Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities; Legacy/CCRMU Amendments; Public Hearing
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities; Legacy/CCRMU Amendments; Public Hearing
Federal Register for Monday, April 13, 2026 (91 FR 18968) [FRL-7814.3-01-OLEM]
- Posted
- Apr 13, 2026
- Comment period
- Apr 13, 2026 – Jun 30, 2026
- FR Doc
- 2026-07061
- CFR
- 40 CFR Part 257
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Position map
Who stands where on each issue?
Every non-silent position is backed by an excerpt from the comment.
Issues shown
Uncheck an issue to choose another.
| Organization | Coal ash regulation rollback | Weakening environmental protections | Coal ash cleanup standards | Closure timeframe criteria | Coal ash storage and transport |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Comite Dialogo Ambiental AdvocacyOppose Ruth Santiago, a lawyer for the advocacy group Comite Dialogo Ambiental, opposes the proposed CCR rule amendments becaus | · | · | · | ||
Downstream Strategies AdvocacyOppose Downstream Strategies, representing a coalition of environmental groups, opposes the proposed rollback of federal regula | · | · | |||
Environmental Integrity Project, Sierra Club, Southern Environmental Law Center, Altamaha Riverkeeper, Chattahoochee Riverkeeper, Clean Power Lake County, Comite Diálogo Ambiental, Coosa River Basin I AdvocacyOppose A coalition of environmental advocacy organizations opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it weakens protections for c | · | · | |||
League of Women Voters of Indiana AdvocacySupport Cheryl Chapman, representing the League of Women Voters of Indiana, supports the 2015 and 2024 CCR rules to ensure the s | · | · | |||
The Alliance for Appalachia AdvocacyOppose The Alliance for Appalachia, a coalition of 24 organizations, opposes the proposed rule changes regarding coal combustio | · | · |
70 organization-typed comments could not be identified.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- Jun 29, 2026Comment submitted by Earthjustice et al.SupportAdvocacy📎 Attachment
Earthjustice submitted a set of attachments to the EPA supporting the proposed rule on coal ash disposal. The submission includes data on EPA-confirmed coal ash reuse damage cases and environmental justice data to highlight the risks associated with coal ash.
Read comment → - Jun 29, 2026Comment submitted by Young, Gifted & GreenOpposeAdvocacy📎 Attachment
Young, Gifted & Green, a civil rights and environmental justice organization, opposes the proposed Legacy/CCRMU Amendments because they would loosen closure and monitoring standards for contaminated coal ash sites. They argue the proposal shifts cleanup costs from polluters to the public and fails to address documented health risks and environmental justice concerns.
Read comment → - Jun 11, 2026Comment submitted by Christina DunbarOpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jun 11, 2026Comment submitted by Will BranchOpposeIndividual
An individual from Appalachia opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it will lead to more environmental abuses and prioritize corporate profit over the safety of local communities and taxpayers.
Read comment → - Jun 10, 2026Comment submitted by Gene AmmarellOpposeIndividual
An individual resident of Athens, Ohio, opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it would further endanger the health of neighbors in Appalachia who are disproportionately affected by coal ash sites.
Read comment → - Jun 8, 2026Comment submitted by Charles WagnerOtherIndividual
The commenter expresses a general sentiment regarding environmental protection and wealth inequality but does not take a specific position on the proposed action regarding the disposal of coal combustion residuals.
Read comment → - Jun 8, 2026Comment submitted by United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)OpposeAdvocacy📎 Attachment
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops opposes the proposed rule because it favors regulatory flexibility over federal minimum standards, which they argue shifts environmental risks onto vulnerable communities and future generations. They urge the EPA to maintain robust federal oversight, limit closure deferrals, and preserve existing requirements for "beneficial use" to prevent unregulated disposal.
Read comment → - Jun 5, 2026Comment submitted by Abigail SchwartzSupportIndividualRead comment →
- May 30, 2026Comment submitted by Dan ClarkOpposeIndividualRead comment →
- May 29, 2026Mass Comment Campaign sponsoring organization unknown (web)OpposeIndividual
A private resident expresses concern over the health and environmental risks posed by coal ash, specifically highlighting its impact on low-income communities and communities of color. They argue that the proposed action would roll back federal protections and urge the EPA to reject the proposal and ensure all coal ash is cleaned up.
Read comment →
