On June 21, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency published a proposal to regulate coal combustion residuals (CCRs), including fly ash, under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA’s proposed regulations [full text of proposed regulation, summary of proposed regulation] would lead to stronger oversight of CCR impoundments, along with measures to prevent environmental damage and contamination of drinking water.
To encourage a robust dialogue on the most effective means to address the human health concerns and structural integrity issues associated with coal ash impoundments and landfills, the EPA has proposed two potential rules. Both options have advantages and disadvantages. EPA wants to ensure that the ultimate decision is based on the best available data and is taken with the fullest possible extent of public input.
The EPA proposal calls for public comment on the two options being considered. The first option is drawn from enforcement powers available under Subtitle C of the RCRA, and creates a comprehensive program of federally enforceable requirements for management and disposal of “Special wastes.” The other option includes remedies under Subtitle D of the RCRA, which gives the EPA the authority to set performance standards for waste management facilities and would be enforced primarily through citizen suits. [See comparison of two options.] Under both approaches proposed by the EPA, the agency would leave in place the Bevill exemption for beneficial uses of CCRs, in which CCRs are recycled as components of products (including concrete) instead of placed in impoundments or landfills.
Comments to the EPA must be received on or before September 20, 2010. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640, through one of the methods listed on www.regulations.gov.
The American Concrete Institute has a page on their web site with information and links compiled on Fly Ash and the proposed regulations. go to http://flyash.concrete.org.
Below are several Q & A’s copied from the EPA’s web site that are related to use of Fly Ash in the concrete and cement industries:
26. What does the May 4, 2010 proposal mean for the use of coal ash in highway applications?
EPA continues to support the use of coal ash in highway applications. The May 4, 2010 proposal does not affect the current practice of using coal ash beneficially in highway applications.
Top of Page
27. If concrete is made using coal ash, is the concrete a hazardous waste, when disposed at the end of its useful life?
Under the subtitle C proposal, coal ash destined for beneficial use would retain the current Bevill exemption, and so would not be subject to regulation under RCRA Subtitle C. Thus, coal ash used in concrete and other products would not fall within the scope of EPA's proposal to "list" coal ash, either during or after the useful life of the concrete product. When the concrete product is discarded at the end of its useful life, it would be treated the same as any other solid waste.
Top of Page
28. What does the May 4, 2010 proposed rule mean for the use of FGD gypsum in wallboard?
EPA strongly supports the use of FGD gypsum in wallboard. The proposed rule does not affect this use.