Comment submitted by Gloria Fooks
AnonymousOpposeOther
Summary: The commenter opposes the proposal, arguing that it weakens environmental justice by allowing site-specific permitting to lower cleanup standards for coal ash. They contend that the proposal shifts remediation costs to taxpayers and disproportionately harms working-class and minority communities.
The communities bearing the greatest burden of this proposal are working class communities and communities of color, who are disproportionately located near coal ash disposal sites and have the fewest resources to respond.
These families cannot afford to move away, cannot afford indefinite bottled water, and have no seat at the table when site-specific permits are privately negotiated between utilities and state or federal agencies.
Weakening corrective action cleanup levels through site-specific permitting means some communities will be left with contaminated groundwater that falls below federal safe thresholds – simply by regulatory redefinition.
Environmental justice demands that national health standards apply equally, regardless of zip code or proximity to a power plant. This proposal moves in the opposite direction.
Delaying or eliminating cleanup requirements does not eliminate the contamination — it shifts the long-term remediation cost onto taxpayers and onto the communities least able to absorb it.
Delay in cleaning up coal ash contamination makes the contamination worse and harder – or even impossible – to clean up.
Allowing coal plants to leave toxic waste in groundwater guarantees a nearly permanent source of hazardous water pollution.