t is easy to get frustrated with “pendulum swinging” CCR Regulations because we have seen this playbook before … with very limited results.

The EPA announced it’s prioritizing a number of timely actions on coal ash, including state permit program reviews and updates to the coal ash regulations. The Agency plans to work with state partners to place implementation of the coal ash regulations more fully into state hands, which will allow those with local expertise to oversee more effective coal ash disposal operations. State partners are encouraged to pursue oversight of coal ash management within their borders.

Unfortunately, pollution is a survivor and will outlast all arguments at the federal, state and local levels. Over the years these “risk-based” arguments have gone away from science and become predominantly political. As the EPA moves away from solving these arguments, pushing decisions down to the states, will there be more consent orders (solutions) or a continuation of legal battles. At least there should be a middle path established that can transcend past next round of administrations.

Another paradigm shift for CCR Regulations is underway. To have better results this time around all stakeholders must reach a compromise and get this mass clean-up underway. Let science and innovation lead this shift.

Because coal ash’s peak contamination levels aren’t reached until well over half a century, ignoring the cleanup process will dramatically increase the problem. Pollution from waste deposits will outlast any administration.

Pushing the regulatory decisions down to the states does not mean the pollution will be cleaned up appropriately. A mandate must be present to deal with this pollution and survive the last long pass state political and state agency staffing changes. Instead of lawsuits, state mandates backed up by science.

EPA’s main problem is NOT that there are too many CCR Regulations on the books, but rather there is no clear mechanism for compromise for all stakeholders within the regulations. Unfortunately, the EPA’s guidance documents, which are typically the way in which a regulatory body can manage regulations, lack a settlement mechanism.

The whole overarching point of the EPA CCR Regulations is that groundwater contamination and the movement of that contamination needs to be stopped. However, the way in which the rules and guide documents were written, even if an unlined site has non-moving ground water contamination, the entire site will have to be excavated (clean closed).

The EPA should concentrate on providing settlement mechanisms (guidance documents) that allow for the mitigation of future ground water risks through power companies plans; approved as consent orders by the State(s).

A coalition of U.S. power companies is demanding “immediate action” from the Trump administration to roll back federal regulation of coal ash and rescind recent enforcement actions.

What is telling about this request is that Duke Energy, the company presently in the largest remediation project in US history, is the first signature on the letter. When a company like Duke is demanding regulatory clarity, it has become evident of a stalemate between the prior administration and utilities companies existed.

Some parts of the signed letter like “beneficial uses of CCR” and the use of “revise” guideline documents is especially revealing. Clearly, all signatories in this letter are looking for a mechanism for a compromise to solve their issues and move on to other “hot” issues.

Science has Answered the Call

Scientific research is starting to yield results. Based on some early articles, which states “researchers have developed a new type of “green concrete” that incorporates twice as much recycled coal ash as existing low-carbon concretes, halves the amount of cement required, and lasts even longer than regular Portland cement concrete”.

Therefore, with the right safeSTORAGE® most of the excavated coal ash to be recycled.

EnCAP-IT has Answered the Call

EnCAP-IT has integrated its intellectual properties into its eMSE Structure designs (TOOLS) that:

• Isolates CCR 100% from the environment, preventing water infiltration and the leaching of metals
• Utilizes CCR in embankments, berms, engineered structural fills and other construction applications
• Maximizes environmental safeguards

• safeBERM® Construction Method to Create Bi-Directional Hydrostatic Barrier
• safeSTORAGE® Construction Method to Maximize Capacity for Coal Ash Beneficiation Storage
• safeBERM® Construction Method to Strengthen a Sloped Structure
• safeBERM® Construction Method to Create Flood Control Prevention
• safeSTORAGE® Construction Method to Reduce Ash Basin Retrofit Footprint
• safeBERM® Construction Method to Expand Landfill Capacity