Energy providers wasted no time last year asking the Trump administration to rescind 2024 federal standards for coal ash disposal.

Five days before President Donald Trump returned for a second term in the White House on Jan. 20, 2025, 10 power suppliers, including Duke Energy, fired off a letter urging Lee Zeldin, Trump’s then-nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency, “decline to defend these unlawful rules.”

Now the EPA is proposing to revise federal regulation for coal ash disposal, a move that would relax the Biden-era national standards for inactive, often unlined basins designed to store a sludgy mix of watered-down fly ash and bottom ash.

Here in North Carolina, where comprehensive coal ash legislation was pioneered, proposed changes at the federal level are not expected to affect, at least for the time being, the state’s robust coal ash management law.

Nor would the proposed federal revisions impact the terms of a 2019 settlement agreement between the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Duke Energy, and public interest groups that set closure schedules and monitoring requirements for the power company’s remaining coal ash basins.

“None of that is going to be changed by what EPA is trying to do now at the federal level,” Southern Environmental Law Center Senior Attorney Nick Torrey said.

But Torrey cautioned that sites where coal ash has been removed may still contain residual groundwater contamination.

“The federal regulations require monitoring and corrective action for that pollution,” he said. “If utilities can get exceptions and exemptions from those things, that’s potentially concerning. Fortunately, we do have a state process as well that’s dealing with groundwater issues, but it was never meant to be a substitute for the federal standards. There’s more vulnerability that coal ash contamination could be allowed to persist. So, we’ll have to be watching that very closely as things go forward.”

Coal ash, referred to in regulation and industry as coal combustion residuals, or CCR, is the byproduct created when coal is burned for electricity. It contains toxic heavy metals such as arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead and radioactive elements, according to the EPA.

In early February 2014, some 39,000 tons of coal ash slurry discharged from a collapsed pipe at Duke Energy’s retired Dan River Steam Station near Eden into the river. The spill spread as far as 70 miles downstream.

In the fall of that year, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the North Carolina Coal Ash Management Act, or CAMA.

CAMA (not to be confused with the Coastal Area Management Act) initially set deadlines for Duke Energy to close a group of basins at four of its power plants by certain deadlines.

EPA in 2015 finalized the federal CCR rule under the Obama presidency. The Biden administration strengthened those regulations in 2024.

By that time, DEQ had finalized a basin closure schedule for all 14 of Duke Energy’s facilities in North Carolina. Following litigation and a settlement agreement between community and conservation groups, DEQ and Duke Energy, a 2020 consent order was approved to govern the cleanup process for the remaining sites.

Duke Energy anticipates officially fully excavating the 12th of its 32 coal ash basins in North Carolina by year’s end. Both coal ash impoundments at the Sutton Steam Plant in Wilmington were excavated by July 2019.

Duke Energy spokesperson Bill Norton confirmed in an email earlier this week that the excavation of ash at its W.H. Weatherspoon Power Plant in Lumberton is complete, well ahead of schedule. The company is in the process of working through the basin’s clean closure certification, a process expected to be completed later this year, Norton said in the email.

“Not yet counting Weatherspoon, we have completed excavation at 11 North Carolina basins and are making strong progress at the remaining 20, with well over half of our basin ash safely excavated in the states,” he stated. “All sites remain on or ahead of schedule for basin closure deadlines as shown here.”

Norton said the EPA’s proposed rule changes will not impact Duke Energy’s proposed coal retirement dates.

“We continue making progress on coal retirements while balancing our regulatory approvals and increased load growth – regulators have made clear that replacement generation must be online and serving customers prior to further coal plant retirements,” he said. “While the potential EPA CCR rule changes have no impact on our proposed coal retirement dates, we appreciate prior changes to in the federal regulations that provided flexibility for our coal facilities, enabling us to maximize the value of existing generation by extending the operational life of these assets to help meet load growth at the lowest possible cost to consumers. Retirement dates are subject to regulatory approval.”

Coal-fired operations at Belews Creek Steam Station in Stokes County are expected to be shut down no later than Jan. 1, 2040. The retirement of that plant’s coal combustion operations will mark the end of Duke Energy’s coal-fired power generation in the state.

“We are making tremendous progress on meeting all obligations agreed to years ago in our North Carolina settlement with state regulators and environmental groups – that commitment is unchanged, and state regulators have confirmed our plans are protective of public health and the environment,” Norton said.

Beneficial reuse units at the company’s Buck Combined Cycle Plant in Salisbury, Cape Fear plant in Moncure, and H.F. Lee Energy Complex on the banks of the Neuse River in Goldsboro have been reprocessing coal ash at those sites to make it suitable for use in concrete since 2020, he said.

Katherine Lucas, DEQ’s Division of Waste Management public information officer, stated in an email that the agency “is evaluating the proposed changes to determine any potential impacts on ongoing excavation and remediation activities at Duke Energy facilities.”

“In the absence of an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-approved state permit program, utilities must comply with both federal and state requirements. North Carolina remains a national leader in coal ash management, both in establishing comprehensive regulations and in the scale and pace of closure and remediation efforts. DEQ believes the state’s regulatory framework is at least as protective as federal requirements and does not anticipate that federal changes would reduce existing environmental and public health protections.”

The EPA is accepting public comments on the proposed rule changes through June 12.

The agency is hosting an online public hearing at 9 a.m. on May 28. 

This story has been updated to include a response from Duke Energy.

The Trump administration moved last week to rewrite part of Obama-era regulations addressing coal ash disposal, which entails risks that a Duke University researcher says are all too familiar in coastal North Carolina.

But a Duke Energy spokesperson said the proposed changes will have no effect on the utility’s handling of the residuals from coal-fired power plants and ongoing closure of coal ash basins. And the utility said Tuesday the researcher is distorting the facts surrounding coal ash at the its Wilmington facility.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced Nov. 4 proposed changes to the 2015 regulation of how electric utilities manage their coal combustion residuals, or CCRs, which are also known known as coal ash, fly ash, bottom ash and boiler slag, and guidelines for handling effluent from steam electric power plants.

“Today’s proposed actions were triggered by court rulings and petitions for reconsideration on two 2015 rules that placed heavy burdens on electricity producers across the country,” said EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler in the announcement.

In 2015, the EPA had hailed the rule as the first national regulation covering the leaking of coal ash-related contaminants into groundwater, the blowing of contaminants into the air as dust and the catastrophic failure of coal ash impoundments. The rule also set out record-keeping and reporting requirements and mandated each coal ash facility to post information to a publicly accessible website.

The EPA said the rule was the culmination of extensive study on the effects of coal ash on the environment and public health. But there is no scientific merit for the current administration’s regulatory rollback, said Avner Vengosh, a professor at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment, whose research focuses on the environmental implications of coal ash disposal and storage.

Together with his students and colleagues Vengosh has been researching coal ash and its environmental effects for about 10 years.

Vengosh told Coastal Review Online that the EPA’s latest decision goes beyond just kowtowing to the industry.

“It’s even more than that. It means that the cost (of contamination and cleanup) is going to be moved to the public, rather than being covered by the industry. I think that is something that the people are not really understanding,” Vengosh said.

The proposed changes would set a new date of Aug. 31, 2020, for facilities to stop placing coal ash into unlined surface impoundments and impoundments located near aquifers or to retrofit them.

Vengosh said any delays of deadlines would lead to more and worsening problems as the companies responsible for the pollution are granted more time to potentially fold, go bankrupt or otherwise avoid their responsibility.

“So, by the end of the day the public will have to deal with it rather than the industry. They’re basically saving the industry from their own doing,” he said. “It’s sad that EPA became so political.”

Vengosh submitted written comments opposing the rule change, saying that his motivation to get involved was related to his scientific research on the environmental implications from coal ash disposal and storage. “Together with my students and colleagues at Duke University, I have been conducting research on the subject of coal ash and its environmental effects for about ten years,” Vengosh wrote.

His research projects have included investigation of the environmental effects of the Tennessee Valley Authority coal ash spill in Kingston, Tennessee; sources of mercury in river sediments from TVA spill sites; discharge of effluents from coal ash impoundments to waterways in North Carolina; developing isotope methods to detect coal ash contaminants in the environment; leaking of coal ash ponds in the Southeast; radioactivity of coal ash; possible links between hexavalent chromium and coal ash ponds in North Carolina; and leaching of arsenic and selenium from coal ash.

“Overall, I have published 13 scientific articles on different aspects of the environmental effects of coal ash,” Vengosh wrote.

Vengosh said the EPA’s proposal would considerably weaken existing federal regulations, reducing environmental protection and safeguards, and severely exacerbate environmental effects associated with coal ash storage and disposal.

He said the changes would undo important safeguards in the 2015 Coal Ash Rule, including the required comprehensive and long-term monitoring of groundwater in the vicinity of coal ash impoundments, including those no longer in use. The changes would allow states to set different standards for coal ash contaminants in groundwater and make groundwater quality and air quality data less transparent.

Also, the proposal would “backtrack” from the 2015 rule’s requirement that the operators of unlined coal ash ponds in areas where there’s contamination of underlying groundwater install liners or close the storage ponds by a certain date. The proposed amendments would allow state agencies or utilities themselves to decide on closure or installation of liners and make the now-required cleanup of contaminated groundwater “discretionary.”

All coal ash ponds are located near major rivers. That’s because water is needed as a coolant for coal-fired plants, so all coal plants and their coal ash facilities are near waterways.

Vengosh said research, his and others’, has shown that nearly all coal ash ponds leak and contaminate the underlying groundwater and nearby surface water. “Basically, everywhere there is a coal ash pond there is leaking – period,” he said.

He authored a 2016 study that looked at archived water chemistry data from 156 wells monitoring groundwater below all 14 coal ash ponds in North Carolina between 2010 and 2015. The evidence suggested that closing coal ash ponds does not necessarily eliminate the leaking of contaminated water from ponds to the environment.

Coal Ash in the Cape Fear

The coal-fired units at Duke Energy’s Sutton Plant in Wilmington were retired in 2013, when the utility switched to natural gas-fired generation, and the coal units were demolished about four years later. And the utility says that during the first half of this year, it completed excavation of the ash basin at the plant and two others in North Carolina, Dan River Steam Station in Eden and Riverbend Steam Station in Mount Holly.

But during Hurricane Florence in 2018, rising water levels in the Cape Fear River breached the plant’s cooling lake, known as Sutton Lake, flushing its contents into the river. In the days following the storm, Duke Energy said water samples from upstream and downstream of the site showed “little to no impact to river water quality” and all results were “well within” state water quality standards.

“There is little difference in river water quality when comparing samples taken upstream above the facility and downstream below the facility,” the utility announced, sharing its test results online.

The 1,100-acre lake is open to the public and the state Wildlife Resources Commission manages a boat ramp there.

Vengosh in June published a paper that concluded there was evidence for multiple spills of coal ash into Sutton Lake, with concentrations of metals that far exceeded state regulations for freshwater lakes. Also, tissue from fish in lake – a popular fishing spot for nearby residents – contain an isotope fingerprint of coal ash, he said.

“Sutton Lake represents a case where the handling of coal ash near drinking water or freshwater resources is causing the mobilization or transport of coal ash into the lake and contamination of the lake. Sutton Lake is really kind of an example of why the 2015 ruling is so important,” Vengosh said.

A Duke Energy spokesperson said in June that Vengosh’s findings were not unexpected and not relevant to anyone’s health and that the wastewater facility performed as designed, serving as a buffer between the coal plant and the Cape Fear River to protect the public and the environment. The company also produced a graphic that noted that levels of selenium, which is often associated with coal ash, in Sutton Lake were far below the state’s recreational human consumption advisory level.

“To me, this was stunning, because they never said it before and the fact that they admitted they put coal ash into the recreation lake, it’s crazy, and I’m actually stunned why nobody sues them,” Vengosh said.

In a response Tuesday, Duke Energy rejected the notion that it had intentionally put coal ash in the lake and dismissed Vengosh’s conclusions.

“Vengosh’s blatant misrepresentation of our statements about Sutton Lake is irresponsible. We operated the Sutton facility in compliance with all permits and approvals and transparently communicated that the Sutton cooling pond was permitted to receive wastewater discharges from the retired steam station, which may have included trace amounts of CCR. This is very different from his previous speculation that we have had significant unreported releases of coal ash into the lake, followed by his implication that we intentionally ‘put’ ash into the lake – an accusation of wrongdoing and a shocking distortion of the facts. Vengosh’s latest fabrication – and subsequent speculation based on a fabrication – is yet another example in a recurring pattern of him seeing things he wants to see and leaping to conclusions not based on facts,” Duke Energy said.

Vengosh said concentrations of coal ash-related metals in Sutton Lake bottom sediment were higher than those measured after the TVA coal ash spills and higher than the Dan River coal ash spill in North Carolina.

“People living in the area should be shocked,” Vengosh said. “It’s not the putting of coal ash into a pond that’s designated for coal ash only, it’s putting coal ash into a lake that’s used by the public. Maybe it’s not unique to Sutton Lake, but we don’t know.”

Bill Norton, the Duke Energy spokesperson, said Thursday that the proposed EPA rule changes would not affect the utility or its Sutton Plant.

“While we are still reviewing EPA’s proposal, we do not expect Duke Energy will be impacted because we are already far down the path of closure,” Norton said.

Norton also disagreed with the conclusions Vengosh and his colleagues reached.

“Their paper was fundamentally flawed for a number of reasons, in particular because it made broad generalizations, assumptions, and conclusions based on an inadequate study design and a very small, limited data set. It appears that the authors had a conclusion in mind before going through a full and robust research process,” Norton said.

He said decades of fish tissue tests of catfish, sunfish and black bass for selenium, the primary tracer used to detect potential influences from coal ash, have consistently demonstrated selenium levels far below the state’s rigorous recreational human consumption advisory level.

“In regard to flooding, even after Hurricane Florence’s historic storm, several days of testing – including split samples with the state – showed results well within rigorous state water quality standards. Even inside Sutton Lake immediately after the storm, the results for coal ash constituents were well within the strict water quality standards that protect people and the environment,” Norton said. “Most importantly, nearly 40 years of rigorous study and sampling proves the fish are thriving and the lake remains safe to use for recreation purposes like fishing and boating.”

No effect on closure plans

Norton said the proposed CCR rule changes will not impact Duke Energy’s timelines for closure.

“We made the commitment to close all coal ash basins across our system, and that is unchanged. We holistically planned upgrades to safely manage coal ash and comply with both state and federal regulations. Those upgrades included dry ash handling systems, new wastewater treatment systems and new lined landfills. That work was necessary to take ash basins out of service,” Norton said.

Norton described the Sutton site as an example of the company’s progress. Duke Energy completed excavating the coal ash basins at its Sutton facility in June.

“We continue to excavate a small quantity of ash from a low-lying area adjacent to the original plant site, and that work is expected to be complete in the coming months,” Norton said, adding that the utility’s groundwater monitoring will continue with no change in public access to the data from the resulting data.

“In addition to federal compliance, all our work must comply with very strict state groundwater and surface water standards designed to keep the public and environment safe,” Norton said.

Separately, Duke Energy continues to appeal a decision earlier this year by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality requiring its nine remaining unlined coal ash basins on Lakes Norman and Wylie, on the Broad River, and in Stokes and Person counties to be closed by excavation. Duke Energy is challenging the timing of the state’s mandate, saying that DEQ has chosen the most expensive, disruptive and time-consuming closure option for several basins without measurable benefit when compared to other approaches and ignoring the costs that customers will bear. The Southern Environmental Law Center is representing more than a half-dozen community groups opposing Duke Energy in the Office of Administrative Hearings proceedings.

WILMINGTON – Coal ash found in the sediment at the bottom of Lake Sutton suggests multiple, unreported and unmonitored spills have occurred for years at Duke Energy’s former coal-fired plant near Wilmington, according to a new study conducted by researchers at Duke University.

Sediment samples collected from the lake in 2015 and again last year after Hurricane Florence detected contaminants including arsenic, selenium, thalium and copper – metals found in coal.

“They have similar levels of presence of coal ash solids,” said Duke University’s Avner Vengosh, a professor of geochemistry and water quality who led the research. “Given that we found evidence in the sediments collected from 2015, it’s suggesting it’s not only related to Florence, but it was apparently a long-term process.”

The contamination may have been from floods or other accidental releases as well as past dumping practices, according to the study, Evidence for unmonitored coal ash spills in Sutton Lake, North Carolina: Implications for contamination of lake ecosystems.

Less than a week after Hurricane Florence made landfall Sept. 14, 2018, in Wrightsville Beach, Duke Energy reported that about 2,000 cubic yards of soil and ash – enough to fill about two-thirds of an Olympic-sized swimming pool – spilled from the landfill at L.V. Sutton Power Station.

A little more than a month later, Vengosh and his team conducted a comprehensive sampling of bottom sediments from seven sites in the lake and three sites in the nearby Cape Fear River.

They believed they might find traces of coal ash in the lake, he said.

“I’m totally surprised because the magnitude of contaminants we’re finding is pure coal ash,” he said. “It is surprising. It was not expected to find that level of contaminants. We thought we might find traces, but not at that level.”

The levels discovered in the lake bottom sediment are similar to or higher than the levels of contaminants found in stream sediments collected after the 2008 Tennessee Valley Authority coal ash spill into the Emory and Clinch rivers, the largest coal ash spill in history, and the 2014 Dan River spill near Eden, in Rockingham County, Vengosh said.

The Lake Sutton sediment samples were compared to sediment bottom collected from Columbus County’s Lake Waccamaw, which is not associated with coal ash disposal.

Duke Energy spokesman Bill Norton said in an email that the results of the study were neither new nor unexpected.

“It is ludicrous to compare decades-old ash at the bottom of a manmade wastewater facility to anything found in conventional lakes and rivers,” he said. “This wastewater facility did exactly what it was designed to do, serve as a buffer between our former coal plant and the Cape Fear river to keep the public and environment safe. We’ve shared similar sediment results going back to the mid-90s with the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission, so these findings are not at all surprising. Most importantly, the results are not relevant to anyone’s health. We have decades’ worth of surface water tests and fish tests, all shared with regulators, that demonstrate Sutton Lake is well within water quality standards and the Sutton fishery is healthy and thriving.”

“This wastewater facility did exactly what it was designed to do, serve as a buffer between our former coal plant and the Cape Fear river to keep the public and environment safe.”

Bill Norton, Duke Energy

Norton said the company samples water quality and chemistry from the lake every other month, conducts fish testing every three months, and samples sediment annually “among other studies.”

“These studies continue to demonstrate that the waters and fish populations are well-protected and the public remains safe from coal ash impacts,” he said.

River sediment collected downstream from Sutton Lake last October showed “relatively low” metal concentrations compared to those found in the lake, according to the study. Researchers note that further studies need to be conducted to fully evaluate the possible migration of coal ash solids downstream.

The Sutton power station operated as a coal-fired plant for more than 40 years before being shut down in 2013 and converted into a 625-megawatt natural gas plant.

Lake Sutton was formed in 1972 as a cooling source for the former power plant.

Over the years, the 1,100-acre lake has become a popular fishing spot.

The lake’s year-round mild water temperatures make it one of a few places where largemouth bass may be caught throughout the winter.

Sutton Lake, which has been open to the public since it was created, is also popular for recreational boaters.

At least two studies published within the last five years examining selenium in sediment bottom and fish in the lake found selenium in the fish.

Selenium is an element found in coal ash that can cause deformities and impair growth and reproduction in fish and other aquatic life.

Test results from a 2015 Duke University study showed 85 percent of all fish muscle samples examined from Sutton Lake contained selenium levels above the Environmental Protection Agency’s threshold.

Prior to that study, Dennis Lemly, an environmental consultant specializing in ecotoxicology and a former researcher biologist with the U.S. Department of Forest Service, collected in 2013 and assessed juvenile fish from the lake during a five-month period.

His assessment showed that discharges from the plant were causing selenium poisoning in young fish and reducing their chances of survival.

“We have strong evidence that contaminants we are finding in the fish are derived from the coal ash and apparently from the spill of coal ash solids in the bottom of the lake,” Vengosh said.

Norton said that the company’s many years of fish monitoring “indicates a healthy, self-sustaining and balanced fish community.”

“Historical routine documented inspections of the Sutton ash basins demonstrate that, with very brief exceptions during a couple major flooding events, all basins have operated as expected,” he said in the email. “Even during those events, no substantial quantities of ash were released to Sutton Lake.”

According to Duke Energy’s website, ash has been excavated from seven of its basins, including two in North Carolina in Asheville and Mooresboro. About 22 million tons of ash has been excavated since the company began closing basins in recent years, the site states.

Excavation of basins at the company’s Dan River facility in Eden, one in Mount Holly and at the plant near Wilmington will be completed “in the coming months.”

The energy company will stop sending ash and wastewater to “nearly all basins” by mid-year, according to information provided on the website.

“To accomplish this, the company constructed dry bottom ash handling systems, lined water treatment basins and new line retention basins at a number of operating coal plants,” the website states.

Despite the closures, Vengosh warns that the contaminants from coal ash are legacy pollutants, meaning they remain long after they were first introduced in the environment.

“A coal ash spill is not a one-time contamination,” he said in a press release. “It builds up a legacy in the environment. Even if you close the site, the legacy and threat remain, as our research has revealed at Sutton Lake and other coal ash spill sites such as Kingston, Tennessee. Collectively, these finding imply that the distribution and impact of coal ash in the environment is far larger than previously thought.”

If coal ash is in the sediment in Sutton Lake, it stands to reason the same may be true for other cooling ponds and waterways near coal ash basins, he said.

“It’s kind of a bigger question,” Vengosh said. “How much coal ash is being exposed to the environment. What are we going to do about it? Those are pretty big questions that need to be addressed.”

Sen. Harper Peterson and Rep. Deb Butler announced Monday a joint press conference to be held Tuesday morning at Lake Sutton to discuss the study’s findings.

RALEIGH – Permanent replacement water supplies have been provided to all eligible households near Duke Energy coal ash facilities in the state, including the Cape Fear facility, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, or DEQ, announced Friday.

DEQ required Duke Energy to provide by the Oct. 15 deadline to eligible households at more than a dozen coal ash locations with a connection to a public water supply or a new water filtration system, set forth in the Coal Ash Management Act.

Duke provided replacement water supplies to all eligible households near its Allen, Asheville, Belews Creek, Buck, Cape Fear, Cliffside/Rogers, Dan River, H.F. Lee, Marshall, Mayo, Riverbend, Roxboro, Sutton and Weatherspoon facilities.

“For the families who have been living on bottled water, this solution is critical and necessary. Every family deserves to have confidence in their drinking water and we must continue to protect this vital resource,” said Gov. Roy Cooper in a statement.

The installation of replacement water supplies provided a permanent solution for residents near coal ash sites who relied on bottled water for drinking, cooking and bathing for more than two years.

“Everyone deserves to have safe, clean drinking water,” DEQ Secretary Michael Regan said in a statement. “DEQ will continue its work to erase the impacts of coal ash across North Carolina.”

RALEIGH –The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality has extended the informal public comment period to April 6 on rules drafted to better protect public health and the environment when coal ash wastes are disposed of and recycled, the agency announced Friday.

Those wishing to comment in writing can email their comments until 5 p.m. April 6 to publiccomments@ncdenr.gov. Include “CCR Rules” in the subject line.

A fourth public meeting will be at 6 p.m. March 27 in Ballroom A at the Gastonia Conference Center, 145 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Way, Gastonia. There will be a presentation about the rules and an opportunity for the public to provide feedback.

The state agency made the draft coal ash rules available for public comments starting Feb. 8, with the comment period set to end March 22. Previous public meetings were Feb. 12 in Roxboro, Feb. 20 in Dallas and Feb. 22 in Wilmington.

The agency made the decision to extend the comment period and add another meeting after hearing from citizens who wished to have more opportunity to provide feedback on the rules.

“Our top priority is making sure all stakeholders have a chance to be heard especially on issues like this one where there has been widespread interest,” said Sheila Holman, DEQ assistant secretary in a statement. “Allowing for greater participation is good government.”

The rules address coal combustion residuals including coal ash, which is a waste product generated when coal is converted into electricity. Waste is increasingly being removed from coal ash impoundments at state power plants and transported to either landfills engineered to be protective of the environment and human health or to recycling facilities for reuse into construction products such as cement, concrete blocks and wall board, according to a release from DEQ. The draft rules incorporate specific requirements from federal rules that outline how coal ash landfills are to be designed, constructed and operated. A section of the rules also addresses dams at the coal ash landfills.

Learn More

• Draft State Coal Ash Landfill Rules 
• Draft Dam Safety Rule

WASHINGTON – The Trump administration is rolling back Obama-era environmental rules regulating the fossil fuel industry, shifting to states power to regulate disposal of toxic coal ash.

The Environmental Protection Agency proposed the changes Thursday, saying they would provide savings of up to $100 million per year for electric utilities.

“Today’s coal ash proposal embodies EPA’s commitment to our state partners by providing them with the ability to incorporate flexibilities into their coal ash permit programs based on the needs of their states,” said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt in a statement. “We are also providing clarification and an opportunity for public comment – something that is much-needed following the public reaction to the 2015 coal ash rule.”

The proposal includes more than a dozen changes to the 2015 rule that set minimum national standards regulating the location, design and operation of existing and new coal ash landfills and surface impoundments at more than 400 coal-fired power plants nationwide. That rule, which was put in place after Duke Energy spilled up to 82,000 tons of coal ash into the Dan River near Eden in 2014 and another spill in Tennessee in 2008, remains subject to litigation pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

The proposal would allow alternative performance standards for coal ash disposal units with operating permits issued under an approved state or federal coal ash permit program. The proposal also requests comment on whether a regulated facility could develop and implement similar alternative standards that would be subject to oversight and enforcement by EPA.

The proposal includes changes to allow a state regulatory program to establish alternative risk-based groundwater protection standards where there’s not an established maximum contaminant level, rather than the use of background levels that are currently required. It seeks to change location restrictions and associated deadlines concerning construction or operation of a coal ash landfill or surface impoundment in certain areas.

It would allow states to establish alternative requirements for how facilities respond to and remediate releases from coal ash landfills and surface impoundments and allow states to determine whether to take corrective action when an unlined surface impoundment is leaking, rather than being forced to stop receiving coal ash and close. It would also change provisions to allow the use of coal ash during the closure process and to allow non-coal ash waste to continue to be placed in a surface impoundment that is subject to closure.

The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality announced in February draft rules regulating coal ash disposal and recycling.

EPA will be accepting public comment on the proposed changes for 45 days after publication in the Federal Register and plans to hold a public hearing to receive additional feedback on the proposal during the public comment period.

EPA also plans to propose additional changes to the coal ash rule later this year.

Learn More

• Information on the proposal and how to comment

RALEIGH – The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality seeks public feedback on rules in the works to better protect public health and the environment when coal ash wastes are disposed of and recycled.

DEQ has scheduled three meetings in February to gather public comments on the draft state rules. The meetings will be held at 6 p.m. on the following schedule:

• Feb. 12 at the Person County Office Building Auditorium, 304 South Morgan St., Roxboro.
• Feb. 20 in the Myers Center Meeting Rooms at Gaston College, 201 Highway 321 South, Dallas.
• Feb. 22 in the U-170 building at Cape Fear Community College, 411 North Front St., Wilmington.

DEQ staff will be on hand to provide a presentation about the rules. State officials will then open the floor to anyone wishing to provide feedback on the rules and will record those comments. Those wishing to speak are asked to register between 5:30 p.m. and 6 p.m. If any time remains after the public comment session concludes, DEQ staff will be available to answer questions.

Comments may be submitted in writing at any time through March 22. Public comments can be sent by email to publiccomments@ncdenr.gov. Include “CCR Rules” in the subject line.

DEQ plans to present a final draft to the full North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, or EMC, in May before a 60-day formal public comment period starts this summer. DEQ said it will consider those comments and then present final draft rules to the full EMC for adoption. If the rules are approved by the EMC, they will then be presented to the Rules Review Commission, which has the final say on whether to approve the rules.

The rules address coal combustion residuals, which includes coal ash, a waste product generated when coal is burned to generate electricity. DEQ said the waste is increasingly being removed from coal ash impoundments at North Carolina power plants and transported to either landfills engineered to be protective of the environment and human health or to recycling facilities where it is used to manufacture construction products such as cement, concrete blocks and wall board.

The draft rules incorporate specific requirements from federal rules enacted by the Environmental Protection Agency in 2015 that outline how coal ash landfills are to be designed, constructed and operated. The 90-plus pages of draft rules are intended to be more protective of public health and the environment than existing rules for coal ash disposal and storage.

Existing state rules require the operators to build coal ash landfills with protective lining to prevent contamination of groundwater as well as systems for collecting wastewater and regular environmental monitoring.

The new rules would add detailed criteria for how the landfills are to be constructed, restrict what sites are suitable for coal ash landfills and widen the buffers between the landfill and adjoining properties, streams and rivers.

The draft rules require operators to inspect the landfills weekly and post the findings from those inspections on a publicly-accessible website. A similar, but shorter rule is being proposed to address dam safety at coal ash impoundments.

Learn More

• Read the draft state coal ash landfill rules
• Read the draft dam safety rule

DURHAM – Researchers at Duke University say a recent study found high levels of selenium in fish in three North Carolina lakes receiving coal ash waste from power plants.

“Across the board, we’re seeing elevated selenium levels in fish from lakes affected by coal combustion residual effluents,” said Jessica Brandt, a doctoral student in environmental health at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment, who led the study.

Selenium is a naturally occurring element that is concentrated in coal ash and other coal combustion residuals. Early life exposure can cause deformities, impaired growth and reproduction, and in extreme cases death in fish and aquatic invertebrates. Because selenium accumulates in the food chain, it also can be toxic to birds that eat aquatic animals containing high levels.

Brandt and her colleagues published their peer-reviewed study Monday in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.

They measured selenium levels in surface water, bottom-sediment waters and fish from three North Carolina lakes: Sutton Lake near Wilmington, Mayo Lake near Roxboro, and Mountain Island Lake near Charlotte. The three lakes are, or until recently were, discharge sites for effluents from coal-fired power plants. Four types of fish tissue were analyzed: liver, muscle, ovary and testes.

The team also measured selenium in water, sediment and fish tissues in three similar lakes — Adger, Tillery and Waccamaw — with no such history of contamination. Samples were collected over a three-month period in spring 2015.

“Catastrophic releases of coal ash like the Dan River spill of 2014 get all of the attention, but there is ongoing, continuous contamination of aquatic ecosystems from hundreds of coal ash ponds across the country,” Brandt said. “People fish in these lakes for recreation and subsistence purposes. We want to protect these public resources.”

The EPA recently revised its selenium threshold criteria for aquatic health, and now places greater weight on concentrations in tissue rather than in water for evaluating ecosystem effects.

“Selenium concentrations in surface water don’t tell us as much about the risk of exposure to fish,” Brandt explained.

Of the three coal ash discharge lakes tested in the new study, Sutton Lake had the highest levels of selenium. Eighty-five percent of all fish muscle samples examined there contained selenium levels above the EPA’s threshold.

North Carolina has new coal ash management rules in place to close coal ash ponds at some power plants, Brandt noted. “But it will be important to continue monitoring sediments and fish tissues at these sites after the selenium inputs are stopped,” she said. “You have to look beneath the surface to understand how these problems persist over time.”

The new study did not evaluate potential human health risks posed by the coal ash residual contamination.

Co-authors of the new study were Emily Bernhardt, professor of biogeochemistry; Gary Dwyer, senior research scientist, and Richard Di Giulio, Sally Kleberg Professor of Environmental Toxicology, all of Duke.

Learn More

• Read the study

RALEIGH – The principal authors of a state law to clean up coal ash ponds and basin predicted when they got started in the spring that the bill wouldn’t please everyone. It turns out that they were right.

After dozens of hours of committee hearings and many more hours behind the scenes, the Coal Ash Management Act of 2014 has picked up strong bipartisan support and equally strong criticisms, especially after the state House amended the Senate’s original version.

Rep. Rick Catlin, a Republican from New Hanover County who was on the House team that worked on the changes, defended them.  The changes, he said, were needed to make the bill workable.

“It’s a very aggressive bill,” Catlin said. “We’re taking the lead in nation on addressing this.”

At the same time, he said, “it’s very important to solve this correctly and safely.”

Sen. Tom Apodaca

The Senate delayed a vote until tonight  to concur with the House amendments, but the bill’s lead sponsor, Sen. Tom Apodaca, R-Henderson, indicated that the Senate would vote not to concur. A committee of legislators would then be appointed to come up with a compromise. The committee will be on a tight schedule with both chambers picking up the pace this week to wind up the budget and remaining legislation.

The House worked through a flurry of 28 proposed amendments to the coal ash bill during a marathon floor debate earlier this month. Among the controversial changes made by the House was a revision that opponents say weakens groundwater protection and a variance provision that would allow the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the newly created Coal Ash Management Commission to extend cleanup timetables set in the bill. The House version also moves the new coal ash commission under the executive branch, a move demanded by Gov. Pat McCrory. The Senate version sets the commission up as an independent agency.

In a repeat of debate in the Senate, several amendments that went down to defeat in the House were aimed at expanding the list of coal ash sites named as priorities for cleanup. The bill lays out specific timetables for the removal of ash at three current and former Duke Energy power stations in Asheville, Gaston County and New Hanover County that environmental groups threatened to sue because of alleged violations of the federal Clean Water Act. The bill also sets cleanup plan for the old Duke power station in Eden. A massive spill there in February demonstrated the consequences of years of lax state oversight of the ponds and spurred legislators to action.

Under both House and Senate versions of the bill the remaining sites would first be ranked according to risk to public health with cleanup at the highest risk required by 2019, intermediate risk by 2024 and lowest risk 2029.

As compromise negotiations begin, environmental groups are stepping up their opposition to some of the House amendments to the bill, while continuing to push for greater certainty for cleanup of the sites not listed as priorities.

The Sutton power station near Wilmington would be on the priority list for immediate clean up. Source: Cape Fear River Watch

“The Senate bill was weak to begin with,” said Kemp Burdette, Riverkeeper with Cape Fear River Watch, “it got even weaker in the House.”

The legislation, he said, still does not spell out how DENR and the new coal ash commission should evaluate the sites.

Burdette said he sees promise in the mandated cleanup at the L.V. Sutton plant in New Hanover County. A number of other sites, though, also have serious problems, he said.

Duke stores 106 million tons of ash at 14 sites in the state. Eighty-four million tons soak in 32 ponds, while 22 million tons are kept dry as fill material or in dry basins.

Burdette toured the ash ponds at Duke’s Chatham County plant at the other end of the Cape Fear River on Friday and said the ponds should have been on the high priority list from the outset.

The site did make the list briefly, after a coalition of Democrats and Sandhills Republicans won a vote on an amendment to add it to the priority list. The win was later overturned after House leaders intervened.

Burdette said given what he saw on Friday, taking the Cape Fear ponds off the list seemed wrong.

“It looks pretty bad,” he said. “There are multiple seeps. The ponds are leaking. All five of [the ponds’ dams] are ranked as high hazard and they are arguably the most dangerous in the state.”

Adding more specific language that would ensure that the Cape Fear and other high hazard sites would improve the bill, he said, but Burdette said he’s not hopeful that that will happen.
He is also among a group of advocates seeking changes to the House-backed provision altering enforcement of cleanup if groundwater is contaminated. Frank Holleman, lead attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center’s coal ash litigation, said a House amendment tries to overturn a ruling in March by Judge Paul Ridgeway of Wake County District Court that said under existing state law Duke must remove the source of groundwater contamination immediately once that contamination has crossed a so-called “compliance boundary,” which is 250 to 500 feet from the pond depending on its age.

Holleman said the House made the bill “much, much worse” by trying to negate the ruling and if the new language stays in the legislation it would be worse than having no bill at all because it would overturn existing law.

The bill’s variance provision, he said, leaves too many of the decisions to DENR and the new coal ash commission. “It still says ‘trust DENR,’” he said. “Why would anyone put their trust in DENR in the area of coal ash given what’s happened?”

Kemp Burdette

Rep. Rick Catlin

Catlin, an environmental engineer, said he backed the variance provision because it gives regulators leeway to adjust the cleanup timetable in case there are changes that need to be made to the proposed plan or a new technology is made available. Finding a place to safely store the ash and then transporting there won’t be easy, he said.

“It takes at least a year to build a landfill and inspect it and make sure it’s done properly. I saw a need for a variance to make sure things were done correctly,” he said.

Sometimes, moving too fast, he said, can cause more problems than they solve.

Catlin said he backed the change to the compliance boundary provision because it would have affected many other sites around the state and because the Ridgeway decision could have led to a much more chaotic approach to cleaning up the sites.

DENR said the decision would have affected more than 2,000 sites around the state including some spray irrigation operations, agriculture wastewater ponds and older municipal landfills, according to Catlin. The unintended consequence of the decision, he said, could have been an economic disaster for counties around the state. Catlin said it also would have gutted the coal ash bill and left prioritizing the sites to the legal process. “You might as well have just thrown the bill in the trash can,” he said.

Catlin said he expects the issue to be revisited during conference negotiations. He said it might be possible to find a way to restrict the effect of the Ridgeway decisions to the coal ash basins.

Holleman said it should be possible to narrow the language in the bill.

“If they want to protect municipal landfills, they can do it without giving Duke amnesty,” he said.

And although he voted against adding Cape Fear to the list, Catlin said he believes it and some of the others proposed for addition to the priority list during House debate will be classified as high risk once DENR and the coal ash commission begin work.

The solutions, he said, need to be technical, not political.

Catlin also expects the legislature’s work on coal ash not to stop with this year’s effort adding that he’ll likely tour most of the sites in the interim to look over specific problems.

“No one has seen all 32 ponds,” he said. “The chances of needing to come back and address this again are pretty strong.”

RALEIGH — The state would set a deadline for Duke Energy to submit cleanup plans for four major North Carolina coal ash sites, including the Sutton Power Plant in New Hanover County, under a proposal developed by the Gov. Pat McCrory and introduced yesterday on the opening day of the legislative short session.

Senate President pro-tem Phil Berger and Sen. Tom Apodaca, R-Henderson, introduced the bill Wednesday within minutes of the opening of the session. Senate Bill 729 — will serve as the start of coal ash legislation promised by both the governor and the legislative leaders in the wake of public outcry over a massive spill in early February at a decommissioned Duke Energy coal-fired plant near Eden.

Gov. Pat McCrory

The bill lays out a statement of principles from the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources acknowledging “six decades” of failure to address coal ash waste and committing to “conversion and closure” of coal ash ponds for the health and safety of the public.

It gives Duke Energy 60 days to come up with closure plans for coal ash ponds at the company’s Dan River, Asheville and Riverbend plants. It gives the company 90 days to develop a plan for Sutton. Company officials said last month that the Sutton site is more complicated and will require more study. The ponds at the site sit on the edge of Sutton Lake, a popular fishing and recreation area.

For all of the closure plans the McCrory’s bill stipulates that they “shall include detailed provisions that ensure all ash in the impoundments will be moved to a lined structural fill, a lined landfill, or an alternative disposition approved by [DENR]”

At opening-day press conferences both McCrory and House Speaker Thom Tillis said coal ash legislation would be a top priority for the session. Tillis said the bill is likely to change as legislators incorporate their ideas into it.

Rep. Chuck McGrady, R-Henderson, a former national president of the Sierra Club and one of three House legislators working with senate leaders on the legislative plan, said there is a growing sense that a deal can be struck. He said the N.C. House team has forwarded a set of guidelines with the hope they’ll be incorporated into the Senate’s proposal.

McGrady said the introduction of the governor’s plan was a sign of greater collaboration after a rough start after McCrory caught legislators who were working on a plan off guard with his proposal.

Rep. Chuck McGrady

“We agree that we need to close the active coal ash ponds. We need to de-water them and then we need to go through a remediation process and that’s our goal for the short session,” McGrady said.

He called the bill a first step and said given the time constraints the legislature is not likely to tackle what to do with all the sites in the long-term beyond setting up a monitoring program. That and the thorny issue of what costs Duke Energy might pass on to ratepayers will probably have to wait until next year’s longer session.

McGrady said there will be differences that will have to be worked out. He said he would like to see the criteria for determining what to do at each site spelled out.

Democrats have said they’ll introduce their own plan for the short session requiring cleanup at all the sites and preventing the company from passing the costs on to ratepayers.

Rep. Rick Catlin, R-New Hanover, said it’s clear that when it comes to Sutton any solution will require removal of the ash from the ponds.

“The most reasonable and safest option there is to relocate the coal ash,” Catlin said. But even though the amount of ash at Sutton is not of large compared to the 13 other sites around the state, finding a lined landfill for the ash won’t be easy.

Catlin said he looked at the possibility using the county landfill and the size of the problem was quickly evident. “It was going to take up 70 of the 90 acres and that was at 270 feet high,” he said. “There’s no way it can go there, so the next question is where does it go?”

Catlin said he’s asked that DENR better spell out the standards for lined landfills for coal ash.

The initial coal ash bill also appropriates $1.4 million to fund 19 positions at DENR and new equipment for a statewide coal ash monitoring program.

McCrory’s 150-page budget adjustment proposal also includes roughly the same funds for the new monitoring program. At the same time the budget proposal trims positions elsewhere leaving DENR for a net gain of eight full-time positions.

McCrory Budget

Legislators get to work today in finance and appropriation committee hearings on adjustments to the state budget. McCrory’s $21 billion budget proposal that was released yesterday uses a combination of savings, fund balances and reversions from state agencies to fill an expected $445 million deficit.

While it includes more money for pay raises for teachers and state employees, McCrory’s budget also continues to trim back on programs. The proposal would cut $1.9 million for the wave energy research program at UNC’s Coastal Study Institute.

The governor also plans to ask for a special provision for $6.9 million in water resources projects including “dredging, navigation, flood control, beach protection, and stream restoration.” The money would be used to leverage $9 million in federal funds according to a budget summary.

DENR is one of the few departments in the state to see an increase. It receives 2 percent budget increase to cover raises and new positions for coal ash monitoring and shale gas regulation.

The governor’s proposal also includes:

• $1.3 million in recurring funding for aquatic weed control to deal with the hydrilla outbreak at Lake Waccamaw State Park in Columbus County
• Shifting three more positions to receipts supported at the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries and calls for a re-evaluation of shellfish growing area sampling and shoreline surveys in the Division of Water infrastructure
• Elimination of two more positions in the state Division of Water Resources and a position in the stormwater permitting section of the N.C. Division of Energy, Materials and Land Resources
• $500,000 to support the recommendations of the Oregon Inlet Land Acquisition Task Force
• A $3 million challenge grant for upgrades and repairs to the USS North Carolina and roughly $400,000 in restored funding for Tyron Palace.

RALEIGH — Hours before yesterday’s press conference where North Carolina’s top environmental regulators tried to defend the state’s clean-up efforts after the Dan River coal ash spill, news broke that U.S. prosecutors have issued another round of subpoenas that expand the federal probe of the state’s oversight to all coal ash ponds, including three near Wilmington.

The U.S. attorney’s office in Raleigh issued the first round of subpoenas a week ago seeking records about a coal ash spill on Feb. 2 at a retired Duke Energy power plant that dumped about 40,000 tons of toxic coal ash slurry into the Dan River in the northern Piedmont.

John Skvarla

The new subpoenas issued Tuesday widen the probe to all of Duke’s 32 ash ponds at 14 active or retired coal-fired power plants in the state. Included in that number are three ponds at Duke’s Sutton Plant
north of Wilmington. Those ponds border a popular public lake where a researcher has found high levels of toxins in the sediment and an unusually high number of deformed fish.

Close to two dozen employees of the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources, or DENR, were also subpoenaed to testify next month before a grand jury in Raleigh about any payments or items of value they might have received or made from Duke Energy or its predecessor company Progress Energy or Carolina Power & Light. The department was ordered to produce their personnel files. Among those ordered to appear are DENR officials in the department’s Wilmington and Washington offices in charge of water quality and aquifer protection and their Raleigh-based supervisors.

“People will go to jail if these subpoenas uncover that criminal behavior is endangering our rivers and public health,” said Todd Miller, executive director of the N.C. Coastal Federation.  “Let’s hope that’s not the case, and instead this is a tragic but inevitable consequence of lax environmental enforcement caused by agency leaders who strive to appease polluters.”

At the press conference yesterday at DENR offices in Raleigh, spokesman Drew Elliot and John Skvarla, the department’s secretary, refused to answer questions related to the subpoenas, citing policy about ongoing investigations.

Skvarla said the agency had not opened an internal investigation into the issues cited by federal prosecutors, whose initial round of requests sought information about the Dan River plant’s permits, inspection records, sampling results and all communication between DENR and Duke Energy and subcontractors for both working at the site.

Skvarla said that under his leadership DENR was being far more proactive about the ash ponds than previous administrations. Gov. Pat McCrory appointed Skvarla, a Raleigh businessman, last year to head the department.

DENR, Skvarla said, considers itself “partners” with environmental groups seeking cleanup of the sites, but disagreed with what he called their “one size fits all” approach. The groups, he said, only wanted to see the sites dug up and the coal ash transported to lined landfills. In some cases, he said, that would be the worst thing to do for the environment.

Most of the ponds are not lined, and environmental groups that are fighting to close them are worried about indications of groundwater contamination at all 14 sites.

This Google Earth image shows the Sutton Power Plant north of Wilmington and the three coal ash ponds that border Lake Sutton, a popular fishing lake that was built as a cooling pond for the power plant.

Lake Sutton Contamination

At a meeting Monday on the coal ash spill by the legislature’s Environmental Review Commission, Cape Fear Riverkeeper Kent Burdette stressed the need for DENR to take action not just to prevent a major spill like the one in the Dan River, but also to get a better handle on how the heavy metals that are the ash’s toxic signature are ending up in public waters.

Burdette said an extensive study released in October by Dennis Lemly, a Wake Forest University researcher and an expert on selenium contamination of fisheries, showed that the sediment at Lake Sutton, the 1,100-acre reservoir next to Duke’s Sutton Plant near Wilmington, contains high levels of selenium, a likely cause for the high rates of deformities that Lemly found in the lake’s fish. In one sample, almost 30 percent of the small bluegill had skeletal deformities. Coal ash from the Sutton plant is stored in three ponds bordering the lake.

Burdette said the state has not done enough to inform the public of the danger at the lake, a popular fishing spot favored for its largemouth bass. “When Sutton Lake fish are brought home to dinner tables,” he told legislators, “the selenium goes with them.”

Selenium is a natural element that in trace amounts is essential to good human health. It’s a common ingredient in coal ash, however, and when released in the environment in large amounts selenium is a persistent poison that has well-documented effects on fish reproduction and growth.

A small bluegill from Lake Sutton with a deformed spine, top, compared to a normal fish. The deformation in this fish and in many others sampled in a study of the lake is called lordosis (swayback) and kyphosis (rounded back). Photo: Dennis Lemly

A deformed mosquito fish from Lake Sutton with lateral curvature of the spine (scollosis). Photo: Dennis Lemly

Belews Lake in Surry County remains the poster child of selenium contamination in the U.S. It was created in 1973 to provide cooling water for Duke’s Belews Creek Steam Station, the largest coal-fired power plant in the state. Duke discharged selenium-laced water into the lake for more than a decade. As selenium accumulated in the lake, the 20 resident species of fish started showing deformities to the spine, head, fins and eyes. Largemouth bass stopped reproducing, and the state issued advisories about eating fish from the lake.

Duke stopped discharging wastewater into Belews in 1986, but long-term studies by Lemly and other researchers showed that the ill effects persisted long after the source of pollution was gone. As late as 2002, high numbers of deformed fish were still being found in the lake.

In an interview Tuesday, Burdette said the state Wildlife Resources Commission recently expanded a boat ramp and fishing pier at Lake Sutton and during heavy use there are as many as 300 boats on the lake and dozens of people fishing from the pier. Few are aware, he said, that less than 300 yards away is the outlet for runoff from coal ash ponds.

Although he’s concerned about the high levels of selenium and heavy metals, Burdette did not downplay the area’s risk that a Dan River-like spill could happen on the Cape Fear, which after passing the plant and lake  winds another 4.2 miles before reaching downtown Wilmington.

The Sutton plant’s three ponds, which sit close to the lake, cover roughly 135 acres and contain 745 million gallons of coal ash slurry more than three times the amount at the Dan River plant. The two main ponds at the plant are on the EPA’s list of sites with a significant hazard risk.

“What the spill points out is that the ponds and berms are not highly engineered structures that aren’t likely to fail,” he said. “I think it’s the opposite.”

He said heavy rains in 2010 caused a breach at one of the ponds at Sutton spilling a large amount of coal ash slurry on the east side of the site. The direction of the spill was fortunate he said, but had the other side of the pond given way instead, the ash would have gone straight into the lake.

“That was during a heavy rain, not a hurricane,” he said.

Burdette said the state also needs to increase its focus on groundwater contamination, especially in the coastal plain where surface waterways and groundwater interact and the flow through the aquifer systems is difficult to predict.