothy E. 

O?Brien

Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05661 Geosynthetic Institute Robert M. Koerner Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10513 City of Lamar Utilities Board Robert Schemahorn Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06819 Missouri Department of Natural Resources Robert Stout on behalf 

of Dru Buntin State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07631 Illinois Municipal Electric Agency (IMEA), 

(IPEA), (IMUA) Ronald D. Earl Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08784 Alabama Pulp & Paper Council Roy McAuley Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10172 Wisconsin Department of Transportation Ruben L. Anthony Jr. State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06196 Comite Dialogo Ambiental Ruth Santiago Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09274 RRI Energy Inc. S. Dixon Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09633 Waterkeeper Alliance Scott Edwards Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-01829 Coal Slag Consortium Sean Todd Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08218 Maryland Department of the Environment 

(MDE) Shari T. Wilson State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10262 Bert & Wetta Abilene, Inc. Stan Foltz Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08332 Choctaw County Economic Development 

District (CCEDD), Mississippi T. Alan Bates Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06917 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

(TCEQ)

Tangela Niemann on 

behalf of Mark R. 

Vickery

State Government
21

Table 3A – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08253 Xcel Energy Terry Coss Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02400 Southern Illinois Motor Xpress, Inc. Terry D. Oetjen Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08219 Pozzi-Tech, Inc. Terry E. Watson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06339 Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. Theresa D. Legere Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09346 American Public Power Association (APPA) Theresa Pugh Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04038 KMR Concrete, Inc. Tim Fletcher Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06872 State of Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection Todd M. Wallace State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05689 Gresham Transfer, Inc. Tom Welch Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09281 Exelon Power Victoria K. Will Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10515 Town of Holly, Colorado Viola Melcher Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09273 Iowa Department of Natural Resources 

(IDNR) Wayne Gieselman State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09995 Professional Engineering Consultants (PEC) Wes Britson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06883 Headwaters Resources, Inc. William H. Gehrmann Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10324 Public Service Company of New Hampshire 

(PSNH) William H. Smagula Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03444 Kansas Department of Health and 

Environment William L. Bider State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06356 U.S. Chamber of Commerce William L. Kovacs Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06423 Construction Materials Recycling 

Association William Turley Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10519 Arkansas River Power Authority (ARPA) William Y. Leung Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08230 Small Business Administration's Office of 

Advocacy (SBA) Winslow Sargeant Federal Agency

Table 3B – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11261_CHI-032 Illinois Environmental Regulatory 

Group (IERG) Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11736_K-162 Environmental Intergrity Project (EIP) Abel Russ Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10614_DC-028 National Association of Manufacturers 

(NAM) Alicia Oman Trade Association

TRANS-ARL-0104

TRANS-LVL-0055 Vectren Corporation Angila Retherford Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11291_CHI-005 Wisconsin Electric Power Company 

d/b/a We Energies Art Covi Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0081 Luminant Barry Boswell Electric Utility

TRANS-LVL-0097 Kentucky Coal Association Bill Bissett Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10836_DA-066 Headwaters Resources Bill Gehrmann Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10823_DA-053

Texas Concrete Pipe Association Bob Folser Trade Association

TRANS-DAL-0041
22

Table 3B – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

TRANS-PIT-0111 Pennsylvania Aggregates and Concrete 

Association Bruce Cody Trade Association

TRANS-LVL-0044 Duke Energy Indiana Bryan Walsh Electric Utility

TRANS-CLT-0040 Florida Electric Power Coordinating 

Group Carl Eldred Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11651_K-066

TRANS-KNX-0116 Kentucky Chamber of Commerce Chad A. Harpole Trade Association

TRANS-LVL-0139

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10727_DEN-039 Tri-State Generation and Transmission 

Association Inc. (Tri-State) Chris Gilbreath Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11287_CHI-065 City Water Light & Power, Springfield, 

IL Christine Zeman Electric Utility

TRANS-CHI-0124

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11618_K-032 Charah, Inc. (Charah) Danny L. Gray Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10777_DA-008 American Electric Power (AEP) David Miller Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10666_DC-051 Old Dominion Electric Cooperative 

(ODEC) David N. Smith Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0092 Office of the Texas Comptroller of 

Public Accounts David Schanbacher State Government

TRANS-ARL-0062 Old Dominion Electric Cooperative David Smith Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10732_DEN-044 Platte River Power Authority David Ussery Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11224_CHI-095 Headwaters Resources, Inc. (spoke as 

employee) Doug Anderson Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11480_L-057

TRANS-PIT-0010

Electric Power Generation Association Douglas L. Biden Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11424_P-155

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11575_L-023

Indianapolis Power & Light Company Dwayne Burke Electric Utility

TRANS-LVL-0005

TRANS-KNX-0125 Dixie Electric Cooperative Gary Harrison Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10788_DA-019 Western Farmers Electric Cooperative 

(Western Farmers) Gerald Butcher Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11203_CHI-071

Illinois Energy Association James Monk Trade Association

TRANS-CHI-0133

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10682_DC-070 National Rural Electric Cooperative 

Association (NRECA) James Stine Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11022_CHA-057 Santee Cooper Jay Hudson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11368_P-087 Greater Pittsburgh Chamber of 

Commerce Jeff Rossi Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11372_P-091 Ohio Chamber of Commerce Jennifer Klein Trade Association

TRANS-ARL-0082 Jessica Miller Private Citizen

TRANS-DEN-0012 Joby Adams Private Citizen

TRANS-ARL-0095 Virginia Manufacturers Association Joe Croce Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10712_DEN-024 Colorado Department of Public Health 

and Environment Joe Schieffelin State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11078_CHA-113

North Carolina Chamber of Commerce John Goodman Trade Association

TRANS-CLT-0116

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11370_P-089 GIlberton Power Company John K. Hart Electric Utility Facility
23

Table 3B – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11304_P-010 Pennsylvania Coal Association (PCA) Josie Gaskey Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10806_DA-036

Luminant Julie Prejean Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0076

TRANS-KNX-0065 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy 

(spoke as employee and citizen) Katherine Stokes Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11703_K-124

PowerSouth Energy Cooperative Keith Stephens Electric Utility

TRANS-KNX-0129

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11464_L-040 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association (NRMCA) Kerri Leininger Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11233_CHI-104 Southern Illinois Power Cooperative Leonard Hopkins Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10771_DA-002 Dynegy Inc. Linda Whelan Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10592_DC-006

Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) Lisa Widawsky Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11381_P-102

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11195_CHI-026 Prairie State Generating Company, LLC 

(PSGC) Mark A. Shepherd Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11202_CHI-070 Iowa Utility Association (IUA) Mark Douglas Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11733_K-159

JEA Matt McClure Electric Utility Facility

TRANS-KNX-0088

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11344_P-057 Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection Michael G. Forbeck State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11300_P-006 International Brotherhood of Electrical 

Workers Michael Sowko Union

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11286_CHI-064 Hoosier Energy Rural Electric 

Cooperative, Inc. Michalene Reilly Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0022 San Miguel Electric Cooperative Mike Kezar Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0044 CPS Energy Mike Mallone Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0065 Texas Coal Ash Utilization Group 

(TCAUG) Mike Silvertooth Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10825_DA-055

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10740_DEN-052 Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, 

Inc. (AEPCO) Patrick Ledger Electric Utility

TRANS-DEN-0026

TRANS-DEN-0025 Sunflower Electric Power Corporation 

(Sunflower) Paul Reynolds Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10739_DEN-051

TRANS-PIT-0046 Scrubgrass Generating Plant Peter Rigney Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11521_L-139 Kentucky Ready-Mixed Concrete 

Association (KRMCA) R. Finley Messick Trade Association

TRANS-PIT-0069 FirstEnergy Ray Evans Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11568_L-016 American Electric Power (AEP) Richard Hayek Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11652_K-067

Tennessee Paper Council (TPC) and 

American Forest & Paper Association 

(AF&PA)

Richard Holland Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11194_CHI-025 Great River Energy (GRE) Richard Lancaster Electric Utility

TRANS-KNX-0094 Tennessee Paper Council and American 

Forest & Paper Association Richmond Holland Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11689_K-111 American Electric Power (AEP) Rick Hayek Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11629_K-043 Robert Bergman Private Citizen
24

Table 3B – Comments Related to Regulatory Costs (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

TRANS-CHI-0090 Indiana Energy Association Stan Pinegar Trade Association

TRANS-DEN-0093 PPL Montana Steve Christian Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10708_DEN-020 PPL Montana, LLC Steve J. Christian Electric Utility

TRANS-PIT-0059 American Electric Power Steven Orenchuk Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11512_L-093 University of Kentucky Center for 

Applied Energy Research Thomas Robl Academia

TRANS-KNX-0011

Santee Cooper Tom Edens Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11660_K-075

TRANS-CLT-0119 SCANA Corporation Tom Effinger Electric Utility

TRANS-LVL-0071 Commerce Lexington Tyler Campbell Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10837_DA-067 Luminant Usha Turner Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10820_DA-050 Association of Electric Companies of 

Texas (AECT) Walt Baum Trade Association

TRANS-DAL-0040

3.1 Historical/Baseline Costs

Comment Summary

Commenters state that the 2010 RIA relies on an inaccurate survey of state government 

industrial waste regulations to develop baseline CCR management costs. As well, 

commenters disagree with the 2010 RIA’s scaling factor approach to model the Subtitle D 

option. One commenter notes that the RIA should but does not claim cost reductions (or 

benefits) from toxins transferred from the air (due to EPA air rules) to CCR. Also, 

commenters claim that the 2010 RIA ignores the cost of converting from wet to dry CCR 

disposal.

EPA Response

EPA’s 2014 RIA has updated the data (as of 2011) regarding state regulatory baselines used in the 

calculation of incremental costs. In addition, the 2014 RIA no longer uses scaling factors for the 

Subtitle D option. Instead, the cost modeling for the 2014 RIA separately models each CCR landfill 

and CCR impoundment under both the final rule and the baseline. Regarding cost reductions from 

air toxins, EPA’s air rules have already claimed air pollution reduction benefits. However, in 

addition to producing a revised RIA for the CCR final rule, EPA used the EPA Office of Air & 

Radiation Clean Air Markets Division “Integrated Planning Model” (IPM) to estimate potential 

additional air pollution reduction benefits for the CCR final rule, associated with potential future 

retirement of coal-fired boilers as a result of the CCR rule. Finally, the 2010 RIA (Section 4B.3 

“Land Disposal Restriction Cost”) did indeed include a cost estimate for converting from wet to 

dry CCR disposal, and EPA’s 2014 RIA includes a revised estimate based on cost data collected 

from electric utility plants in the EPA Office of Water’s 2010 ICR survey in support of its June 

2013 “Steam Electric Power Generator Effluent Limitations Guidelines” proposed rule.
25

3.2 Incorrect Cost Assumptions

Comment Summary

Commenters claim that the 2010 RIA uses old and/or outdated information on the controls 

at CCR disposal units, and does not use information regarding more protective controls 

installed at recently-constructed units. As well, commenters note that the 2010 RIA has 

inconsistent data regarding the number of facilities using offsite disposal. One commenter 

noted that the RIA uses inaccurate assumptions to measure dry-conversion costs. 

Commenters also claim that the RIA should take into account transportation costs of 

increased offsite disposal, and others state the methods used to calculate transportation 

costs are not reasonable. Some commenters note that states already have CCR regulations 

and these should be incorporated into the RIA baseline. Alternatively, commenters note 

that some states allow variances for these regulations and thus the baseline is overly 

optimistic regarding state requirements. Similarly, some commenters disagree with the 

RIA’s 48% state enforcement rate for the Subtitle D option and the “D-prime” regulatory 

approach; some suggest using higher rates, while others suggest using lower rates. 

Similarly, some commenters suggest the RIA estimate costs and benefits using alternative 

discount rates. Several comments note that EPA must consider the cumulative effects of 

the CCR rule with respect to other recent EPA regulations which also affect the electric 

utility industry. One commenter notes that CCRs as generated may not meet RCRA land 

disposal restriction (LDR) treatment standards, and thus facilities may incur additional 

costs to treat CCRs before disposal. Another commenter says the 2010 RIA does not 

include the cost elements of: storage, design and operating standards; corrective action; 

and added cleanup cost. Commenters raise concern that the regulated universe will not be 

able to pass through CCR rule compliance costs to their customers as is suggested in the 

RIA. Commenters claim that the cost-benefit calculations presented in the preamble are 

based on the limited scope of EPA’s 2010 Risk Assessment for the CCR proposed rule, 

and as such underestimate human health benefits. A commenter claims that EPA’s 

assumption on phasing out of coal plants does not have any limits. As well, a number of 

commenters provided their own analyses of the CCR rule and presented their impact 

estimation methodology and results. Finally, many commenters suggest in general that 

there are cost errors in the 2010 RIA, while not providing specific examples.

EPA Response

EPA’s CCR final rule 2014 RIA used the most current data sources and public responses to EPA’s 

October 2011 “Notice of Data Availability” (NODA) to identify state regulatory baseline 

requirements. The following sources were used: impoundment data from ORCR's 2009-2011 

impoundment site inspections; impoundment data from ORCR's 2009 mail survey to plants with 

impoundments; and landfill and impoundment data from EPA Office of Water's 2010 mail survey 

to power plants for the Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines. State CCR disposal 

regulations in effect in 2011 related to pollution controls at landfills and impoundments also were 
26

reviewed. The review addressed 34 states with coal-fired electric utility plants. The plants in these 

states account for 97% of the annual tonnage of CCR generated.

IWith regard to commenters that noted inconsistent data regarding facilities with offsite disposal, 

EPA has made adjustments to the RIA universe of power plants affected by the CCR final rule, 

and thus these numbers in the associated RIA have changed. Under the RIA for CCR final rule, 

197 out of 478 plants, or 41%, dispose CCRs offsite. The 2014 RIA assumes a 25 mile one-way 

distance to the nearest offsite landfill or surface impoundment. The 25 mile distance is applied for 

all offsite disposal, and while generalized, a sensitivity analysis in section 7.1.4 of the 2014 RIA 

illustrates that the transportation distance of offsite disposal has only small marginal implications 

on transportation costs (decreasing the distance 50% drops total transportation costs by 2%). The 

2014 RIA used nationwide truck transport distances and trucking costs in the cost analysis; EPA 

does not have micro-data on the unique trucking distances and costs to Subtitle D landfills for 

every electric utility plant.

n response to the commenters that claim EPA uses incorrect assumptions for CCR wet to dry 

conversion costs, the 2014 RIA revised the wet to dry CCR conversion cost estimate; it applies 

dry conversion cost data obtained in EPA Office of Water’s 2010 ICR survey of the electric utility 

industry.

Both the 2010 RIA and the 2014 RIA attempted to take existing state regulations into account in 

the RIA “baseline” projection of future conditions. As well, the 2014 RIA (Section 7.3.2) presents 

an analysis of state regulatory exemptions and variances for CCR management: EPA obtained 

updated information on the status of state government regulatory programs affecting CCR 

management, and re-estimated the RIA’s baseline costs. The basis for the 48% enforcement rate 

assumption on page 198 of the 2010 RIA is an analysis of current regulatory requirements for 

groundwater monitoring by states across the country. It was assumed that groundwater monitoring 

is necessary to determine the existence of groundwater contamination. Without groundwater 

monitoring, states would not be able to identify and thus enforce the cleanup of groundwater 

contamination and avoid potential future cancers. From page 124 of the 2010 RIA, the states with 

groundwater monitoring requirements in their regulations for either or both existing surface 

impoundments and newly constructed surface impoundments account for 48% of the total CCR 

tonnage managed in surface impoundments in the country. This enforcement rate represents a 

national average and not necessarily current enforcement conditions in any particular state. 

However, the 2014 RIA uses a modeling approach, rather than scaling factors, to individually 

estimate all costs across the regulatory baseline, as well as incremental costs for the CCR final 

rule. As such, it does not use scaling factors based on state regulatory baseline enforcement to 

estimate compliance costs.

Regarding commenters that suggest applying alternative discount rates, the 2014 RIA applies both 

a 3% and 7% discount rate to its analysis and provides results for each throughout the document. 

These two rates are mandated by OMB’s Circular A-4 for conducting Federal regulatory impact 

analyses.
27

To consider cumulative effects of EPA rules, EPA used the “Integrated Planning Model” (IPM) to 

evaluate potential future effects of the CCR rule on the nationwide electricity market. IPM 

estimates expected coal-fired boiler/plant retirements, changes in electricity generation, electricity 

demand, and other electricity market and environmental effects. IPM includes both the effects of 

the CCR rule as well as the cumulative effects of other EPA regulations, including EPA’s 2012 

Mercury & Air Toxics final rule and EPA’s 2014 Cooling Water Intake Structures final rule. The 

results from EPA IPM market effects estimation project for the CCR final rule are available as 

Appendix X to the 2014 RIA. However, because it is not yet finalized, it is more appropriate for 

the Office of Surface Mining to estimate the effects of its CCR minefill rule on the volume and 

cost of alternatively managing CCR in landfills.

Regarding the commenter that suggested LDR treatment cost be included in the CCR RIA, the 

CCR final rule does not contain LDR treatment standards (LDR standards pertain only to RCRA 

Subtitle C regulations). The cost of converting CCR management to dry handling is a key factor 

in the decision to retrofit or close impoundments both the baseline as well as the CCR final rule. 

However, these costs are highly uncertain, and actual costs vary widely depending on existing 

technology, age, and size of each plant. Ideally this RIA would use plant-specific data to estimate 

all costs, but limited information is available about specific plant costs in part because plants 

responding to the 2010 EPA Office of Water survey chose to restrict access to the wet-to-dry 

handling conversion costs to preserve confidentiality. Data for this critical part of the closure 

conversion process are available only on an average cost per ton of waste basis, and it is not clear 

to what extent the costs in these data may overlap with other steps in the process laid out above 

(e.g., wastewater treatment tank systems and construction of replacement impoundments). As a 

result, this RIA relies on general, average cost estimates of typical technologies. Moreover, while 

the total national-level cost per ton for conversion to dry handling is calculated at a plant level in 

the model, the actual cost of wet-to-dry handling conversion is not related to tonnage in a linear 

fashion, and plant level conversion costs based on these data do not accurately reflect the cost of 

conversion.

EPA recognized in the 2010 RIA (Exhibit 4K “Summary of Cost Estimates for the Regulatory 

Options”) that the RIA did not completely estimate all costs (e.g., cost elements 10. storage, design 

& operating standards, 14. RCRA corrective action, and 17. Added cleanup cost). In the 2014 RIA

EPA attempted to estimate all relevant cost elements for the final rule.

PA’s 2010 RIA human health benefit category was based on the limited scope of the EPA’s 2010 

Risk Assessment; as such the RIA did indeed underestimate potential human health benefits of the 

CCR rule. The 2010 RIA (Chapter 5) expanded the scope of monetized human health benefits 

compared to the 2010 RIA (11 monetized benefits, compared to 4 monetized benefits in the 2010 

RIA). However, because of data and/or methodology limitations, EPA was unable to monetize 11 

other expected benefits which are described in Chapter 6 of the 2014 RIA.

In response to commenters that suggest the regulated universe may not be able to pass through 

CCR rule compliance costs to their customers (in the form of higher electricity prices), EPA’s 

2014 RIA cost estimates, small business impact analysis, unfunded mandates and Federalism cost 

impact analyses for the CCR final rule, do not rely on cost pass-through but are based on an upper 
28

bound cost assumption of zero cost pass-through by electricity plants. For the commenter who says 

that EPA’s assumption of phasing out of coal plants does not have any limits, EPA has 

supplemented the 2014 RIA by adopting the (a) 2012-2020 coal-fired boiler/plant retirement data, 

and (b) 2012-2050 coal consumption projection data, from the “Integrated Planning Model” 

version 5.13; both projections have limits.

For commenters that provided their own analyses, EPA has attempted to correct 2010 RIA 

calculation errors in the 2014 RIA. One example is the addition of a “stranded cost” element to 

the 2014 RIA, which was proposed by commenters. However, for one commenter that provided 

their own independent analyses, EPA was unable to find documentation to validate the 

monetization factors applied in this comment and thus their suggestions were not incorporated into 

the RIA. Regarding commenters that found general, overarching errors in the 2010 RIA, the 2014 

RIA has been largely reworked and the cost errors from the 2010 RIA no longer apply. The 2014 

RIA has been thoroughly reviewed by EPA for cost errors.

3.3 Landfill and Surface Impoundment Liner Costs

Comment Summary

Commenters claim that the universal requirement for liners will require leachate treatment 

systems and that the RIA fails to analyze these costs. As well, commenters argue that a 

Flexible Membrane Liner (FML) is the recommended liner choice for CCR landfills and 

surface impoundments. Finally, commenters feel that landfill and/or surface 

impoundments liner requirements are cost prohibitive.

EPA Response

EPA's 2014 RIA includes hazardous waste testing (TCLP testing) costs. These costs include 

hazardous waste testing in the first year, repeated every three years. The 2014 RIA also includes 

costs for leachate collection systems, and the management of these systems. Liner 

recommendations do not apply to the CCR RIA. Similarly, cost prohibitiveness of rule 

requirements do not apply to the methods or results of the RIA.

3.4 Groundwater Monitoring Costs

Comment Summary 

EPA received two cost comments related to groundwater monitoring costs; however these

comments were also classified as “costs to specific groups” (section 4.7 below) and “other” 

(section 4.11 below); EPA provides responses in those two sections, respectively.

EPA Response

No response necessary in this section.
29

3.5 Fugitive Dust Control Costs

Comment Summary 

EPA received no comments pertaining to fugitive CCR dust control cost estimation in the 

2010 RIA.

EPA Response

No response necessary.

3.6 Wet-to-Dry Handling Conversion Costs

Comment Summary

Commenters claim that the 2010 RIA ignores costs of wet-to-dry CCR disposal conversion. 

As well, commenters argue that the 2010 RIA does not consider all costs of a 100% dry 

handled CCR operation.

EPA Response

The 2010 RIA (Section 4B.3 “Land Disposal Restriction Cost”) provides an estimate of the cost 

for power plants to convert from wet to dry CCR disposal. The 2014 RIA (chapters 3 and 4) 

includes costs of wet-dry CCR handling conversion, and applies these costs in cases where 

facilities switch from wet CCR handling (i.e., disposal or storage in surface impoundments) to dry 

CCR handling (i.e., disposal in on-site or off-site landfills). The 2014 RIA includes costs for 

corrective action (i.e., cleanup) associated with CCR impoundment structural failure spills and 

releases. Separately, the 2014 RIA uses a decision based regulatory compliance cost estimation 

model in which power plants choose the “least cost” CCR management option while complying 

with the CCR rule requirements. As such, a plant may choose to convert all operations to dry if 

the model considers this to be the least cost option for any given plant.

3.7 Costs to Specific Groups

Comment Summary

Many commenters note that citizens will ultimately bear the cost of the CCR rule in the 

increased cost for goods and services (e.g., increased electricity prices), and some argue 

that these costs are not accounted for in the 2010 RIA. One commenter feels that industry 

should pay CCR rule compliance costs, and that costs should not be passed through to 

consumers. Separately, commenters note that the 2010 RIA should take into account 

electricity market impacts, including costs to rate payers and power plant closures. 

Similarly, commenters disagree with the EPA’s sentiment in the RIA that electricity market 

consumption will not decrease as a result of increased electricity prices from facilities 

passing costs through to consumers. Commenters note that EPA should consider 

employment impacts on the utility sector and on non-utilities. Commenters also suggest 
30

that EPA consider effects to state governments. Lastly, a number of commenters 

recommend EPA to favor a particular regulatory option for the CCR final rule.

EPA Response

Comments suggesting that citizens will bear the cost of the regulation do not address EPA's 

estimate of the total costs of the rule, but rather the distribution of these across different segments 

of society. The 2014 RIA addresses the following distributional analyses: electricity price analysis; 

Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis; Unfunded Mandates Reform Act analysis; 

tribal government analysis; CCR beneficial use sensitivity analyses; and Federalism analysis. To 

consider the maximum potential impact on consumers, the electricity price analysis includes a 

sensitivity analysis considering the impact on electricity prices if all costs were to be passed 

through to consumers. Regarding the comment that suggests industry should bear the costs: this 

comment does not apply to the CCR RIA.

EPA used the Integrated Planning Model (IPM) to analyze electricity market effects of the CCR

final rule. IPM provides detailed output regarding electricity market impacts, include electricity 

pricing, demand, fuel switching, and electricity boiler and power plant closures. Comments that 

question the validity of EPA’s statement that it does not expect electricity demand to change due 

the final rule can reference the IPM evaluation, which explicitly forecasts electricity demand. 

Details of the IPM model and its projected future electricity market effects of the CCR final rule 

are available as Appendix X to the 2014 RIA. Appendix X also presents potential future 

employment impacts in sectors affected directly and indirectly by the CCR final rule, analyzed 

both semi-quantitatively and qualitatively.

EPA has attempted in both the 2014 RIA and the ICR paperwork burden statement for the CCR 

final rule, to itemize all state government implementation costs. Lastly, the 2010 RIA provides 

cost estimates for each of the regulatory options (i.e., Subtitle C, Subtitle D, and D-prime) to aid 

in the decision making process. Comments regarding preference for a specific option are not an 

RIA related issue.

3.8 Corrective Action (Groundwater Cleanup) Costs

Comment Summary 

EPA received no comments pertaining to corrective action costs. 

EPA Response

No response necessary.
31

3.9 Impoundment Failure/Spill Cleanup Costs

Comment

Commenters argue the 2010 RIA’s (Section 5B) estimate of $3 billion remediation cost for 

the December 2008 TVA Kingston CCR release is overly high. Other commenters claim 

that the failure at TVA Kingston was not typical or representative, and conclude that 

because of that the RIA overestimates cleanup costs. Commenters also have concerns 

regarding the oil spill cost model applied in the 2010 RIA. Lastly, commenters suggest 

EPA more accurately model CCR management units that will require cleanup.

EPA Response

EPA no longer uses the $3 billion estimate in the 2014 RIA, and applies an alternate method to 

estimate cleanup costs. Regarding comments that TVA Kingston is not representative, both the 

2010 RIA and the 2014 RIA rely on a projection of future CCR impoundment structural failures 

as probabilities calculated in relation to historical CCR impoundment structural failure data. Thus 

the analysis takes into account a wide variety of structural failure types, frequencies of occurrence, 

and CCR release volumes. As well, the 2014 RIA does not apply the oil spill cost model but applies 

a revised analysis of historical CCR impoundment failure/spill cases.

The CCR final rule requires electric utility plants to monitor groundwater and conduct groundwater 

cleanup corrective action for unlined CCR surface impoundments detected to leak chemical 

contaminants which exceed “maximum concentration levels” in relation to drinking water 

protection standards. The count of, and associated corrective action cost for, unlined leaking 

impoundments which may exceed MCLs is a probabilistic analysis in the 2014 RIA.

3.10 Storage Costs

Comment Summary 

EPA received one cost comment related to groundwater monitoring costs; however this 

comments were also classified as Wet-to-Dry conversion” (section 4.6) and EPA 

responded to it in that section.

EPA Response

No response necessary.

3.11 Other Cost-Related Comments

Comment Summary

Commenters claim that the RIA does not account for public health costs associated with 

the slow implementation of the Subtitle D rule. Separately, commenters disagree with the 

50 year future time period of analysis used in the 2010 RIA. Some commenters note general 
32

disagreement with the data and/or approach used to model facility-specific cost increases 

in the RIA, and others claim that EPA does not consider the cost of CCR disposal 

impoundments at plants that are fuel switching. Commenters also raise that the RIA ignores 

the effect of plant retirements and the cost of replacement power.

Many commenters also provide more general disagreements regarding costs in the RIA. 

Commenters attest that the RIA ignores the complex nature of power plant operations and 

CCR management. As well, commenters note general transparency issues regarding data 

and methods, while others provide general statements regarding the overestimation or 

underestimation of costs. Similarly, commenters claim that the Subtitle D rule will increase 

costs of disposal and will not address the environmental threat of CCRs. Commenters 

suggest EPA reviews comments by other Federal agencies, state governments, and other 

interested organizations, and also review EPA’s 2009 CCR Surface Impoundment ICR 

mail survey. Lastly, a large number of commenters suggest that the costs of the CCR rule 

are too high.

EPA Response

Both EPA’s 2010 RIA and the 2014 RIA, attempted to quantify the difference in implementation 

and benefits between the Subtitle C and Subtitle D co-proposed options. Unfortunately, human 

health and environmental protection benefits estimation in EPA rulemaking RIAs is still largely a 

“craft” compared to the “science” of industrial compliance cost estimation.

The 2014 RIA revised its future period of analysis from 50 years to 100 years to take into account 

all costs and benefits of the CCR rule. The 100 year time period is similarly in accordance with 

OMB Circular A-4 which indicates that the period of analysis should be long enough to adequately 

incorporate all rule costs and benefits. 

Ideally, the 2014 RIA would use plant-specific data to estimate all costs, including wet-dry 

conversion costs associated with the final rule. However, data regarding the costs of implementing 

and maintaining the various pollution controls required by the final rule at each coal-fired electric 

utility plant are not available. Rather, the 2014 RIA uses a cost model that estimates average costs 

for each combination of pollution control requirements at a given CCR disposal unit and/or coalfired electric utility plant. This cost model ascribes both variable (i.e., per ton of CCR) and fixed 

costs associated with pollution control or combination of pollution controls. Factors such as unique 

design specifications or unique, plant-specific cost structures, may lead to deviations from costs 

estimated by the 2014 RIA on the individual facility level. However, given that the 2014 RIA 

employs national average costs, and adjusts for state regulatory baselines and state cost indices 

when estimating compliance costs, these deviations likely balance out when considered on a 

national basis.

REPA’s 2014 RIA has been aligned with recent and planned future coal-fired boiler retirements 

as listed in the NEEDS v.5.13 database associated with the ”Integrated Planning Model” (IPM) 

which EPA uses to evaluate other proposed and final environmental regulations, for example, 

associated with control of air pollution by the electric utility industry.
33

The 2014 RIA applies three components to address retiring plants and replacement power. First, 

the 2014 RIA adopts the IPM NEEDS v.5.13 database’s list of plant retirements before 2016, and 

applies zero cost to these plants as they are no longer subject to the rule. Secondly, the RIA applies 

the IPM forecast of coal burned as a proxy for CCR generation, and scales each plant’s CCR 

generation in the RIA model by changes in the IPM forecast. Finally, the separate report provided 

as Appendix X to the 2014 RIA updates the IPM v.5.13 base case model with the CCR rule to 

estimate effects on the electricity market. Results illustrate incremental effects of the CCR rule on 

plant closures and electricity generation.

Due to the complex nature of power plant operations and CCR management, the 2014 RIA relied 

on generalizations and assumptions to model the future costs of the CCR rule. Many of these 

simplifications are used in the face of incomplete or non-existent data, confidential business 

information, or uncertainty. However, compared to the 2010 RIA, the 2014 RIA incorporates more 

involved decision-based modeling to reflect the complicated decisions that power plants may face 

under the CCR final rule. The model is described in detail in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4, and further 

within the 2014 RIA’s appendices. As well, many of the RIA’s cost modeling assumptions are 

tested in Chapter 7 sensitivity analyses.

Regarding concerns of transparency, the 2014 RIA clearly cites all sources, assumptions, and 

methodologies in the text of the RIA and its appendices. Regarding concerns of overestimation 

and underestimation, the 2014 RIA adjusted many of its data sources, methods, and assumptions 

to provide the most accurate representation of costs and benefits. As well, both the 2010 RIA and 

the 2014 RIA attempted to quantify the difference in implementation and benefits between the 

Subtitle C and Subtitle D co-proposed options in 2010. Unfortunately, human health and 

environmental protection benefits estimation in EPA rulemaking RIAs is still largely a “craft” 

compared to the “science” of industrial compliance cost estimation.

For the comment that suggest EPA conduct further review, the 2014 RIA applies additional 

information from the suggested organizations as well as from EPA’s 2009 CCR impoundment ICR 

mail survey. Lastly, for comments that claim the rule is too expensive and/or does not provide 

environmental protection, the role of the RIA is to estimate the costs of the rule as it is written to 

aid in the decision making process. Thus these issues are not directly relate to the RIA.

4.0Comments Related to Environmental, 

Human Health, and Economic Benefits 

The public stakeholders submitted comments relating to environmental and economic benefits, which are 

grouped into seven subcategories:

1. Monetization Issues

2. Avoided Cancer Benefits

3. Avoided Catastrophic Failure Benefits

4. Avoided Remediation Cost Benefits
34

5. Other Benefit-Related Comments

Table 4A – Comments Related to Environmental and Economic Benefits (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10493 Wake Forest University, Department of 

Biology A. Dennis Lemly Academia

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06526 Green Delaware Alan Muller Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06883 Tri-State Generation & Transmission Barbara A. Walz Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07791 Edison Mission Energy, LLC Basil G. Constantelos Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09808 Wyoming Outdoor Council Bruce Pendery Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06242 Charah, Inc. Charles Price Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08267

Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. (Cliffs) David Z. Skolasinski Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08270

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08847 Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) Henry Eby Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08248 Massachusetts Department of 

Environmental Protection James C. Colman State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10483 Utility Solid Waste Activities Group 

(USWAG) et al. James R. Roewer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08244 Institute for Policy Integrity Jason A. Schwartz Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06956 East Kentucky Power Cooperative 

(EKPC) Jerry Purvis Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06991

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06991 Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources (GAEPD) Jim Brown for Mark Smith State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06398 Utility Solid Waste Activities Group 

(USWAG) Jim Roewer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06526

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06315 Dayton Power & Light Company (DP&L) JoAnne Rau Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08253 United States Gypsum Company (USG) John Donahue on behalf of 

Joseph W. Holmes Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09633

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09765 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Ken Ladwig Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10494

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03707 Green Century Capital Management Kristina Curtis Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06311

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06315 Earthjustice et. al. Lisa Evans Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10495

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09886 PMI Ash Technologies, LLC (PMI) Lisa I. Cooper Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06352

Duke Energy Mike Stroben Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06398

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03934 Kentuckians For The Commonwealth 

(KFTC) Nancy L. Reinhart Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06298 Tennessee Department of Environment 

and Conservation (TDEC) Paul L. Sloan State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06260 Kentucky Department for 

Environmental Protection R. Bruce Scott State Government
35

Table 4A – Comments Related to Environmental and Economic Benefits (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08270 Center for Progressive Reform, 

University of Maryland School of Law Rena Steinzor Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08847 Center for Progressive Reform, 

University of Maryland School of Law Rena Steinzor Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08853 Waterkeeper Alliance Scott Edwards Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08251 Xcel Energy Terry Coss Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06202 American Coal Ash Association (ACAA) Thomas H. Adams Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06852 Headwaters Resources, Inc. William H. Gehrmann Beneficial User

Table 4B – Comments Related to Environmental and Economic Benefits (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

TRANS-KNX-0048 Environmental Integrity Project Abel Russ Advocacy Group

TRANS-KNX-0045 Charah Danny Gray Beneficial User

TRANS-ARL-0002 Environmental Integrity Project Eric Shaffer Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10608_DC-022 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association 

(NRMCA) Karthik Obla Trade Association

4.1 Monetization Issues 

Comment Summary 

Commenters found that EPA’s discussion of monetization in general was unclear, that EPA 

should have done more to monetize, or otherwise evaluate and consider other or 

unquantified benefits such as surface water contamination, litigation costs, buying nearby 

property, and providing public drinking water. One commenter directed EPA to a paper by 

Dr. Lemly that monetizes ecological harms of coal ash. Another commenter believed that 

EPA should not monetize or consider fugitive dust benefits as these are already subject to 

existing state implementation plans. Finally, commenters suggested that the monetization 

of benefits would favor a subtitle C approach.

EPA Response

EPA considers 22 benefit categories in the 2014 RIA. 11 of these benefit categories are evaluated 

quantitatively, or monetized, as the commenters suggested. An additional 11 benefit categories are only 

discussed qualitatively. Further discussion of these 22 benefit categories can be found in Section 5 and 

Section 6 of the 2014 RIA. With respect to litigation, buying adjacent property, and providing public 

drinking water, EPA believes that these activities are alternatives to cleanup which are practiced in some 

states, whereas the RIA’s assumption of a successful cleanup would result in these being superfluous. 

With respect to Dr. Lemly’s report, EPA notes that Section 5 of the 2014 RIA monetizes ecological 

benefits that overlap with those considered in Dr. Lemly’s report.
36

With respect to comments that EPA should not evaluate benefits of reduced emissions from fugitive dust 

controls, EPA does not quantify these benefits in the 2014 RIA as there was insufficient data. Thus, no 

further response is required.

Finally, with respect to subtitle C, see Section 2 of this response to comments document.

4.2 Avoided Cancer Benefits 

Comment Summary 

Commenters raised many issues suggesting that the calculation of cancer reduction benefits 

was overestimated. Specifically, commenters stated that EPA did not use current estimates 

of disposal practices involving liners, account for the period of time contamination takes 

to reach a receptor, or include a latency period. Commenters also suggested alternate cancer 

slope factors that EPA should have used or carried forward, presented data that arsenic was 

typically in the pentavalent form, and that CCR impoundment sizes had been 

overestimated. Furthermore, these commenters found that cancer reductions for subtitle D 

may have been underestimated due to the use of groundwater monitoring as the lone proxy 

for a good state program, and the failure to assume that all facilities complied with the rule. 

Commenters also presented comments that suggested EPA underestimated cancer 

reduction benefits. Specifically, commenters found that EPA used an inadequate leachate 

test, incorrectly used a 5-year survival rate when 10-year survival rates were suggested by 

the Cost of Illness Handbook, failed to quantify avoided cancers from off-site disposal and 

beneficial use, and failed to use epidemiological data around CCR disposal sites. 

Furthermore, commenters found that EPA underestimated benefits by only examining 

arsenic cancer cases and not including other pathways and other cancer and noncancer 

effects. Commenters also found the accrual of health benefits in the baseline to be 

unsupported.

Finally, commenters generally pointed to the calculation of cancer benefits as reasons to 

support a subtitle C or subtitle D rule.

EPA Response

EPA no longer uses a cancer cases avoided approach to monetize human health benefits from decreased 

groundwater contamination. Instead, EPA uses a willingness to pay approach, as discussed in Section 5 

of the 2014 RIA. This approach allows EPA to capture more health benefits than the 2010 RIA. To the 

extent that commenters stated their preference for a subtitle C or D rule, see Section 2 of this response to 

comments document.

4.3 Avoided Structural Failure/Spill Benefits 

Comment Summary 

Commenters pointed out that EPA’s structural integrity inspections did not find any 

impoundments rated “unsatisfactory,” and furthermore pointed out that only 16% rated 
37

“poor.” One commenter claimed that no structural failures have occurred before or since 

the December 2008 CCR impoundment structural failure at TVA’s Kingston plant. One 

commenter found that GAEPD regulations already in place would prevent the type of 

failure that occurred at TVA’s Kingston plant. 

One commenter believes that EPA should have assumed that plants will take more active 

steps after the Kingston spill. Furthermore, that commenter believes that the Kingston spill 

was a very rare event, and EPA should have used site-specific data for predicting other 

failures. Additionally, the commenter questions why EPA failed to evaluate the benefits of 

improving design requirements as well as monitoring and repair regimes.

Commenters also questioned whether the selection of 10% and 20% failure rates were 

properly justified. Some commenters stated that failure probability should have increased

for impoundments that were not designed by an engineer.

Other commenter questioned why EPA does not account for factors that would increase 

costs beyond those of Kingston such as impoundment capacity, relative CCR toxicity, and 

the potential loss of human life. These commenters also pointed out that EPA missed 

several other releases and erroneously omitted releases of “unknown” magnitude without 

further research, as illustrated by the release at the Bowen Power Station of over two 

million gallons. These commenters further stated that EPA had incorrect release dates and 

erroneously used a 15-year period of analysis instead of a 10-year period of analysis.

Finally, commenters argued that EPA underestimated the costs attributed to the Kingston 

ash spill and other failures. Specifically, commenters found that EPA’s estimate of 

remediation by TVA should be increased because EPA did not consider the purchase of 

150 parcels of land or the provision of $40 million to local governments to restore the 

image and economy of affected communities. These commenters also found that EPA 

underestimated ecological and socioeconomic costs at Kingston by using inadequately 

small Etkin multipliers, and further failed to consider ecological and socioeconomic costs 

for the significant failures at all. Commenters also took issue with the fact that EPA did not 

include seepage and other small release events in its analysis.

EPA Response

Since the TVA Kingston incident, EPA has continued to conduct site inspections. During those 

inspections, one additional surface impoundment was rated “unsatisfactory.” Furthermore, impoundments 

that do not rate “unsatisfactory” today, may degrade due to mismanagement or acts of nature, and later 

become so. Thus, although the commenter is correct in pointing out the findings of EPA’s first rounds of 

site inspections, EPA continues to believe that events like the one that happened at Kingston could happen 

again in the future. 

In addition, several other releases in the millions of gallons led up to the Kingston spill or occurred 

afterward. Thus, EPA declines to speculate that the knowledge of these releases will result in voluntary 

industry improvement that seems to conflict with the numerous releases occurring in the run-up to 

Kingston and its aftermath. Similarly, the fact that a Kingston-sized CCR impoundment structural failure
38

has not happened from coal ash before or since does not carry much weight to the agency. Spills like the 

Buffalo Creek disaster, referenced by another commenter, have occurred throughout history in the United 

States and abroad. The simple fact of the matter is that impounding large amounts of liquids will always 

pose a significant threat unless properly managed.

With regard to a comment that EPA should have considered Georgia’s regulations, EPA notes that one of 

the worst releases occurred at the Bowen plant in Georgia, and that 3 releases were reported in Georgia

over the 10-year period that plants reported over.

With regard to a commenter’s desire for EPA to evaluate the benefits of improving design, monitoring, 

and repair regimes, EPA has done so in Section 5 of the 2014 RIA.

EPA agrees that the 10% and 20% failure rates were not properly justified. Since these rates were only 

used of a sensitivity analysis in the draft RIA, and are not included in the 2014 RIA, no further response 

is necessary.

With respect to comments regarding EPA’s release data, EPA notes that it has made several updates where 

it could verify correct dates and tonnages for releases. This revised database is included as Exhibit P-6 of 

Appendix P. Based on this revised database, EPA now assumes a 10-year period of reporting for all 

facilities unless an earlier release was reported. In these cases, EPA includes additional reporting years to 

the denominator to balance the inclusion of the earlier release. Furthermore, EPA now accounts for all 

non-seepage events whether they are larger events than Kingston, smaller than the significant failures of 

the 2010 RIA, or even of an unknown magnitude. However, EPA did not include seepage events as these 

events do not present significant quantities of liquid which would require remediation or result in harm. 

Nor did EPA include release events at facilities that did not report to the EPA survey. Instead, EPA used 

only reported release events at plants that were represented in the survey to avoid biasing the results. While 

adding the missing historical releases at these additional sites would affect the projected future releases 

by increasing the numerator in the average failure rate calculation, the inclusion of additional 

impoundment-years that were not part of EPA’s survey would also increase the denominator in this 

equation. Without a comprehensive survey response from each of these plants, inclusion of known releases 

could bias the results low by only providing a partial picture over that 10-year period.

With respect to suggestions that EPA account for factors that would increase costs beyond those of 

Kingston, EPA has done so to the extent that it now considers impoundment capacity. With respect to the 

other suggestions to consider CCR toxicity and the potential loss of human life, EPA notes that these could 

only be done on a site-specific basis, may either under- or overestimate costs at any particular site, and 

would require consideration of additional precautions that are taken at that specific facility. 

EPA also notes that it has revised its estimates of remediation costs, ecological costs, and socioeconomic 

costs due to releases. This includes a more detailed review of the available literature that can be found in 

Section 5 and Appendices Q and R of the 2014 RIA. The results of this more detailed review are used not 

only to adjust the costs of catastrophic releases, but for all releases whether they are larger than or smaller 

than Kingston. Finally, with respect to comments that EPA should have considered TVA’s purchase of 

nearby land or the provision of $40 million to local governments, EPA notes that the former cost is likely 

an alternative to future litigation (which EPA does capture) and the latter is a voluntary effort aimed at 

improving the company’s image. Thus, EPA does not find the inclusion of these costs to be necessary.
39

4.4 Avoided Groundwater Remediation Benefits 

Comment Summary 

Commenters stated their belief that EPA double-counted groundwater remediation benefits 

with cancer cases avoided, or alternatively that since EPA could allow cancer cases worth 

less than the cleanup costs, there was no benefit of groundwater remediation at all. 

Commenters also took specific issue with the point-estimates used for remediation costs, 

the interaction between time to remediation and costs, whether compliance is a good proxy 

for remediation, the exclusion of cleanups where interception occurred, and the possibility 

of cleanup below background.

Finally, commenters generally commented on the differences in remediation costs avoided 

under subtitles C and D, or discussed groundwater benefits as being supportive of a subtitle 

C or subtitle D regulation. 

EPA Response

EPA strongly disagrees with commenters suggesting that there are no groundwater remediation benefits 

because EPA could allow people to suffer cancer and noncancer health risks. Furthermore, to the extent 

that the same commenter believed double-counting had occurred, EPA had actually accounted for this in 

the draft rule RIA by decreasing cancers as groundwater remediation occurred. Since the 2014 RIA no 

longer monetizes cancer cases avoided, double counting is no longer an issue, and thus no further response 

is required.

EPA has also revised other aspects touched upon by commenters. EPA has updated the remediation costs 

as detailed in Sections 4 and 5 of the 2014 RIA, conducted more detailed modeling of when leaks would 

occur and be detected, and revised the assumptions regarding state compliance. Furthermore, EPA no 

longer considers interception in deciding when groundwater remediation occurs. In contrast to these 

changes, EPA was unable to consider background concentrations as these concentrations and actual 

leachate concentrations would have to be assessed on a site-specific basis rather than the nationwide basis 

of the RIA.

Finally, with respect to comments being for or against a subtitle C rule, see Section 2 of this response to 

comments document.

4.5 Other Benefit-Related Comments 

Comment Summary 

Commenters provided a random assortment of comments on benefits. Several commenters 

criticized EPA for its assumptions of decreased enforcement leading to lower benefits 

under subtitle D with one suggesting it should be much higher and the other suggesting it

should be much lower. Another commenter provided a draft report estimating damages to 

surface waters from poisoned fish. A third commenter stated that a stringent rule could 

decrease financial risk to investors. Two other commenters found that EPA should have 
40

estimated the benefits of decreased fugitive dust emissions. A fifth commenter pointed out 

that any tendency of the rule to decrease coal usage would also be a benefit. Two other

commenters suggested that EPA evaluate fear/property value stigma benefits. Finally, one 

commenter suggested that EPA consider the benefits gap.

EPA Response

EPA no longer assumes partial enforcement under subtitle D due to inadequate state regulatory programs 

and the difficulty of citizen suits. Instead, EPA believes that the increased reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements will allow states and citizen groups to successfully enforce the rule. 

With respect to the report on damages to poisoned fish, EPA now quantitatively evaluates ecological 

benefits in Section 5 of the 2014 RIA. Since these benefits would include the harm to fish discussed in the 

report, no further response is necessary. 

EPA also qualitatively discusses financial risk to investors in Section 6 of the 2014 RIA.

As discussed in an earlier response, EPA does not quantitatively evaluate benefits of reducing fugitive 

dust emissions. However, EPA does qualitatively discuss the potential property nuisance benefits of 

decreased fugitive dust emissions in Section 6 of the 2014 RIA.

The future decreased coal usage is modeled in Appendix X of the 2014 RIA using the IPM model. This 

report also estimates benefits associated with future decreased coal usage due to decreased particulate 

matter precursors as well as decreased greenhouse gas emissions.

With respect to one commenter’s request that EPA evaluate fear benefits, EPA has included this benefit 

category as a qualitative benefit in Section 6 of the 2014 RIA.

Finally, comments regarding the benefits gap are addressed in Section 6 of this response to comments 

document.

5.0Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial 

Uses

The public stakeholders submitted comments relating to impacts on beneficial use, which are grouped into 

nine subcategories:

1. Accuracy of life cycle benefits 

2. Industry-specific economic data 

3. Impact scenarios

Table 5A – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-01577

(no name provided) C 

& C Ready Mix 

Corporation

Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05905 Bull Concrete Adam Pinto Beneficial User
41

Table 5A – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02185 Ceramatec Inc. Anthony Nickens Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06251 We Energies Art Covi Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06872 Tri-State Generation & Transmission Barbara A. Walz Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09765 City of Morristown, Tennessee Barbara C. Barile Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06121 Rustin Concrete Barton L. Rustin Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08227 Edison Mission Energy, LLC Basil G. Constantelos Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06154 Northern Concrete Pipe Inc Bill Washabaugh Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06026 Jack B. Parson Companies (JBP) Bob Rowberry Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02554 Trimac Dry Bulk Group, Inc. Bob Williamson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06127 Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Bradley W. Evans Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06860 Restore Painting & Waterproofing, Inc. Brenda Camacho on 

behalf of Norge Araniz Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06302 BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) Brendan Lowrey Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06967 Valley Ready Mix Brent Baker Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09280 Gibbco, Inc. Bruce N. Kazich Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06967 J. P. Noonan Transportation Bruce Voight Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09514 Errcive, Inc. C. Eric Ramberg Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06027 Pocatello Ready Mix C. Michael Horrocks Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05772 Walker Parking Consultants Carl L. Schneeman Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09850 Progress Energy, Inc. Caroline Choi Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04001 Coresco, LLC Carrie D. Lilly Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04001 Coresco, LLC Carrie D. Lilly Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06299 MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company 

(MidAmerican) Cathy S. Woollums Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06857 Constellation Energy Charlene Zaruba on 

behalf of Paul Allen Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08845 Grand River Dam Authority Charles J. Barney Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10574 Paramount Ready Mix Charles J. Oliver Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06300

Southern Company behalf of itself and its four 

subsidiaries: Alabama Power Company, Georgia 

Power Company, Gulf Power Company, and 

Mississippi Power Company

Chris M. Hobson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09639 Specialized Transport LLC Christopher D. Benna Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09432 CK Transport Chuck Kitchens Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09803 Peterson Gravel & Ready Mix, Inc. Cindy Peterson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09358 Wisconsin Public Service Connie K. Lawniczak Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09765 Dale Nash Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10189 LA Ash, Inc. Danielle King Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03743 H&K Enterprises Dave Baker Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02402 Greenleaf Environmental Services, LLC David A. Wheeler Beneficial User
42

Table 5A – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10534 Triple C Concrete Inc. David Coats Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03731 Crouse Electric, Inc. David Lawrence on 

behalf of Paul Crouse Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06857 South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, 

Environmental Technical Committee David M. Comen Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09331 Texas Industries, Inc. (TXI) Operations, LP David Perkins Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03729 Ernst Concrete of Georgia David R. Ernst Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08247 Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. (Cliffs) David Z. Skolasinski Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09426 Rock Transport, Inc. Dick Peterson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10205 LeGrand Johnson Construction Co. Dick Sackett Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07804 MeadWestvaco Dirk J. Krouskop Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03740 Coastal Drilling Doug Banks Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04025 Missoula Concrete Construction Douglas G. Bauer Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06155 Lifetime Composites LLC Edward J. Butteriss Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10534 Mobile Abrasives - Alabama Edward J. Serda Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09507 PSEG Power LLC and Public Service Electric and 

Gas Eric B. Svenson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08244 Tucson Electric Power Company Erik Bakken Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09350 ANJ Transport, Inc. F. Stephen Thomas Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06311 United Materials of Great Falls, Inc.

Frances Talbot on 

behalf of Basil 

Jacobson

Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03887 Fred Hooper Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04047 Conco Companies - Ready Mix Division/ACME

Gaylene Anderson on 

behalf of John 

Holiman

Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10199 Conti Materials Service, LLC Gene Conti Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04143 Private Citizen Gene Daniel, P.E. Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10352 Harsco Minerals International, a division of 

Harsco Corporation Gene Iannazzo Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10543 Buckeye Aggregates, Inc. Gene M. Kiral Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06360 Dunham Price, LLC (submitted on behalf of 

Dunham Price by Headwaters Resources) George Thompson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10509 Graniterock Greg Diehl Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05900 Cross Creek Cattle, Inc. Greg Hayes Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04045 H.G. Fredriksen Company, Inc. H.G. Fredriksen III Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10111 Croell Redi-Mix, Inc. Harlan Taylor Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02831 JE Hill Precast Harley E. Northup Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08842 Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) Henry Eby Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-00354 Pennsylvania Legislature Holly Stimely on behalf 

Timothy J. Solobay State Elected Official

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04145 Weber Sustainability Consulting Ivan Weber Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03930 Orangeburg Redi-Mix Concrete, Inc. J. C. Till Beneficial User
43

Table 5A – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09519 Norfolk Southern Corporation James A. Hixon Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03026 Separation Technologies LLC James Bittner Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10515

Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) James G. Toscas Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10530

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06398

FlyAshDirect LTD James H. Irvine Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02931

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06122 Port Aggregates, Inc. James P. Guinn Sr. Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06311 Titan America LLC James S. Willis Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09228 Dredging Inc. (doing business as) Scott's 

Concrete Jane E. Martin Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09424 Private Citizen Jared Sommer, Ph.D. Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08245 Institute for Policy Integrity Jason A. Schwartz Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08248

U.S. Minerals Jason D. Vukas Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08253

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10571 Geneva Rock Products, Inc. Jay H. Ritchie Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06315

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06329 ARIPPA Jeff A. McNelly Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06358

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04139 Mineral Resource Technologies, Inc. Jeffrey G. Dusseault Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06031 MBO Precast, Inc. Jeffrey Opachinski Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09885 Private Citizen Jerry Dart Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04035 Michie Corporation Jessica Michie Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06398 Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG) Jim Roewer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09679 Joe Neason Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08223 Alabama Public Service Commission John D. Free State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08271 Simon Contractors Company John Hodge Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03741 North American Drilling John Mayfield Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10558 Belmont Aggregates, Inc. John S. Kish Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06555 Boral Material Technologies Inc. (BMTI) John Scoggan Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09639 Intermountain Power Service Corporation (IPSC) Jon A. Finlinson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-05677 Concrete Placing Company, Inc. Jon Berger Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09333 Interstate Life Power and Light Company (IPL) 

and Wisconsin Power and Light Company (WPL) Kathleen A. Lipp Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10568 Ferndale Ready Mix & Gravel, Inc. Keith Korthuis Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09707

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09728 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Ken Ladwig Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09739

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10489 Connecticut Ready Mixed Concrete Association, 

Inc. (CRMCA) Kevin Miller Trade Association
44

Table 5A – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09537

Structural Rehabilitation Group, LLC Kirby L. McCleary Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09633

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06414 AspenGold Consulting, LLC Kristopher J. Johnson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07781

North Dakota Department of Health L. David Glatt State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07783

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10192 Enduracon Technologies Larry Nelson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06525

Saint-Gobain Corporation / CertainTeed 

Corporation

Lauren P. Alterman Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06526

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06553

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06555

CertainTeed Gypsum, Inc.

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06793

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06810

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06857

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09235 Ashland Casting Solutions (Ashland) Lee R. Horvath Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06304

Earthjustice et. al. Lisa Evans Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06306

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06308

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06311

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10353

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09880 PMI Ash Technologies, LLC (PMI) Lisa I. Cooper Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04036 Offshore Express, Inc.

Marcia Mann on 

behalf of Scott 

Kisilywicz

Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10189 Standard Cements Materials, Inc. Mario A. Tamez Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09804 McDonald Farms Enterprises Marjorie McDonald Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-00906 LB Industrial Systems, L.L.C. Mark Konzal Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09248 F. H. Stickles & Son Inc. Mark Stickles Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06555 Private Citizen

Mass Comment 

Campaign sponsoring 

organization unknown 

(47)

Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06871 Associated General Contractors of America 

(AGC) Melinda L. Tomaino Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06360 Structural Design Group, Inc. (SDG) Michael Davis Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07989

Gypsum Association Michael Gardner Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08211

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09829 First Energy Corporation Michael L. Horvath Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06363

Duke Energy Mike Stroben Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06382

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10495 Materials Handling and Transportation Name illegible Beneficial User
45

Table 5A – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03934 Kentuckians For The Commonwealth (KFTC) Nancy L. Reinhart Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06249 Elastizell Corporation of America Ned Glysson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09423 National Council of Coal Lessors (NCCL) Nick Carter Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03470 Private Citizen Norman E. Divers Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08241 Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP on behalf of Kansas 

City Board of Public Utilities

Parthenia B. Evans and 

Dennis Lane Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06298 Tennessee Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC) Paul L. Sloan State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09336 American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA) Paul Noe Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03437 Edgerton Contractors, Inc. Peter Davis Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09796 Memphis Ready-Mix Phillip Palczer Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06260 Kentucky Department for Environmental 

Protection R. Bruce Scott State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06956 Private Citizen Rafic Minkara, Ph.D., 

P.E. Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06360 Public Utilities Commission of Ohio Rebecca L. Hussey State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06038 L.G. Everist, Inc. Richard A. Everist Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09534

Earth Justice, et. al. (prepared for Sierra Club, 

Earthjustice, Natural Resources Defense 

Council)

Richard C. Fortuna Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09499 Frank C. Alegre Trucking Robert A. Fowler Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08853 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association 

(NRMCA) Robert A. Garbini Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08975

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02816 Beneficial Reuse Management, LLC Robert C. Spoerri Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06917

Granite Construction Incorporated Robert Swango Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06921

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08838

RAC Brokerage, LLC Ron Carter Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08842

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02823 Partners Bulk Logistics (PBL) Ron Heller Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10556 Great Lakes Concrete Products, LLC Rosanne DiPizio Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08241 Sphere One, Inc. Ryan M. Brownhill Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03719 Liebe Trucking, Inc. Sara Liebe on behalf of 

Gary Liebe Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08271 USC Technologies, LLC Sarah Toevs Sullivan Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06203 Arizona Public Service Company (APS) Scott Davis Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03582 Hanson Aggregates, LLC Scott Dickson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09530 Waterkeeper Alliance Scott Edwards Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09816 Western Rock Products Scott Sidlow Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07781 Lehigh University Sean Parrott and Dr. 

Dork Sahagian Academia

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06384 McMahon Contracting, L.P. Shawn McMahon Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08270 Cape Cod Ready Mix Steve Berlo Beneficial User
46

Table 5A – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03723 Metro Ready Mix Concrete (MRM) Steve Herron Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02874 Nagy Concrete Company Steve Simpson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08227 Revolutionary Plastics, LLC

Steven G. Barringer 

and Tasha M. 

Newland, Holland & 

Hart LLP, on behalf of 

Revolutionary Plastics

Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09634 Semo, Ready Mix, Inc. Steven R. Obermann Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06865 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

(TCEQ)

Tangela Niemann on 

behalf of Mark R. 

Vickery

State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08246 Xcel Energy Terry Coss Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-02400 Southern Illinois Motor Xpress, Inc. Terry D. Oetjen Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06202 American Coal Ash Association (ACAA) Thomas H. Adams Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04038 KMR Concrete, Inc. Tim Fletcher Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08845 Lehigh Hanson Inc. Timothy L. Matz Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03313 Mathis-Akins Concrete Block Co. Inc Tina Sheffield 

Kuncaitis Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08380

Airplaco Equipment Company Todd Ferguson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08785

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06865 State of Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection Todd M. Wallace State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06028 Kanta Products, Inc. Tom Kanta Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06011 Public Service Commission (PSC) - State of North 

Dakota Tony Clark State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04335 Intermountain Construction & Materials Tony Clobes Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09280 Sidney Red-E-Mix, Inc. Travis Peterson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06302 Verle C. Martz Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06304 NRG Energy Inc. Verne Shortell Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10500 Town of Holly, Colorado Viola Melcher Local Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06019 Metro Ready Mix W. Ryan Skidmore Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10161

Lexington Concrete and Block Watt Ervin Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10173

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09886 Eutaw Construction Company, LLC William E. Cox Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09316 The Society for Protection Coatings (SSPC) William Shoup Trade Association

Table 5B – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10614_DC-028 National Association of 

Manufacturers (NAM) Alicia Oman Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10681_DC-069 American Forest & Paper 

Association (AF&PA) Amy E. Schaffer Trade Association
47

Table 5B – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11291_CHI-005 Wisconsin Electric Power Company 

d/b/a We Energies Art Covi Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10780_DA-011 Luminant Barry Boswell Electric Utility

TRANS-DEN-0032 Colorado Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association Bernie Cawley Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11496_L-077 Bill Chlebowy Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10836_DA-066 Headwaters Resources Bill Gehrmann Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11531_L-102

Bobby Raia Private Citizen

TRANS-LVL-0121

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10786_DA-017 Black Diamond Granules, Inc. Bruce Haslerud Beneficial User

TRANS-CLT-0099 Advanced Wall Technologies 

(AWT), LLC Carl Dudding Beneficial User

TRANS-DAL-0026 Precast Concrete Manufacturers 

Association of Texas Chris Lechner Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11287_CHI-065 City Water Light & Power, 

Springfield, IL Christine Zeman Electric Utility

TRANS-CHI-0124

TRANS-PIT-0073 American Bituminous Power 

Partners Craig Cierra Electric Utility Facility

TRANS-ARL-0058 PPL Corporation Craig Shamory Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10755_DEN-067 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association (NRMCA) Dan Huffman Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11618_K-032 Charah, Inc. (Charah) Danny L. Gray Beneficial User

TRANS-DAL-0092 Office of the Texas Comptroller of 

Public Accounts David Schanbacher State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11615_K-029

Blalock Ready Mix Dennie Underwood Beneficial User

TRANS-KNX-0049

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11224_CHI-095 Headwaters Resources, Inc. (spoke 

as employee) Doug Anderson Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11480_L-057

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10776_DA-007 Acme Brick Company Ed Watson Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10671_DC-058

Tufts University Frank Ackerman Academia

TRANS-ARL-0075

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11319_P-029

Ebensburg Power Company Gary Anderson Electric Utility

TRANS-PIT-0029

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11044_CHA-079 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association (NRMCA) Gary Mullings Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10788_DA-019 Western Farmers Electric 

Cooperative (Western Farmers) Gerald Butcher Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11036_CHA-071

Southern Concrete Materials Jane Arnold Beneficial User

TRANS-CLT-0033

TRANS-CLT-0030 Santee Cooper Jay Hudson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10842_DA-072 NRG Energy, Inc. (NRG) Jeffrey Davis Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11078_CHA-113 North Carolina Chamber of 

Commerce John Goodman Trade Association

TRANS-CLT-0116

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11458_L-034 E.ON U.S. LLC John Voyles Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10741_DEN-053 Great River Energy (GRE) John Weeda Electric Utility
48

Table 5B – Comments Related to Impacts on Beneficial Use (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

TRANS-DEN-0028

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10733_DEN-045

Platte River Power Authority Jon Little Electric Utility

TRANS-DEN-0014

TRANS-ARL-0125 Jonathan Barker Private Citizen

TRANS-DAL-0076 Luminant Julie Prejean Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10826_DA-056 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association (NRMCA) Kevin Walgenbach Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11346_P-059 Sphere One, Inc. Mark Bonne Beneficial User

TRANS-DAL-0116 American Concrete Pipe 

Association Matt Childs Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11557_L-005 E.ON U.S. LLC Michael Winkler Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0044 CPS Energy Mike Mallone Electric Utility

TRANS-DAL-0065 Texas Coal Ash Utilization Group Mike Silvertooth Trade Association

TRANS-CHI-0108 LifeTime Composites, LLC Mike Thorpe Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10639_DC-079 American Road and Transportation 

Builders Association (ARTBA) Nick Goldstein Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11521_L-139 Kentucky Ready-Mixed Concrete 

Association (KRMCA) R. Finley Messick Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10673_DC-060 Separation Technologies LLC and 

Essex Cement Randy Dunlap Beneficial User

TRANS-CLT-0011 Tampa Electric Company Randy Melton Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11264_CHI-035 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association (NRMCA) Richard DeBoer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11194_CHI-025 Great River Energy (GRE) Richard Lancaster Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10790_DA-021 National Ready Mixed Concrete 

Association (NRMCA) Robert Garbini Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11716_K-140

JEA Scott Schultz Electric Utility Facility

TRANS-KNX-0105

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11275_CHI-047 Indiana Energy Association Stan Pinegar Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11357_P-071

Sunbury Generation LP Teresa Copenhaver Electric Utility Facility

TRANS-PIT-0081

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11669_K-088 American Coal Ash Association Thomas H. Adams Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11336_P-049 Congress of the United States, 

House of Representatives

Tim Holden, et al. 

[121 signatures] Federal Elected Official

5.1 Accuracy of Life Cycle Benefits

Comment Summary 

Commenters raised several issues with EPA’s calculation of beneficial use life cycle 

benefits. Specifically, one commenter found that EPA incorrectly valued particulate matter 

reductions, double-counted emission reductions from air rules, and therefore overestimated 

energy reductions from the cement and wallboard industries. That commenter further stated 

that EPA should have included avoided cancer risks, groundwater remediation, and 
49

impoundment failure cleanup in its beneficial use benefits. This commenter also suggests 

evaluating the transportation and storage costs of the CCR and the virgin feedstock. 

Commenters also found that EPA overestimated avoided disposal costs by using the 

incorrect disposal costs, or by confusing transfers with benefits. 

With respect to the quantity of beneficially used CCRs this life cycle benefit is applied to, 

commenters found errors in EPA’s extrapolation of beneficial use growth under the 

baseline, and assumption that beneficial use would increase under the rule. Commenters 

also found miscellaneous errors in data, discussion, and transcription. Finally, commenters 

raised issues regarding subtitle C and stigma. 

EPA Response

The assessment of beneficial use impacts in the 2014 RIA includes several changes relative to the 2010 

RIA that address the concerns raised by the commenters. In particular, the beneficial use analysis in the 

2014 RIA eliminates the use of the PM2.5 $/ton value and instead monetizes PM precursors NOx and 

SOx. Furthermore, the rule estimates emissions from avoided cement production based on emissions 

anticipated from the cement sector following implementation of the recent National Emission Standards 

for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the portland cement sector. For a further discussion of these changes, see 

Section 5 and Appendix S of the 2014 RIA.

Neither 2010 RIA nor 2014 RIA considered how changes in beneficial use associated with the rule affect 

avoided cancer risks, groundwater remediation, or impoundment failure cleanup. EPA acknowledges that 

this is an uncertainty of the analysis.

The commenter also suggests that emissions reductions upstream from the production of virgin materials 

would be minimal and should be weighed against emissions created by the storage, excavation and 

transportation of fly ash and other CCRs when beneficially used. The Agency's beneficial use analysis, 

however, does not reflect avoided impacts associated with the transportation of raw gypsum and other 

virgin materials from the location where they are produced to the location where they are used. Emissions 

associated with shipping virgin materials displaced by CCRs are assumed to be of roughly the same 

magnitude as the emissions associated with transporting CCR to a beneficial use site. Based on this 

assumption, The RIA's beneficial use analysis does not quantify these impacts. Similarly, emissions 

associated with the handling and storage of CCR are assumed to be similar under the baseline and policy 

scenarios. Thus, while upstream emissions for the production of raw materials displaced by CCR may be 

minimal, they would not be offset by emissions associated with the handling and transport of CCR, as 

these latter emissions are (assumed to be) offset by other virgin material emissions not captured in the 

RIA's beneficial use analysis.

With respect to avoided disposal costs, EPA has estimated new disposal costs for the final rule, and thus 

the comment pointing out incorrect disposal costs being used in the beneficial use analysis is moot. 

Furthermore, to the extent that one commenter argues that avoided disposal costs are transfers, and should 

omit rule costs, EPA disagrees. When CCR is beneficially used, users of the material derive value from 

the cost savings associated with the avoided purchase of virgin materials. Because utilities do not realize 

this savings under baseline conditions, diverting CCR to beneficial use is not merely an economic transfer. 
50

EPA has also worked to improve its estimates of beneficial use increases under the baseline and final rule. 

These revised forecasts were generated using a linear programming model that took into account 

considerations such as regional market demand and generation of dry CCRs. Discussion of the new linear 

programming model that EPA relied on for these estimates is located in Appendix S.

Errors in data, discussion, and transcription from the 2010 RIA are no longer relevant due to the new data, 

calculations, and discussion of the 2014 RIA.

Finally, to the extent that commenters raised issues pertaining to subtitle C and stigma, see Section 2 of 

this document.

5.2 Industry-Specific Economic Data for the RIA

Comment Summary 

One commenter provided industry data questioning EPA’s forecast of increasing beneficial 

use. Specifically the commenter provided data indicating that there was not enough 

concrete production to use 100% of fly ash, that engineering specifications make some fly 

ash unusable, that seasonality of fly ash demand make consistent use difficult, and that 

power plants are not always located near the consumers of CCRs. State commenters also 

provided several estimates of the savings beneficial use had in their respective states. 

Commenters raised numerous arguments and examples regarding the effects of a subtitle 

C rule and stigma on various beneficial uses.

EPA Response

EPA acknowledges that there are many regional and market-specific issues that affect the amount of CCRs 

that can be beneficially used. However, as detailed in Appendix S of the 2014 RIA, EPA now accounts 

for many of these issues through the use of a linear programming model of three of the largest annual 

volume CCR beneficial use markets (i.e., concrete, wallboard, and structural fill). With respect to seasonal 

generation, EPA notes that the revised RIA is conducted in annual time increments, and thus, this level of 

granularity is beyond that encompassed in the 2014 RIA.

With respect to state comments valuing beneficial use, EPA acknowledges these beneficial use benefit 

estimates. However, without details about how these estimates were reached, EPA was unable to make 

use of them in the RIA for the final rule.

With respect to comments on subtitle C and stigma, see Section 2 of this document. 

5.3 Future Beneficial Use Impact Scenarios

Comment Summary 

Commenters provided views on which beneficial use scenario they felt was more 

appropriate, or the extent to which the scenarios were representative of future beneficial 

use under the regulation.
51

EPA Response

See Section 2 of this response to comments document.
52

6.0Comments Relating to Net Benefits 

The public stakeholders submitted comments relating to net benefits, which are grouped into nine 

subcategories:

1. Cost/Benefit scaling under subtitle D options

2. Comparison of benefits to costs

Table 6A – Comments Related to Net Benefits (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07001 Vectren Corporation Angila M. Reinerford Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08234 Colorado Department of Public Health 

and Environment

Charles G. Johnson on behalf 

of Joe Schieffelin State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03053 Private Citizen Chris Barnes Private Citizen

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06300

Southern Company behalf of itself and 

its four subsidiaries: Alabama Power 

Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf 

Power Company, and Mississippi Power 

Company

Chris M. Hobson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06876 Tennessee Riverkeeper, Inc. David Whiteside Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08261 Black Warrior Riverkeeper, Inc. Eva Dillard Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10166 Consumers Energy Company Gary A. Dawson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08248 Institute for Policy Integrity Jason A. Schwartz Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08865 Geosyntec Consultants John Seymour Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06068 Utah Physicians for a Healthy 

Environment John Veranth Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04142 Kentucky Association of Manufacturers 

(KAM)

Karen F. Ellis on behalf of 

Charles Gregory Higdon Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09765 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Ken Ladwig Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09501 Institute for Study of Economics and the 

Environment, Lindenwood University Kenneth W. Chilton Academia

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08211 North Dakota Department of Health L. David Glatt State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06311

Earthjustice et. al. Lisa Evans Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06315

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08246 Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP on behalf 

of Kansas City Board of Public Utilities

Parthenia B. Evans and 

Dennis Lane Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08847 Center for Progressive Reform, 

University of Maryland School of Law Rena Steinzor Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08784 Alabama Pulp & Paper Council Roy McAuley Trade Association
53

6.1 Cost/Benefits Scaling under Subtitle D Option 

Comment Summary 

Some commenters criticized the scaling factors applied to the subtitle C costs and benefits 

to estimate the subtitle D costs and benefits. One commenter found the scaling factors 

themselves to be wrong due to incorrect assumptions about state regulatory programs, and 

provided alternative scaling factors. Another commenter stated that EPA improperly 

ignored the distributional effects of this scaling in states that were predicted not to adopt 

subtitle D regulations. Finally, one commenter found rounding and transcription errors 

which they found to lead to incorrect scaling. In some cases, commenters found 

misstatements and conflicting rationales that made it difficult to understand the scaling 

procedures used.

EPA Response

EPA no longer uses scaling factors to estimate subtitle D costs. Instead, costs and benefits are directly 

estimated for the final regulatory option selected by EPA. Thus, no further response is necessary. 

6.2 Comparison of Benefits to Costs 

Comment Summary 

Some commenters found that EPA improperly compared the benefits and costs of the 

proposed regulatory options. One commenter found the comparison improper due to a 

complete costing of regulatory requirements and an incomplete monetization of benefits, 

and provided several examples of benefits that were not monetized. As an alternative to 

monetizing these benefits, this commenter suggested that EPA analyze the benefits gap 

necessary to make each regulation benefit-cost neutral. Finally, commenters made general 

statements that the comparison of benefits and costs leads to the conclusion that either 

subtitle C or subtitle D was the appropriate regulatory option. 

EPA Response

As described earlier in this response to comments document, EPA has revised the RIA for the final rule 

to reflect benefit categories beyond those estimated in the RIA for the proposal, as well as cost categories 

that were not originally estimated. Thus, the benefit-cost comparisons provided in the 2014 RIA are more 

Table 6B – Comments Related to Net Benefits (Public Hearings)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-11736_K-162 Environmental Intergrity Project (EIP) Abel Russ Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10712_DEN-024 Colorado Department of Public Health 

and Environment Joe Schieffelin State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10792_DA-023 PMI Ash Technologies Kyle Crake Beneficial User

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10653_DC-092 Vermont Law School Patrick Parenteau Academia

TRANS-KNX-0001 Steve Scarborough Private Citizen
54

complete. Furthermore, EPA has updated the calculation of costs and benefits to reflect the final regulatory 

option. In light of these changes, comments relating to specific costs and benefits of the formerly proposed

CCR regulatory options are no longer relevant, and thus no further response is necessary. 

With respect to an analysis of the benefits “gap” suggested by one commenter, EPA notes that this 

calculation is unnecessary, but can easily be conducted by interested stakeholders based on the tables 

provided in the RIA for the final rule.

To the extent that comments reflected the view that the benefit-cost comparisons supported a specific 

choice of CCR regulatory option, see Section 2 of this response to comments document. 
55

7.0Comments Related to Supplemental 

Analyses 

The public stakeholders submitted comments relating to supplemental analysis, which are grouped into 

nine subcategories:

1. Energy Impact Analysis: EO 13211

2. Small Business Impact Analysis: RFA/SBREFA

3. Environmental Justice Analysis: EO 12898

4. Children’s Health Analysis: EO 13045

5. Paperwork Reduction Act, Including Comments on ICR

6. Unfunded Mandates Analysis/UMRA

7. Federalism Analysis: EO 13132

8. Consultation/Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments: EO 13175

9. Other Comments Related to Supplemental Analyses

Table 7A – Comments Related to Supplemental Analyses (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06251 We Energies Art Covi Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09337 Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Benjamin H. Grumbles State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06424 Garrett & Moore, Inc. Bernie Garrett Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09236 National Tribal Air Association 

(NTAA) Bill Thompson Tribal Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06867 Manufacture Alabama Blake Hardwich on behalf of 

Mike Conlon Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08857 Department of Electric, City of 

Hamilton, Ohio Charles Young Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09712 Basin Electric Power Cooperative 

(BEPC) Claire M. Olson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06297 Business Council of Alabama (BCA) David Roberson Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08270 Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. (Cliffs) David Z. Skolasinski Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08220 PowerSouth Energy Cooperative Dr. Keith Stephens Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06988 Missouri Joint Municipal Electric 

Utility Commission Floyd Gilzow State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10166 Consumers Energy Company Gary A. Dawson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06723 West Virginia Department of 

Environmental Protection (WVDEP)

Gary Casto on behalf of 

Randy C. Huffman State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06533 Empire District Electric Company George G. Thullesen Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10329 Interstate Mining Compact 

Commission (IMCC) Gregory E. Conrad State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08841 Deseret Generation and 

Transmission Co-operative Howard Vickers Electric Utility
56

Table 7A – Comments Related to Supplemental Analyses (Submitted to Docket)

EPA ID Organization Commenter Organization

Type

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06396 National Rural Electronic 

Cooperative Association (NRECA) James F. Stine Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10483 Utility Solid Waste Activities Group 

(USWAG) et al. James R. Roewer Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08248 Institute for Policy Integrity Jason A. Schwartz Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-07791 Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources (GAEPD) Jim Brown for Mark Smith State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06252 Minnkota Power Cooperative, Inc. 

(Minnkota) John T. Graves Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06722 Arkansas Electric Cooperative 

Corporation (AECC) Jonathan Oliver Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09427 San Miguel Electric Cooperative, 

Inc. (San Miguel) Joseph G. Eutizi Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06226 Pennsylvania Coal Association (PCA) Josie Gaskey Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09358

Interstate Life Power and Light 

Company (IPL) and Wisconsin 

Power and Light Company (WPL)

Kathleen A. Lipp Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06849 Little Village Environmental Justice 

Organization (LVEJO) Keith Harley Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-04003 Environmental Council of the States 

(ECOS)

Lia Parisien on behalf of John 

W. Mitchell State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06326 Old Dominion Electric Cooperative 

(ODEC) Lisa D. Johnson Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06315

Earthjustice et. al. Lisa Evans Advocacy Group

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-10495

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06190 Lafayette Utilities System Lisa G. Dowden and Steven C. 

Pearson Electric Utility Facility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-03936

Association of State and Territorial 

Solid Waste Management Officials 

(ASTSWMO)

Mary T. Zdanowicz State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09237 Ohio Coal Association Michael T.W. Carey Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06446 Hoosier Energy Rural Electric 

Cooperative (REC), Inc. Michalene Reilly Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06398 Duke Energy Mike Stroben Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06254 Sunflower Electric Power 

Corporation Paul E. Reynolds Electric Utility

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06298

Tennessee Department of 

Environment and Conservation 

(TDEC)

Paul L. Sloan State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06384 Public Utilities Commission of Ohio Rebecca L. Hussey State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06819 Missouri Department of Natural 

Resources

Robert Stout on behalf of Dru 

Buntin State Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08861 Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan Inc. Robin Clark Tribal Government

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06400 Waste Management (WM) Susan Briggum Other Company

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-09346 American Public Power Association 

(APPA) Theresa Pugh Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-06356 U.S. Chamber of Commerce William L. Kovacs Trade Association

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640-08230 Small Business Administration's 

Office of Advocacy (SBA) Winslow Sargeant Federal Agency
57

7.1 Energy Impact Analysis: EO 13211 

Comment Summary 

Commenters stated that a CCR rule would affect the ability for utility companies to provide 

reliable electric services generally due to premature boiler closures, or stated that prices to 

consumers would rise without providing further detail. Specifically, commenters called 

upon EPA to revise their energy impact analysis based on the findings of NERC (2010), 

the consideration of multiple EPA regulations in combination, and the ability of ratepayers 

to afford higher electricity prices.

EPA Response 

EPA agrees that NERC (2010) shows that the smallest impacts on energy prices and reliability are from 

the CCR disposal rule. However, other commenters requested that EPA consider the cumulative impacts 

of EPA’s various electric sector rules. In light of these comments, the NERC (2010) findings on 

cumulative impacts, and the newly released EO 13563 – Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, 

EPA has run the Integrated Planning Model (IPM) to estimate electricity price and reliability effects of 

the CCR disposal rule in conjunction with other EPA rules. The modeled impacts of the final CCR rule 

on electricity prices and premature boiler closures are minimal, and can be found in Appendix X of the 

2014 RIA. Finally, with respect to issues raised regarding the subtitle C regulatory option, see Section 2

of this response to comments document.

7.2 Small Business Impact Analysis: RFA/SBREFA 

Comment Summary 

Commenters argued that EPA’s No SISNOSE determination was fatally flawed. 

Specifically, commenters believe that EPA has improperly excluded affected entities and 

underestimated costs, which have wrongly led to a No SISNOSE determination. 

Commenters also stated that cost pass-through was unlikely to occur for rural electric 

cooperatives. Finally, commenters argued that EPA violated the RFA/SBREFA as well as 

its own RFA/SBREFA guidance by not convening a small business advocacy review panel, 

and that such a panel should be convened. 

EPA Response

EPA disagrees with comments that large sectors of affected entities were improperly excluded from the 

small business analysis. According to EPA’s guidance on how to conduct an RFA/SBREFA analysis for 

RIAs (U.S. EPA, 2006), only entities directly affected by a regulation should be considered. Here, 

commenters suggest a number of entities that are only indirectly affected, and thus EPA properly excluded 

them from the RFA/SBREFA analysis of the RIA. 

To the extent that commenters believed that EPA’s RFA/SBREFA analysis is incomplete because EPA 

underestimated the costs of the rule, EPA has addressed cost-related comments in Section 3 of this 

response to comments document. Furthermore, to the extent that commenters were concerned that EPA 
58

improperly used a cost pass-through analysis, EPA notes that the costs and benefits of the rule assumed 

no cost pass-through as a worst case, and only considered cost pass-through for the electricity price 

impacts analysis discussed in the previous section of this response to comments document.

With respect to the suggestions for a small business advocacy review panel, EPA notes that such a panel 

need only be convened if EPA’s cost estimates to small entities exceed the 1% or 3% of revenues 

thresholds. Since neither the 2010 RIA nor 2014 RIA cost estimates exceeded this threshold, no further 

response is required.

Finally, to the extent that commenters raised small business stigma and subtitle C issues, see Section 2 of 

this response to comments document.

7.3 Environmental Justice Analysis: EO 12898 

Comment Summary 

Commenters provided general statements that environmental justice communities would 

be impacted. Additionally, some commenters pointed to specific power plants or groups of 

power plants as having environmental justice communities present. Further, commenters 

generally found that EPA’s environmental justice analysis was insufficient. Specifically, 

commenters proposed that EPA analyze specific ethnicities rather than minorities as a 

whole, include individuals who reported two ethnicities even when one was white, evaluate 

populations near off-site disposal facilities, make use of county-level comparisons, and 

correct a calculation error for poverty rate. Commenters also claimed that disproportionate 

impacts would be felt in states that did not adopt a subtitle D rule, and that only a subtitle 

C rule would solve the environmental justice disparities currently existing. Alternatively, 

a couple commenters suggested that EPA evaluate the environmental justice implications 

of increased electricity prices. Finally, commenters used claims about environmental 

justice to justify a subtitle C or D rule.

EPA Response

EPA revised the national environmental justice analysis of all the communities potentially affected by this 

regulation. This revised analysis can be found in the 2014 RIA available in the docket. EPA acknowledges 

that environmental justice communities may be present at specific CCR disposal sites. However, since 

this rule is not a site-specific action, EPA did not conduct a site-specific environmental justice analysis. 

To the extent that particular sites pose risks to environmental justice communities, the requirements under 

the final rule will prevent these risks. Furthermore, site-specific environmental justice issues can be taken 

into account during the corrective action process required for contaminated sites under today’s rule. 

With respect to the comment suggesting the evaluation of Latinos as “non-white” when mixed reporting 

occurs, EPA agrees that the counts of “white” and “non-white” populations would change. However, the 

increased numerators representing potentially affected populations would increase by the same 

proportions as the denominators representing state or national populations. Thus, the net effect would be 

to arrive at the same results reported in the 2014 RIA. Thus, no further changes were made in response to 

this comment.
59

The same commenter also suggested that each ethnicity be evaluated separately, as opposed to EPA’s 

approach of evaluating “non-white” populations as a whole. EPA notes that this would result in large 

portions of the population with mixed reporting being double counted. Furthermore, EPA sees no reason 

to treat each minority differently when the final rule should be protective of all minority populations. 

Thus, no further changes were made in response to this comment.

In response to one commenter’s desire for EPA to evaluate off-site disposal, EPA does not have a national 

data set of off-site disposal facilities receiving CCRs which could be used to conduct such an analysis. 

Furthermore, most CCRs that are not disposed of on-site are either beneficially used or sent to municipal 

solid waste landfills. Unencapsulated beneficial uses under today’s rule will be required to post findings 

of their protectiveness, and municipal solid waste landfills are already subject to permitting and oversight. 

Thus, off-site transport of CCRs should not pose an environmental justice concern. No further changes 

were made in response to this comment.

With respect to the commenter’s suggestion that EPA use county-level data instead of state and nationwide 

data to assess minority and low income populations, this would not provide a useful comparison due to 

the large areas of potentially affected populations being considered relative to the size of counties. Instead, 

EPA continues to rely on comparisons to state and national counts in the revised environmental justice 

analysis which can be found in the 2014 RIA.

In response to one commenter’s finding that EPA miscalculated the poverty rate, EPA has redone the 

environmental justice analysis and verified that it uses a proper metric for household incomes defined as 

“low” as defined by U.S. Census Bureau statistics.

EPA disagrees with comments that suggested environmental justice analysis should have been conducted 

on customer service populations. While EPA did not specifically look at customer service populations, 

these populations would only be adversely affected to the extent that their electricity prices were raised. 

However, some customers residing or working in proximity to regulated power plants could experience 

health and environmental benefits from the rule. EPA estimated the potential future effect of the CCR 

final rule on electricity prices according to customer service regions in the IPM modeling project for the 

CCR final rule. However, these price impacts were minimal, as discussed in Section 7.1 of this response 

to comments document.

Finally, comments received citing environmental justice considerations as a rationale for choosing for or 

against a subtitle C rule, these comments are not related to the environmental justice analysis in the RIA, 

and EPA refers commenters to Section 2 of this response to comments document.

7.4 Children’s Health Analysis: EO 13045 

Comment Summary 

Commenters raised general complaints that coal ash was affecting children’s health without 

pointing to any specific issues. 

EPA Response

No response necessary.
60

7.5 Paperwork Reduction Act and Comments on ICR 

Comment Summary 

Commenters found that EPA’s use of a 2009 ICR mail survey of the electric utility industry 

to identify CCR surface impoundments was overly broad.

EPA Response

EPA does not find these comments to be directly relevant to the 2010 RIA. However, to the extent that 

the 2010 RIA and 2014 RIA evaluate CCR impoundments that may not be subject to the rule, EPA notes 

that this will result in a conservative cost estimate. Further definition of the types of entities and CCR 

management units subject to the CCR final rule is available in EPA’s 2015 Federal Register notice for the 

CCR final rule.

7.6 Unfunded Mandates Analysis/UMRA 

Comment Summary 

Commenters asked EPA to evaluate all comments under UMRA. Commenters also stated 

that the regulation comprises an unfunded mandate due to regulatory oversight burdens as 

well as increased electricity costs to states. Furthermore, commenters found funding from 

the Federal government inadequate to meet these increased costs. 

EPA Response

The threshold for triggering UMRA is $100 million in costs to state, local and tribal governments in 

aggregate or to the private sector. Both the 2010 RIA and the 2014 RIA found that while the costs to state, 

local, and tribal governments was below this threshold, the private sector costs exceeded $100 million 

annually. Thus, EPA has provided the required written statement to OMB and the Federal Register to 

address the five issues enumerated in UMRA. No further response is necessary.

7.7 Federalism Analysis: EO 13132 

Comment Summary 

Several commenters claim that reporting requirements are an enormous burden in light of 

the declining funding to state governments. Commenters also presented claims that state 

programs are adequate as justification of a subtitle D alternative.

EPA Response

According to EPA guidance, costs to state and local governments that exceed $25 million or 1% of annual 

revenues are considered “substantial.” The RIA for the proposed rule found these costs to be above the 

$25 million threshold but below the 1% threshold, and furthermore found that a substantial portion of 

these costs could be passed on to electricity consumers. However, because EPA found that there may be 
61

a substantial cost to state and local governments, EPA included a discussion of the Federalism impacts in 

the proposed rule and conducted consultations with the following “Big 10” entities:

 National Governors’ Association

 National Conference of Legislatures

 Council of State Governments

 National League of Cities

 U.S. Conference of Mayors

 National Association of Counties

 International City/County Management Association

 National Association of Towns and Townships

 County Executives of America

 Environmental Council of States

Costs to state and local governments have been revised in the 2014 RIA to account for the final regulatory 

option. These costs continue to be above $25 million and below 1% of revenues. 

With respect to state programs and the choice of a subtitle D final rule, EPA does not find these comments 

to be related to the analyses conducted in the RIA. However, further discussion on that issue is available 

in EPA’s Federal Register notice for the CCR final rule.

7.8 Consultation/Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments: EO 13175 

Comment Summary 

Commenters disagreed with EPA’s finding that Executive Order 13175 does not apply to 

this rulemaking on the grounds that while tribes did not own the affected entities, tribal 

lands could be affected. Documentation was also submitted about specific instances where 

tribes alleged such effects. As a result, commenters requested that EPA consult with tribes. 

Finally, commenters requested that EPA not issue a subtitle D rule due to problems with 

enforcement on tribal lands.

EPA Response

EPA disagrees that Executive Order 13175 was violated. As pointed out by commenters, no affected 

entities (i.e., electric utility plants) are owned by tribes. Furthermore, the fact that independent third-parties 

are affecting tribal lands is not a result of EPA’s proposed CCR rule, but instead will be ameliorated by 

its implementation. 
62

With respect to consultation, Executive Order 13175 does not require consultation. While EPA has 

released a guidance concerning tribal consultation, this was not finalized at the time of the June 2010 

proposed rule, and thus it would not have been applicable.

With respect to issues relating to enforcement and the choice of a subtitle D rule, these are not related to 

the RIA. However, further discussion on that issue is available in EPA’s Federal Register notice for the 

CCR final rule.

7.9 Other Comments on Supplemental Analyses 

Comment Summary 

Several commenters suggest that EPA consider the effects of the rule on jobs, productivity, 

and competitiveness. Two commenters specifically find that EPA’s failure to conduct a 

jobs evaluation for the proposed rule was improper. Another commenter disagrees that 

such an analysis was required in this instance.

EPA Response

EPA does not agree with the comments suggesting that a jobs analysis should have been conducted for 

the proposed rule. As pointed out by the environmental commenters, 42 U.S.C. § 6966(e) does not 

explicitly require jobs analysis of proposed rules as suggested by one of the industry commenters. 

Furthermore, the fact that alternative cost estimates suggested by the commenter may have triggered a 

jobs analysis by exceeding 0.25% of GDP does not change the fact that EPA’s best estimate of the costs 

associated with the highest cost regulatory option of the 2010 proposed rule was below this threshold. 

Thus, EPA properly did not evaluate jobs, productivity, and competitiveness. Although EPA did not 

evaluate the job impacts of the 2010 proposed rule, EPA conducted a semi-quantitative jobs analysis for 

the CCR final rule which has been included as Appendix X of the 2014 RIA to further address 

commenters’ concerns.
63

8.0References

NERC (North American Electric Reliability Corporation). 2010. Special Reliability Scenario Assesment: 

Potential Resource Adequacy Impacts of U.S. Environmental Regulations. Princeton, NJ 08540. 

October 5. Available online at: www.poweracrosstexas.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/NERCEPA-Scenario.pdf

U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2006. EPA’s Action Development Process. Final 

Guidance for EPA Rulewriters: Regulatory Flexibility Act as amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. Washington, DC. November 30. Available online at: 

www.epa.gov/rfa/documents/Guidance-RegFlexAct.pdf