Slide 1

Jeff Poupart Water Quality Permitting Section Chief NCDENR / Division of Water Resources

Slide 2

Questions? Does the New Law Really Impact Facilities other than Duke Has the Coal Ash Challenge changed How DWR interacts with Regulated Industries? 2

Slide 3

Does the New Law Really Impact Facilities other than Duke? Simple answer Yes and No Yes some spill reporting requirements changed No If you dont burn coal or store combustion residuals

Slide 4

Has the Coal Ash Challenge changed How DWR interacts with Regulated Industries? First lets start with some background on coal ash

Slide 5

So how did this coal ash stuff start?

Slide 6

TVA Kinston Power Plant

Slide 7

How did we get here In 2012, the Catawba Riverkeeper Foundation and SELC settled suits with SCE&G and Santee Cooper under which they agreed to remove 2.4 million tons and 1.3 million tons of coal ash from the Catawba- Wateree River near Columbia, South Carolina and another plant near Myrtle Beach. 2013 SELC issues 60 day Notice of Intent to sue in NC to Riverbend and Asheville Duke power plants Spring 2013 NC DENR files for injunctive relief in superior court eventually expands to all 14 plants

Slide 8

How did we get here Throughout 2013 and into 2014 Cases and initial proposed settlement work their way through various court procedures and evidence discovery and motions In the mean time there was another high profile case not related to ash but related to coal that had the publics interest

Slide 9

January 9, 2014 Freedom Industries Charleston, West Virginia Release of up to 7,500 US gallons of crude 4- methylcyclohexanemethanol (MCHM) into the Elk River Crude MCHM is a chemical foaming agent utilized in the processing of coal Outcome Up to 300,000 residents within nine counties were without access to potable water Injuries 169+ affected 14 hospitalized

Slide 10

Groundhog Day February 2, 2014 Pipe collapses at Dan River Facility

Slide 11

~ 30,000 39,000 tons of ash from primary ash basin ~ 24 27 million gallons of ash basin water What was released?

Slide 12

How and when was the spill stopped? 1. First attempted using an inflatable bladder 2. This process failed several times 3. Next tried to plug pipe at failure point. 4. This process failed due to instability of ash 5. Designed a plug system to fill the pipe from the outlet end with grout/concrete 6. This process was successful on Feb 8 th

Slide 13

48 pipe plugged on Feb. 8 th Plug design used to seal 48pipe Grout/concrete pumped in to pipe

Slide 14

So where did all the coal ash go?

Slide 15

Dan River Long Term Remediation Sec. Skvarla requested EPA take role of lead agency under CERCLA for response to Dan River release Response crosses state lines Long term activities being coordinated by Stakeholders Group consisting of EPA, NC DENR, VA DEQ, US FWS, US Army Corps of Engineers, US Coast Guard, Rockingham County, Danville, South Boston, Clarksville and Duke Energy Stakeholders Group meets every Wednesday in Eden, NC Stakeholders Group share and discuss sampling results: - Chemical analyses, sediment sampling, fish community, benthic data, fish tissue, etc. Stakeholders Group coordinate and collaborate to establish long term remediation plan

Slide 16

First coal ash deposit identified immediately downstream of the 48 pipe outlet. Removal of ash deposit completed early March.

Slide 17

Surface Water through June 2014 Surface Water through June 2014 Arsenic has decreased from 40 ug/L to less than 2.0 ug/L at Draper Landing by mid-March Arsenic has decreased from 40 ug/L to less than 2.0 ug/L at Draper Landing by mid-March Aluminum & Iron remain elevated at all stations due to background contributions Aluminum & Iron remain elevated at all stations due to background contributions All data posted on DWR website All data posted on DWR website

Slide 18

Sediment Sediment 100 yards from release: 100 yards from release: Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Copper, Iron, Mercury Above EPA Screening Values Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Copper, Iron, Mercury Above EPA Screening Values Danville: Danville: Aluminum, Boron, Iron & Strontium Above EPA Screening Values Aluminum, Boron, Iron & Strontium Above EPA Screening Values

Slide 19

Fish Tissue First round = background Nothing above federal and state guidelines

Slide 20

Surface water sampling started February 3 rd Surface water sampling started February 3 rd Daily through mid- March Daily through mid- March Weekly mid-March to May Weekly mid-March to May Twice/month June-July Twice/month June-July Monthly beginning August Monthly beginning August

Slide 21

NC NC 3 Stations Hwy 14, VA Line & Milton Monthly surface water, yearly fish tissue, yearly benthos Duke Duke Continuing monitoring Natural Resources Damage Assessment and Restoration Agreement

Slide 22

Unauthorized Surface Water Discharges Types of Unauthorized Discharges Engineered e.g. dam toe drains Unengineered seeps and weeps

Slide 23

How is permitting of seep determined The flow and pollutant concentration of the unpermitted discharge is compared with the dilution flow of the stream it flows int0 if there is no reasonable potential to violate water quality standards the discharge is given monitoring only, no limits in the permit. Examples of drought flow in River at various coal power plant sites Buck 1030 cubic feet second 554 MGD Asheville 306 cfs or 165 million gallons per day Mayo, Roxboro discharge into Reservoir no dilution must meet standard at end of pipe

Slide 24

How is permitting of seep determined As seeps flow change in flow appear and disappear NC has taken the approach of aggregating the seeps together and estimating total flow plus additional factor this will mean that unless significant changes occur major modification of permit not necessary Seeps combined outfall Monthly monitoring for 18 different parameters in draft permit

Slide 25

Current Situation We have received applications to modify or renew permits for all 14 affected coal fired plants We have tentatively agreed on a process for permitting potential dewatering discharges as flows are diverted from ash ponds 1 st round of three draft NPDES permits are Went to Public notice and Hearing is April 8

Slide 26

Has the Coal Ash Challenge changed How DWR interacts with Regulated Industries? Largest fine in NC DWR History $25.1 Million for groundwater contamination at Sutton plant Every single piece of paper back and forth between the company is up on the internet Press releases issued for almost every interaction Often picked up by AP or other news service

Slide 27

Has the Coal Ash Challenge changed How DWR interacts with Regulated Industries? Multiple court actions filed Federal and State Thousands of public comments received on original settlement Unprecedented level of Third party interaction (SELC and Riverkeepers et al)

Slide 28

Has the Coal Ash Challenge changed How DWR interacts with Regulated Industries? Intense involvement by EPA Region IV on every aspect of every action we take Increase in Frequency of monitoring and number of parameters sampled Every word and every sampling result in the history of the each facilitates file scrutinized

Slide 29

Litigation Trend in NC What if DWR doesn'tt take a formal enforcement action 1st Lawsuit American Canoe Assoc vs. City of Greensboro 1998 mostly failure to monitor violations DWR received four Notices of Intent to sue under CWA from SELC just last year. EPA ECHO website of all compliance date and Internet make it much easier for public to be aware of violations. Increased interest in permit issuance under Article 150 B of state statutes DWR developing new enforcement tools

Slide 30

Slide 31

Has the Coal Ash Challenge changed How DWR interacts with Regulated Industries? Yes and No No, We are still the courtesy professional regulators we were on Feb 1, 2014 Yes, the world has changed communication occurs in a flash where traditional and social media look for the next big thing (e.g. In the picture is the dress white and gold or blue and black) Yes, Once the focus has started on an issue even the smallest detail receives laser focus

Slide 32

Has the Coal Ash Challenge changed How DWR interacts with Regulated Industries? Yes Citizens are more educated and involved a few minutes on Google and anyone can become an expert on a pollutant or an industrial sector or a permitting process We both the regulators and industry need to continue to strive to make sure that ALL documentation is accurate We have to continue to work together to maintain and build public trust that we are protecting the environment

Slide 33

Has the Coal Ash Challenge changed How DWR interacts with Regulated Industries? Our responsibility is to continue to issue permits, conduct inspection and take proper compliance and enforcement actions when necessary Industrys responsibility is to consistently audit their processes, analyze risk and maintain pollution control systems to avoid being the next big environmental issue.

Slide 34

Question/Answer