Congress and Coal Ash: Who are the Constituents?

[ensho]

http://www.progressivereform.org/CPRBlog.cfm?idBlog=704D3F7F-E05B-6065-5A035C925EABA1AA


Sue Sturgis has a nifty post at Facing South checking in on the doings of members of congress who represent states or districts that have cases of groundwater pollution from coal ash sites. Writes Sturgis:

On July 9, 2007, EPA's Office of Solid Waste published a report titled "Coal Combustion Damage Case Assessments" documenting 24 cases of proven environmental damage and 43 cases of potential damage caused by current coal ash disposal practices nationwide. As it turns out, many of those damage cases are in the home states of Congress members opposing strict coal ash regulations.

Dozens of members representing areas affected by coal ash pollution have signed letters to the administration opposing strong regulation (one of the letters was sent just last month). Check out the post for the full rundown.
-----------------

coal barons have lots of money to put into pockets so that regulations stay the same.

we need to shine the light on those 'pockets'.

[ThomWV]

1. An interesting segment

Quote:
In summary, EPA gathered or received information on 135 possible damage cases and has evaluated 85 of these cases. Six of the 50 cases that were not evaluated were minefills and outside the scope of this NODA. The remaining 44 cases that were not evaluated involved allegations with little or no supporting information. (See Table 2: Fossil Fuel Combustion (FFC) Damage Case Resolution, excluding minefills)
Of the 85 cases evaluated, EPA determined that 24 were proven cases of damage19. Sixteen were determined to be proven damages to ground water and eight were determined to be proven damages to surface water. Four of the proven damages to ground water were from unlined landfills, five were from unlined surface impoundments, one was due to a liner failure at a surface impoundment, and the remaining six were from unlined sand and gravel pits. Another 43 cases were determined to be potential damages to ground water or surface water. Four of the potential damage cases were attributable to oil combustion wastes. The remaining 18 alleged damage cases were not considered to be proven or potential damage cases; they were, therefore, rejected due to either (1) lack of any evidence of damage or (2) lack of evidence that damages were uniquely associated with CCW20.
Of the 16 proven cases of damages to ground water, the Agency has been able to confirm that corrective actions have been completed in six cases and are ongoing in nine cases. The Agency has not received information regarding the one remaining case. Corrective actions measures at these CCW management units vary depending on site specific circumstances and include formal closure of the unit, capping, the installation of new liners, ground water treatment, ground water monitoring, and combinations of these measures.