the acaa appreciates epa's final decft)_qt t coal ash as nonhazardous.cience ahead of politics and clears the way for the beneficial use of coal ash to begin growing again, thereby keeping millions of tons out of landfills and ponds in the first place. we're also painfully aware, however, that epa has made final decisions before only to reverse course in the future. a hazardous versus nonhazardous debate occurred prior to the agency's final 2000 determination, which eight years later turned out to be not so final. additionally, the final rules preamble states with respect to ccr that is disposed in landfills until additional information is available in a number of key technical policy questions. apparently 34 years of study two reports to congress, two formal regulatory determination and a final rule issued after six-year rule making process may not be enough for epa to make a truly final determination. bills previously passed by president house would resolve these issues permanently. the bills would put enforcement responsibility authority in the hands

nonhazardous. do the citizens of your states or any of our states lose the ability to appeal, complain. sort of like we're talking about either citizens have rights or beaurocracy has rights and the two can't go hand in hand. as a former regulator myself, frankly, we heard more from citizens in these areas than we heard from any other person. to me the local and state level is where you get more citizen interaction not less. so could you -- somebody elaborate on that? if time is left, i certainly would welcome you to comment on that. >> as far as our members we feel we're all in favor of minimum federal standards, codification and certainty of it is the key point that was missing in all this. we do not think that citizens will lose their ability to have a public forum or appealing of decisions, no we feel that will continue. >> and the thing that would help by having a federal law and certainly epa rules that would help, there are a number of states luckily not including my own, where it is not all

we support me mental protections agency's decision to designate ccr's as nonhazardous. the epa's approach supported by data from its own investigation balances the need to protect a look the environment without creating an undue burden on affected phyllis szilagyi's. even with the nonhazardous final rule, we are seeking your support to provide additional legislative certainty. seminole owns a 1300 megawatt power plant employing 300 hard-working syrians. we have $535 million environmental control equipment. seminal generates approximately 800 house and tons of ccr's per year. however, we recycled roughly 550,000 tons per year of our ccr 's to produce waffle board, cement, and concrete blocks. one ccr material is converted into synthetic gypsum and sold to continental building products. continental is a facility specifically constructed to utilize the synthetic gypsum. since 2000, more than 7 million tons of this ccr material has been converted into wallboard. wallboard used to build homes and businesses throughout florida and the country. seminole recycles all of the fac

. >>> i wish we were here friday evening and even saturday after it was declared nonhazardous and itmade the difference in many lives. there are hundreds of birds. >> crews is washed more than 50 birds and they still very busy trying to stabilize almost town more so they can watch them. the international bird rescue is hand goaling the effort and they are asking the public not go out to the beach or show up at the center and they are relying on trained volunteers to help collect and clean the birds. >>> right now we want for check out this video a paddle boarder was "too excited to be scared," weapon face-to-face with killer whales off southern california. he captured this video off the shore of orange county. a pod of favoring cans -- five orcas came a few feet from him and one mammal swam under him twice and wanted to raise awareness of the "incredible magical creatures." police are looking for a man who has been looking into the weapons of two homes. a resident saw the man around the home and roaming around. >>> also, the daughter of eric guard neither says her dad's memorial was

coal ash as a hazard waste or promulgate a self-implementing standards for managing coal ash as nonhazardous waste under subtighting d. epa chose to regulate it under subtitle d which will help ensure coal ash continues to be beneficially reused. like this. hour because of the way is up title d is currently drafted epa didn't have the authority needed to create a permanent program for coal ash. the final rule lays out a program that will be enforced through citizen suits and will unavoidably lead to an unpredictable array of regulatory interpret tagss asations as judges throughout to the country will be forced to make extremely technical compliance decisions better left to a regulatory agency. final rule also sets up a dual regulatory program. epa strongly encourages, and i quote, that states -- for states to incorporate requirements into their solid waste management plans. however, it is currently drafted, it is not allowed state coal ash programs to operate in lieu of federal requirements in the final rule. meaning even if states adopt the federal requirements or requirements that are more

based on what the epa has stated, they clearly have the ability to revisit their determination on nonhazardous versus hazardous. that creates uncertainty. i will tell you in my experience that for the beneficial use committee, for our plant that provides a significant portion that uncertainty is a problem. a later designation or determination of hazardous is going to put that beneficial use process at risk. >> in terms of the effect of the market so far, it is too early to tell. we have heard many comments that people are happy that epa has gone with subtitled the. it is troubling to have that language in the preamble that they may want to go back and revisit the double exemption. they said it in 93, they set it in the year 2000. they said the call lasted not warrant hazardous waste management. we need action by congress to put an end to that chain of events. >> how about you on the whole issue and beneficial use and certainty? what don't think it is certain when you say you say you're going to reopen it. the history has changed the maximum contaminant levels which is a hundred times that stan