Impacts o
f CCR
Managem
ent
Audits and
How
Utilities are
Respon
ding
Jason Po
korny, PE
Steve Pu
trich, PE
2015
Wo
rld
of
Co
al A
sh (
WO
CA
) C
on
fere
nce
in N
asvh
ille,
TN
- M
ay 5
-7, 2
015
htt
p:/
/ww
w.f
lyas
h.in
fo/
2
1Final Rule Highlights
2Ho
w Utilities Have Prep
ared
3Au
dit O
verview & Lessons Learned
4What U
tilities are Doing
Key Po
ints
Final Rule Highlights
Final CCR
Rule
•For purpo
ses of th
is presentatio
n, we assume the grou
p has a
gen
eral to
de
tailed un
derstand
ing of th
e Final Rule
•The
Rule is complex and
has layers of interpretation
•Definition
s are key
•The
re are not definitive answers to all site
‐spe
cific sc
enarios
–Legal team sh
ould be integral to
process
–Falls back on
“recognize
d and gene
rally accep
ted good
engineerin
g practice” to
meet the
specified
requ
irements or top
ics that a
re m
ore vague
4
Site‐Spe
cific Nature of App
licability
•The
truth is, th
ere is no
t one
size fits all or one
right a
nswer –de
pend
s on
utility
risk to
lerance, m
anagem
ent strategies, and
managem
ent/bu
dget
•Spe
cific app
lications to
Rule requ
ire site‐spe
cific inform
ation, so
illustrations/examples, com
men
ts are not app
licable fo
r every site
•For an inform
ed answer, have to look
at site
‐spe
cific inform
ation that will
includ
e site cond
ition
s/siting issue
s:•History
•Geo
technical &
hydrogeology/GW con
ditio
ns,
•Surface water m
anagem
ent con
ditio
ns;
•Interrelationship with
other CCR
units on site;
•Plant o
peratio
nal plans; and
•Interplay/coordinatio
n with
other com
pliance standards
5
6
New
CCR Im
poun
dmen
ts, landfills/
land
fill lateral expansio
ns m
ust
demon
strate com
pliance prior to
placing CC
R materials.
Apr 2015
Oct 2015
Oct 2016
Oct 2017
Apr 2018
Oct 2018
What to Focus o
n Now
•Recon
figuring “Status D
esignatio
ns” of units/site
s
•Potentia
l Causal Trig
gers
–Stability
–Groun
dwater
–Sitin
g
•Internal Team and
Managem
ent
•Ultimately –Ke
eping Your Plant Ope
ratin
g
7
How Utilities Have Prep
ared
Wha
t is the
Spe
ctrum of U
tility
Activity
?
9
•Proa
ctive versus Reactiona
ry•Whe
re do I stand
? How
do I
compa
re to
the indu
stry?
Level of A
ctivity
Silos
•Tho
se th
at have be
en re
stricted (regulated
vs. de‐regulated)
•Tho
se th
at have moved
slow
–Available Bu
dget
–Limite
d Staff
–Managem
ent h
urdles
–Other Focuses (A
ir, etc)
•Tho
se th
at are aggressive
–De
veloping
internal m
anagem
ent p
rotocols
–Bu
y‐in from
Managem
ent
10
Restricted
Aggressive
Slow
What R
oadb
locks/Hurdles
are We Seeing?
•Internal Sched
ule, $$ Allocatio
n Und
er‐Bud
geted (fo
r 201
5/16
/17)
•Lack of utility
staff/resources
•Con
flicts w
ith State Permits/Program
s (e.g. we want to close no
w und
er
fede
ral, bu
t state has 12 to 18 mon
th lead
time to app
rove und
er its
perm
itting programs)
•Status D
esignatio
ns of Inactive and Second
ary/Tertiary Pon
ds
•Historic Im
poun
dments –Closed
, Idled
, Inactive
•Misc
onception that entire
state pe
rmitted
land
fill (with
portio
ns not
“existing”) m
eans th
e remaining
footprint n
ot im
pacted
by Ru
le
•Staging
Area Managem
ent –
being “con
tainerize
d”
11
Audits Overview and
Lessons Learned
Type
s of A
udits and
Purpo
se
13Programmatic Aud
its
•Outcome = De
term
ine whe
re to
focus
resources
Detailed Multim
edia Aud
its
•Outcome = Thorou
gh Preparatio
n, Strategy,
and Ab
ility to
Act
Compliance by
“Definition
”….from
the Bo
ttom
Up or Top
Dow
n, W
hat D
oes that M
ean or Loo
k Like?
3 STEP
S
•1st–Und
erstan
d the Ru
le: What d
oes it say, digest it, apply it
•2nd–Ap
ply the Ru
le:Iden
tify & aud
it for com
pliance ‐Every
know
n or poten
tially kno
wn CC
R un
it [In
ventory/Status
Desig
natio
ns, A
pplicability]
14
Compliance by
“Definition
”….from
the Bo
ttom
Up or Top
Dow
n, W
hat D
oes that M
ean or Loo
k Like?
•3rd–Strategic Plan
ning
and
Action
Yes–
Status Quo
may be fin
e
No–What d
o we have to
do “To Co
mply”
Maybe
/Never
‐the
answer to
“what if w
e can’t com
ply”, or “if the
cost is to
o high”, or “we do
n’t h
ave en
ough
time”, or “it do
esn’t
mesh with
the rest of o
ur overall CC
R plan”, or if we did “w
e’d
have to
make a dracon
ian change/shu
t‐do
wn”
Alternate and/or Sup
porting Co
mpliance Strategies?
15
What can
you
do by th
e Effective Da
te?
•De
term
ine what u
nits are exempt/regulated
•An
y po
tential closure triggers you
can
add
ress?
•“Lined
” vs. U
nlined
Impo
undm
ent?
•CC
R Piles v
s. CCR
“Staging Areas”
•Proactive constructio
n or closure activities
•Groun
dwater M
onito
ring Program –Prelim
inary Und
erstanding
•Do
cumen
tatio
n de
velopm
ent / PE certificatio
ns–Web
site and protocols
16
Stability?
Compliance De
mon
stratio
ns•W
hat to focus o
n:
–First, Du
st Con
trol Plan
•Need to find
metho
d to “e
mplace CC
R as con
ditio
ns” or che
mical dust sup
pressio
n agents?
•May re
quire
time to im
plem
ent o
peratio
nal changes prio
r to Effective Da
te
–Po
tential causal trig
gers
•Structural Integrity
Assessm
ents
–Ab
ility to
Retrofit to
meet FS?
–Otherwise
, a definitive answer to
und
erstand ne
ed fo
r alte
rnative managem
ent (dry conversio
n, new
unit)
•Sitin
g–Need tim
e to develop
alte
rnative path?
–Need tim
e to determine if you can resolve?
17
Compliance De
mon
stratio
ns•W
hy Early?
–De
velop process for:
•Internal re
view
–Give tim
e for layers o
f internal review/com
ment
–Legal
–Branding
of u
nits
–Nam
ing conventio
ns•External re
view
–Gives te
am buy‐in
that re
sults are correct
–Co
nsisten
cy–Manage level of aggression or con
servatism
–Alternate compliance standards
18
Internal Ju
stificatio
ns fo
r Exempting Units
•Since Rule is self‐im
plem
entin
g, develop
a basis for w
hy you
are
exem
pting a un
it–“Closed” im
poun
dment
–Inactive Im
poun
dments
–Staging Areas instead
of C
CR Piles
•Don
’t wait for outsid
e EN
GO to
inqu
ire
•Develop
s a com
mon
und
erstanding
internally
–Co
mmon
talking po
ints and
und
erstanding
for a
ll layers of o
rganiza
tion
•Not intend
ed to
be placed
on pu
blic web
site (in
back po
cket)
19
So W
hat A
re Utilities Doing?
‐Status Designatio
ns‐
Land
fill Expansio
ns‐
Staging Areas
‐Groun
dwater
‐Da
ta M
anagem
ent
Defin
ing An
Impo
undm
ent’s “Status Designatio
n”•Ha
s it a
lready be
en closed?
•Was it designe
d to re
ceive CC
Rs?
–De
term
ines: C
CR or N
on‐CCR
Impo
undm
ent
•If CC
R Im
poun
dment, do
es it and
/or w
ill it con
tinue
to re
ceive CC
Rs after Effe
ctive Da
te?
–De
term
ines: A
ctive or Inactive CC
R Im
poun
dment
•If Active, is it idled with
capacity
remaining
or p
lans fo
r ben
eficial use?
–De
term
ines: W
hen closure may be triggered
•If Active, doe
s it m
eet the
definition
of an existing lined
impo
undm
ent?
–De
term
ines: Lined
or U
nlined
Existing Im
poun
dment
•If Inactive, do you plan
on closing in 36 mon
ths?
–De
term
ines: W
hich criteria app
ly21
Second
ary/Tertiary
Pond
s ‐De
signatio
n•A
ssum
e the scen
ario sh
own
•Key Que
stions to
Ask:
–Was th
is po
nd orig
inally designe
d to hold an
accum
ulation of CCR
s?–Do
es it treat, store, or d
ispose of
CCR?
–Do
es it re
ceive sig
nificant
amou
nts o
f CCR
?–Even
if orig
inal design did no
t intend
for it to be
a CCR
im
poun
dment b
y defin
ition
, has it
ever acted
as o
ne?
22
Prim
ary
(Dire
ct Sluice)
Second
ary
Tertiary
Second
ary/Tertiary Im
poun
dments ‐
Limiting
CCR
Material D
ischarge
•Lon
gest Flow Path for S
ettling
•Hanging
Baffle
s
•Decant S
tructures
23
INTENT?
MODIFY DOWNSTRE
AM
IMPO
UNDMEN
T STATU
S
Opp
ortunistic Con
struction Activ
ities –
Pond
Recon
figuration
24
ACTIVE
24
ACTIVE
ACTIVE
ACTIVE
ACTIVE
HISTORIC
HISTORIC
ACTIVE
PROPO
SED
INAC
TIVE
INAC
TIVE
PROPO
SED
Historic “Closed
” vs. Inactive Im
poun
dments
•Need to m
ake de
term
ination if un
it is “closed” or sim
ply “inactive” (m
eaning
it
no longer re
ceives CCR
after Effe
ctive Da
te but still con
tains C
CRs a
nd liqu
ids)
–Is it “breached
and
dew
atered
”? Can
it im
poun
d water (closest definition
to “c
losed”?
Prea
mble Pa
ge 21409
Prea
mble Pa
ge 21343
–If it still has liqu
ids and/or th
e ability to
impo
und liquids, m
ay be considered
“inactive”
instead of “c
losed” and
therefore subject to the regulatio
n
25
“Strategic” Ve
rtical or H
orizo
ntal Expansio
n?
26
Amen
ded Pe
rmit Expa
nsion
Entire Perm
itted
Landfill vs. “Existing Land
fill”
27
250 A
cre P
erm
itted
La
ndfil
l10
Pha
ses
Over
60 Y
ears
of
Tota
l Life
Existin
g Footprint
is 25
acres as
of to
day
Strategic CC
R Land
fill
Horizon
tal Expansio
n
28
Existing
Proposed
Existin
g
Prop
osed
Tempo
rary Stockpiling
•A tempo
rary stockpile of C
CRs p
laced
on land
at the
plant site in
an
“unp
rotected
manne
r” is con
sidered
to
be a “CC
R Pile”
•The de
finition
of a
“CC
R Pile” is:
–any no
n‐containe
rized
accum
ulation
of so
lid, non
‐flow
ing CC
R that is
placed
on land
. CC
R that is
beneficially used off‐site
is not a CCR
pile.
•“CCR
Pile” = CC
R Land
fill
29
CCR Piles
•To clarify
the de
finition
, the
EPA
disc
usses its intent of the
term
non
‐containe
rized
on page 21356 of th
e Preamble:
–The use of th
e ph
rase “no
n‐containe
rized
” is no
t inten
ded to re
quire
that all activ
ities occur with
in ta
nks or con
tainment structures, but
merely that sp
ecific measures h
ave be
en ado
pted
to con
trol exposures
to hum
an health
and
the environm
ent.
–This could includ
e placem
ent o
f the
CCR
on an
impe
rvious base such
as asphalt, con
crete, or a
geo
mem
brane; leachate and
run‐off
collection; and
walls or wind barriers.
30
“Con
tainerize
d” Staging
Areas
31
Bene
ficial U
ses
•Coal M
ine Re
clam
ation
•Roadw
ay Activities/Agricultural
•Mining ou
t historic disp
osal activities
32
Groun
dwater
Mon
itorin
g
33
Gen
eral Tim
eline –Groun
dwater M
onito
ring
30 M
onths –
Whe
re did th
e tim
e go?
34
Publish Date
Minim
um Recom
men
ded
Sampling Period = 12
Mon
ths
30 months
Effective Date
18 months
CERTIFY
Can you pu
ll some of th
ese activ
ities fo
rward to allow m
ore tim
e for sam
pling and analyses?
Early
Groun
dwater Analyses
•Groun
dwater Flow Dire
ction and Elevations
•Site
Con
ceptual M
odels
35
Inform
ation Managem
ent
36
Step
3: R
eview Develop
ed Con
tent & Post M
aterial to Pu
blic Site
Professio
nal Third Party Review
Post to
Pub
lic Portal “Go Live”
Prep
are respon
ses for potentia
l qu
estio
ns
Step
2: C
CR W
ebsite Logistics, Design, Con
tent, Review Criteria
Develop web
site strategy,
implem
entatio
n sc
hedu
le w/ a
ction
items &
respon
sibilitie
s
Review
existing material, identify
othe
r related
pub
lic inform
ation,
Develop requ
ired content p
er plan
for C
CR Com
pliance, PE requ
ired
sign offs
Step
1: D
evelop
CCR
Pub
lic W
ebsite Im
plem
entatio
n & Action Plan
Develop CC
R Strategy & Im
plem
entatio
n Plan
for e
ach
CCR Unit
Determ
ine Ope
ratin
g Re
cord Req
. for each compliance
compo
nent for each affected
unit &
minim
um level of
content req
uired for w
ebsite
Conclusio
n•P
ublishing
of R
ule has forced utilitie
s to act
•The
re is still time to m
anage risk and fin
d op
portun
ities to
actively
manage assets and
plan
•Gettin
g all critical personn
el (e
ng/enviro
/legal/p
lant/m
anagem
ent) in
the
same room
and
on same path fo
rward is of utm
ost impo
rtance
37
Impacts o
f CCR
Managem
ent A
udits and
Ho
w Utilities are Respo
nding
JASO
N POKO
RNY, PE
STEV
E PU
TRICH PE
QUESTIONS??
Than
k you
Top Related