Issue. I commend the epa for working on this rule. Do you have a conference that this final rule is protective of health and the environment, are there gaps in the protections under this rule that would need to be filled by legislation . I believe the rule is very strong and very protective. And in terms of any gaps we dont believe there are any gaps. We believe all the risks are put in place. All the rigorous technical information. What about beneficial reuse . Will this rule restrict beneficial reuse in anyway to stigmatize coal ash . We dont believe it will. The real clarity is not subject to the rule. But still i expect were going to hear from the second panel that legislation is needed to remove epas authority to regulate cole ash under subtitle c in the future. What factors might lead epa to some day regulate coal ash under subtitle c. To be clear we had proposed an approach under d and c. We made a decision under d the seat proposal is no longer on the table. Like any other rule
Norway
New-york
United-states
Tampa
Florida
North-carolina
Texas
Dan-river
California
Indiana
Virginia
Farmington-hills