Coal Combustion Waste Management at - DOE - Fossil Energy ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

S-2 the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA), the American Public Power Association (APPA), and the American Gas Association (AGA). EEI is the principal national association of investor-owned electric power and light companies. NRECA is the national association of rural electric cooperatives. APPA is the national association of publicly owned electric utilities. AGA is the national association of natural gas utilities. Together, USWAG member companies and trade associations represent more than 85% of the total electric generating capacity of the United States and service more than 95% of the nation’s consumers of electricity. To verify the survey findings, the EPA also asked State regulators from nine selected States that are leading consumers of coal for electricity generation for information on disposal units that may not have been covered in the USWAG survey. The selected States were Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, and Texas. A total of 56 waste units were identified, and information from these units 1 formed the basis for the analysis of recent and current surface disposal management practices. Table S-1 summarizes the numbers of units for the various categories covered in this study. The total number of CCW disposal units permitted, built, or laterally expanded between January 1, 1994, and December 31, 2004 (“new units”) is not known, as no industry organization or government agency tracks this information. However, by using coal-fired power plant generating capacity as a proxy for calculating sample coverage, we estimate that the 56 units on which the analysis is based represent at least 63% of the total universe of new or expanded TABLE S-1 CCW Units in Study Unit Category as Defined in This Study Description Surveyed Identified in December 2004 USWAG survey Nonsurveyed Identified by the EPA Identified Sum of surveyed and nonsurveyed units Supplemental a Identified in 2006 USWAG follow-up Total Sum of identified and supplemental units Questionnaire Sent and Returned Landfill Yes 29 Number Surface Impoundment Total 16 45 No 9 2 11 45 yes 11 no 38 18 56 No 4 2 6 45 yes 42 20 62 a Supplemental units were identified in a 2006 USWAG follow-up to identify any units that were not reported in the 2004 survey. The supplemental units were not included in the analysis. 1 Identified units included 45 surveyed units, or units that returned the questionnaires, and 11 nonsurveyed units, or units that resulted from the EPA investigation (no complete questionnaires).
S-3 disposal units. In addition, a January 2006 follow-up identified six supplemental disposal units from four utilities that had not responded to the December 2004 survey. Adding the capacities of these utilities to the total brings the response rate up to 71%, using the capacity proxy. This is a conservative estimate for the following reasons: (1) the actual coal-fired power plant capacity requiring CCW disposal capacity is much less than the generating capacity that was used to calculate the sample coverage rate; (2) the total U.S. coal-fired power plant capacity (335.2 GW in 2004) includes those power plants that are on standby and produce neither power nor CCWs; (3) a significant portion (between 35% and 40%, according to different sources) of CCWs are beneficially used, thus requiring no disposal in waste units; and (4) because less than 3% of the total coal-fired generating capacity has been added during the period that closely corresponds to the survey period, new disposal capacity would be required for only a small portion of the total generating capacity. For the State regulatory analysis, our initial objective was to compare current CCWrelated regulatory requirements with comparable information from earlier reports. It was evident from the outset, however, that a nationwide study of the CCW regulations and their chronological changes in the States that have coal-fired generating capacity would not be feasible under the time and resource constraints of this study. Therefore, an alternative approach was undertaken, namely reviewing the current regulatory programs applicable to CCWs in States that contain units of one or more of the following types and comparing the results with corresponding information from earlier reports: (1) new CCW disposal units (i.e., those permitted, constructed, or laterally expanded between 1994 and 2004) and (2) units that are the basis of proven, potential, or alleged damage cases. 2 Of the 26 States identified as meeting the selection criteria, a pilot study involving five States (Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Virginia, and Wisconsin) was conducted to determine whether it would be feasible, within the established budget and schedule constraints, to collect enough data for all 26 States to allow comparisons of current regulatory requirements with comparable information from earlier reports and identify changes. Information collected during the pilot study covered the following categories of regulatory control: Regulatory designation of CCWs for disposal, Permitting requirements, Liner requirements, 2 In comments to the EPA, public interest groups have identified cases in which they allege that damage to human health or the environment was caused by fossil-fuel-combustion waste management units. As of May 2006, 86 of the alleged damage cases have been investigated by the EPA to verify the existence and cause of the damage. As defined in the 1999 RTC, proven damage cases are those with exceedences of primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or other health-based standards in groundwater or surface water off-site or at a distance from the waste management unit sufficient to conclude that they could cause human health concerns, while potential damage cases are those with (1) documented exceedences of primary MCLs or other health-based standards on-site or beneath or close to the waste source, and/or (2) documented exceedences of secondary MCLs or other non-health-based standards on-site or off-site.
Page 5: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to
Page 8 and 9: CONTENTS (Cont.) 3.1.9 Testing for
Page 10 and 11: TABLES (Cont.) 7 Trends in Construc
Page 12 and 13: TABLES (Cont.) A.14 Chronological C
Page 14 and 15: xii
Page 16 and 17: MCL maximum contaminant level MoDNR
Page 18 and 19: xvi
Page 22 and 23: S-4 Groundwater-monitoring requirem
Page 24 and 25: S-6 receives only material that the
Page 26 and 27: TABLE S-2 Summary Results from Chro
Page 28 and 29: S-10 − In the area of groundwater
Page 30 and 31: S-12
Page 32 and 33: 2 Air heater and precipitator wash
Page 34 and 35: 4 wastes, and 17% were bottom ash.
Page 36 and 37: TABLE 1 (Cont.) State a Total CCWs
Page 38 and 39: 8 The remainder of this report cont
Page 40 and 41: 10 (NRECA) and the American Public
Page 42 and 43: 12 Information collected during the
Page 44 and 45: 14 − Type of variance (e.g., clos
Page 46 and 47: 16 potential duplication with the s
Page 48 and 49: TABLE 2 (Cont.) ID a Unit Name 18 S
Page 50 and 51: 20 Because new power plants built d
Page 52 and 53: 22 the number of new and expanded u
Page 54 and 55: 24 TABLE 7 Trends in Construction C
Page 56 and 57: 26 TABLE 8 Percentages of Wastes Di
Page 58 and 59: 28 TABLE 9 Numbers and Types of Per
Page 60 and 61: TABLE 11 Liner and Groundwater-Moni
Page 62 and 63: FIGURE 2 Liners in Identified New o
Page 64 and 65: 34 FIGURE 4 Liner Types Reported fo
Page 66 and 67: 36 Constituents monitored. Landfill
Page 68 and 69: 38 impoundments). The analysis does
Page 70 and 71:
40 (Class I) wastes for which no li
Page 72 and 73:
42 States (Alabama, Florida, Georgi
Page 74 and 75:
44 TABLE 20 Solid Waste Permitting
Page 76 and 77:
46 United States in 2004. The one S
Page 78 and 79:
3.2.2 Findings 48 Table 22 summariz
Page 80 and 81:
TABLE 22 (Cont.) Category of Regula
Page 82 and 83:
52 the surveyed units was conducted
Page 84 and 85:
TABLE 23 Variance Requests and Disp
Page 86 and 87:
56 request, the State regulatory ag
Page 88 and 89:
TABLE 26 Variance Requests by Surve
Page 90 and 91:
TABLE 27 (Cont.) Variance Request S
Page 92 and 93:
62 variance. However, the State (Vi
Page 94 and 95:
TABLE 28 (Cont.) Variance Request S
Page 96 and 97:
TABLE 29 Variance Requests by Surve
Page 99 and 100:
69 5 REFERENCES ACAA 2004 American
Page 101 and 102:
A-1 APPENDIX A: STATE-SPECIFIC REGU
Page 103 and 104:
A.1 APPROACH A-3 APPENDIX A: STATE-
Page 105 and 106:
A-5 For each State reviewed, an eff
Page 107 and 108:
TABLE A.2 Summary of Regulatory Des
Page 109 and 110:
A-9 addition, the regulations in Al
Page 111 and 112:
TABLE A.3 Chronological Comparison
Page 113 and 114:
A-13 A disposal facility in Indiana
Page 115 and 116:
TABLE A.4 Permits Required for CCW
Page 117 and 118:
TABLE A.4 (Cont.) a The pilot study
Page 119 and 120:
A-19 landfills. Otherwise, surface
Page 121 and 122:
TABLE A.5 (Cont.) a “On-site” m
Page 123 and 124:
A-23 groundwater and surface water
Page 125 and 126:
A-25 discharge), the facility may s
Page 127 and 128:
A-27 Wisconsin—Wisconsin designat
Page 129 and 130:
TABLE A.6 (Cont.) State a Illinois
Page 131 and 132:
TABLE A.6 (Cont.) State a Landfills
Page 133 and 134:
TABLE A.6 (Cont.) State a Landfills
Page 135 and 136:
TABLE A.7 Chronological Comparison
Page 137 and 138:
TABLE A.7 (Cont.) State EPA 1988 EP
Page 139 and 140:
A-39 Illinois—In Illinois, landfi
Page 141 and 142:
A-41 The design standards for utili
Page 143 and 144:
A-43 According to Technical Guideli
Page 145 and 146:
TABLE A.13 Summary of Groundwater-M
Page 147 and 148:
TABLE A.13 (Cont.) State a Groundwa
Page 149 and 150:
A-49 such as a commercial industria
Page 151 and 152:
A-51 The Indiana regulations do not
Page 153 and 154:
A-53 developed guidance documents,
Page 155 and 156:
A-55 groundwater. Table A.15 summar
Page 157 and 158:
TABLE A.15 (Cont.) State Leachate-C
Page 159 and 160:
A-59 TABLE A.16 Chronological Compa
Page 161 and 162:
A-61 quality standards, or otherwis
Page 163 and 164:
A-63 A.7 CLOSURE/POST-CLOSURE REQUI
Page 165 and 166:
TABLE A.17 (Cont.) State Closure/Po
Page 167 and 168:
A-67 Type III restricted waste site
Page 169 and 170:
TABLE A.19 Summary of Corrective Ac
Page 171 and 172:
A-71 the plume (329 IAC 10-29-9). T
Page 173 and 174:
TABLE A.20 Summary of Siting Contro
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
A-77 The Virginia regulations speci
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
TABLE A.24 Summary of Additional In
Page 183 and 184:
A.12 FINDINGS A-83 Table A.26 summa
Page 185 and 186:
TABLE A.26 (Cont.) States with Chan
Page 187 and 188:
TABLE A.26 (Cont.) Description of C
Page 189 and 190:
A-89 TABLE A.27 Summary of States w
Page 191 and 192:
B-1 APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR N
Page 193 and 194:
B-3 APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR N
Page 195 and 196:
Compacted ash Compacted in-situ soi
Page 197 and 198:
7.0 Monitoring B-7 7.1 Is groundwat
Page 199 and 200:
C-1 APPENDIX C: SURVEY RESPONSE RAT
Page 201 and 202:
C-3 APPENDIX C: SURVEY RESPONSE RAT
Page 203 and 204:
C-5 USWAG asked for a response from
Page 205 and 206:
C-7 nonsurveyed units). The capacit
Page 207 and 208:
D-1 APPENDIX D: RECONCILIATION OF U
Page 209 and 210:
TABLE D.1 Reconciliation of Units I
Page 211 and 212:
E-1 APPENDIX E: UNIT COMPLETION DAT
Page 213 and 214:
TABLE E.1 Trends in Unit Completion
Page 215 and 216:
F-1 APPENDIX F: MATERIALS DISPOSED
Page 217 and 218:
TABLE F.1 Materials Disposed of at
Page 219 and 220:
TABLE F.1 (Cont.) Coal Bottom Ash (
Page 221 and 222:
TABLE F.1 (Cont.) Coal Other Unit C
Page 223 and 224:
G-1 APPENDIX G: PERMITS ISSUED FOR
Page 225 and 226:
TABLE G.1 Permits Issued for Survey
Page 227 and 228:
TABLE G.1 (Cont.) Unit ID State Typ
Page 229 and 230:
H-1 APPENDIX H: LINER DATA
Page 231 and 232:
TABLE H.1 Liner Data Unit Is Unit N
Page 233 and 234:
TABLE H.1 (Cont.) Unit Is Unit New
Page 235 and 236:
TABLE H.1 (Cont.) Unit Is Unit New
Page 237 and 238:
I-1 APPENDIX I: GROUNDWATER-MONITOR
Page 239 and 240:
TABLE I.1 Groundwater-Monitoring Da
Page 241 and 242:
TABLE I.1 (Cont.) ID GWM Conducted
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
J-1 APPENDIX J: VARIANCE REQUESTS B
Page 249 and 250:
TABLE J.1 Variance Requests by Stat
Page 251 and 252:
K-1 APPENDIX K: VARIANCE REQUEST DE
Page 253 and 254:
TABLE K.1 Variance Request Descript
Page 255 and 256:
TABLE K.1 (Cont.) Variance Variance
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
TABLE K.1 (Cont.) ID State Granted
Page 265 and 266:
L-1 APPENDIX L: VARIANCE GRANTING R
Page 267 and 268:
TABLE L.1 Variance Granting Rationa
Page 269 and 270:
TABLE L.1 (Cont.) ID State Variance
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
show all

Coal Combustion Waste Management at - DOE - Fossil Energy ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?