Comment submitted by 22 Designs

I am submitting this comment to oppose the proposed Federal CCR Permit Program, docket EPA-HQ-OLEM-2019-0361, in its current form. This program will determine permit processes for most states across the nation, with only four having EPA-approved programs. The setup of the federal program, including its deadlines and criteria, will influence how the leniency in the April rollback impacts real-world protections. The EPA's questions during this comment period are crucial for public health. The EPA is considering reducing the first-tier permit application deadline from 18 months to six months after the rule's effective date. I oppose this reduction. The proposed amendments for April 2026 demand complex, site-specific analyses for groundwater monitoring, cleanup levels, and closure timelines. These applications necessitate extensive analysis and site-specific risk assessments taking a year or more. A six-month deadline will lead to incomplete applications, increasing discretionary permit authority, usually benefiting operators over communities. The 18-month deadline should remain. The EPA is considering which facilities should submit applications first, suggesting priority for CCR units in states not pursuing their own program approval. I oppose using state administrative preferences for tiering criteria. States opting out typically lack robust regulatory frameworks and political will to protect residents from coal ash contamination. Prioritizing these sites under compressed timelines does not safeguard at-risk communities. Criteria should focus on human health and environmental risks: sites with confirmed groundwater contamination, those near communities without alternative drinking water, and legacy sites lacking federal oversight should be prioritized. EPA should base decisions on contamination risk and community vulnerability. The EPA is considering whether states running their own CCR programs should input permit data into the EPA's centralized RCRAInfo or maintain separate systems. I strongly advocate for mandatory participation in the federal database for all CCR permit authorities. The 2020 proposed rule included a CCR module in RCRAInfo for federally issued permits. Extending this to state-issued permits is vital for public accountability and data consistency. Permit-level decisions will be crucial in coal ash management, and if inaccessible, communities and environmental groups cannot monitor protections or enforcement weaknesses. A centralized, publicly accessible database is essential for accountability. The EPA should ensure all state CCR programs participate. Communities near coal ash sites have awaited meaningful federal oversight for decades. This permit program must honor that need. Thank you.