Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category: Unmanaged Combustion Residual Leachate
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category: Unmanaged Combustion Residual Leachate
Federal Register for Monday, May 18, 2026 (91 FR 28487) [FRL-8794.2-01-OW]
- Posted
- May 18, 2026
- Comment period
- May 18, 2026 – Jun 18, 2026
- FR Doc
- 2026-09895
- CFR
- 40 CFR Part 423
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 leachate safety | Data center regulation | Oppose deregulation of effluent limits | Procedural and substantive concerns | Public health and water costs |
|---|
33 organization-typed comments could not be identified.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- Jun 17, 2026Comment submitted by Attorneys General of Illinois, et al.OpposeGovernment📎 Attachment
The Attorneys General of Illinois, Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, and New Mexico oppose the proposal to shift the responsibility for determining best available technology (BAT) for unmanaged combustion residual leachate from the EPA to individual state regulators. They argue that the proposal weakens national water quality standards, imposes an undue administrative burden on states, and improperly allows for the consideration of data center development in environmental permitting.
Read comment → - Jun 16, 2026Comment submitted by Laura GeorgiOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it relaxes antipollution regulations for the dirtiest coal plants and fails to account for the true costs of health and environmental damage. They advocate for stricter regulations that hold utilities responsible for cleaning up toxic pollutants and encourage energy efficiency.
Read comment → - May 23, 2026Comment submitted by Kelly HartmanSupportIndividual
The commenter opposes the deregulation of data centers and argues that the government should prioritize public health and environmental protections over corporate profits. They advocate for stricter regulations on the environmental impact of data centers rather than the proposed reduction in protections.
Read comment → - May 22, 2026Comment submitted by TerryAnn Towers Saint AmandOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the proposed revisions to wastewater discharge requirements for unmanaged combustion residual leachate, arguing that they weaken long-term water protections and create regulatory loopholes. They advocate for maintaining robust treatment standards, rigorous cumulative-impact analysis, and enforceable monitoring to protect groundwater and downstream communities from contaminants like arsenic and mercury.
Read comment → - May 21, 2026Comment submitted by Gail LandyOpposeIndividual
Gail Landy, a private resident, opposes the proposed rule because she believes it weakens wastewater pollution standards and allows the coal industry to avoid cleaning up toxic leachate. She argues that the EPA should withdraw the proposal and instead focus on retiring coal plants in favor of cleaner energy sources like solar and wind.
Read comment →
