Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities; Federal CCR Permit Program

American Electric Power (AEP), a large electric utility, supports the EPA's proposed federal CCR permit program. They advocate for specific modifications including permits without expiration dates, exemptions for immediate response activities, and extended deadlines for submitting technical data for site-specific closure alternatives.

The commenter opposes the proposed Federal CCR Permit Program as currently structured, specifically arguing against reducing the first-tier permit application deadline from 18 months to six months. They also advocate for prioritizing permits based on environmental risk and community vulnerability rather than state administrative choices, and they strongly support mandatory federal database participation for all CCR authorities.

The Large Public Power Council (LPPC), an association of 29 large public power systems, supports the establishment of a federal CCR permit program but argues against shortening the permit application deadline from 18 months to six months. They advocate for a "concurrence process" to allow for site-specific, risk-based performance standards as a practical bridge to future permitting programs.

An individual commenter supports the action by advocating for the phase-out of fossil fuels due to health concerns regarding coal combustion residuals. They also express strong political opposition to the current administration.

The commenter opposes the proposed Federal CCR Permit Program in its current form, specifically arguing against reducing the permit application deadline from 18 months to six months. They also advocate for prioritizing sites based on documented environmental risks rather than state administrative choices and demand mandatory participation in the federal RCRAInfo database for all state-issued permits to ensure public accountability.

Nancy Moldenhauer, a Michigan City Councilperson, requests that the EPA maintain strict coal ash clean-up requirements for legacy plants. She expresses concern that leaving coal ash behind at the decommissioned NIPSCO plant would harm the health of local residents.

Samantha Baker, a community organizer, opposes the proposed Federal CCR Permit Program as currently structured, specifically arguing against shortening the permit application deadline and prioritizing sites based on state administrative preferences. She advocates for a longer 18-month deadline, prioritizing sites based on documented health and environmental risks, and mandates that all state permit data be entered into a centralized, publicly accessible federal database.

An individual expresses opposition to the proposed action based on personal health concerns regarding coal combustion residuals. They claim that living near a coal-burning plant led to multi-generational cancer and asthma in their family.

The commenter opposes the proposed Federal CCR Permit Program in its current form, specifically arguing against shortening the permit application deadline from 18 months to six months and against prioritizing sites based on state preferences. They advocate for prioritizing sites based on documented health and environmental risks and strongly support mandatory participation in the federal RCRAInfo database for all state CCR permit authorities.

A retired teacher and concerned citizen from Indiana supports the proposed action, urging the EPA to require the prompt and safe removal of coal ash ponds. The commenter highlights the severe environmental and public health issues in southwestern Indiana, advocating for polluters to bear the costs of cleanup.