Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category: Unmanaged Combustion Residual Leachate

Chief Pomaj-chakmam-yajalaji, representing the ARH TRUST and the Tuscarora Onkwehone Nations People, opposes the proposed rollback of wastewater pollution standards for coal-fired power plants. The commenter argues that weakening these limits threatens public health, environmental justice, and Indigenous stewardship by allowing toxic pollutants like mercury and arsenic to contaminate water systems.

Chad Reiber, a private individual, opposes the proposed rule to weaken wastewater pollution standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category. He argues that the rollback would allow coal plants to release hundreds of millions of pounds of toxic pollutants, such as arsenic and mercury, into U.S. waterways, posing significant health risks.

The commenter opposes the proposed action, arguing that it facilitates the continued use of outdated and polluting coal industries. They advocate for a transition to renewable energy and express concern over the environmental and economic damages caused by fossil fuel production and deregulation.

Myste Montesano opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it shifts the costs of cleaning up coal-fire tail waters onto low-income communities. The commenter claims the rule allows oil and gas companies to continue polluting water supplies with carcinogenic substances like arsenic to save money.

Dawn Knutson, a private citizen, opposes the proposed rule because she believes it weakens wastewater pollution standards for coal-fired power plants. She argues that the rule will allow toxic pollutants like arsenic and mercury to enter drinking water, posing significant health risks to nearby communities.

PPL Corporation supports the EPA's proposed Option 1 for numerical limits on mercury and arsenic for unmanaged combustion residual leachate and the proposed clarifications regarding retired plants and closed waste management units. However, the company strongly opposes the 2024 Effluent Limitations Guideline (ELG) rule, arguing that zero-liquid discharge (ZLD) technologies are neither technically feasible nor economically achievable for most coal-fired units.

The Environmental Protection Network (EPN) opposes the proposed rule to exempt coal-fired power plants from mercury and arsenic discharge limits for unmanaged combustion residual leachate (CRL). They argue that the EPA's rationale regarding economic unachievability is based on speculative assumptions, fails to account for the benefits of pollution reduction, and creates regulatory inconsistencies with other coal ash programs.

The Iowa Environmental Council (IEC) advocates for the adoption of Option 3 in the proposed revisions to effluent guidelines for unmanaged combustion residual leachate. They argue that Option 3 is the only choice that aligns with the Clean Water Act and provides necessary protections for public health and water quality by requiring zero-discharge limits.

The Sierra Club, submitting on behalf of nearly 600 members and supporters, opposes the EPA's proposal to allow coal-fired power plants to delay compliance with 2024 Effluent Limitations Guidelines. They argue that the proposal would allow continued toxic pollution and heavy metals to enter waterways, harming public health and the environment.

Clean Water Action, representing a coalition of 64 national, state, and local public interest organizations, opposes the EPA's proposal to weaken the 2024 Effluent Limitations Guidelines for Steam Electric Power Plants. They argue that the proposal would allow coal plants to release significant amounts of toxic pollutants into waterways, threatening public health, drinking water safety, and critical habitats for endangered species.