EPA seeks shift of coal ash monitoring to states

EPA move would expand state control of coal ash oversight, loosening federal safeguards while local communities push back over contamination risks.

A change in how the U.S. monitors toxic coal ash is moving to the center of environmental policy debates, with the Environmental Protection Agency signaling it wants more authority placed in state hands.

Across Georgia’s major rivers, large lagoons store coal ash, the hazardous residue left after coal is burned. Most of these impoundments are unlined, allowing heavy metals such as arsenic and mercury to leach into soil and nearby water bodies over time.

The shift traces back to rules put in place in 2015 under the Obama administration.. Those requirements pushed utilities to clean up coal ash ponds and also created monitoring obligations. elevating the EPA’s role as the primary regulator for these sites.. States could take over oversight as well, but only if they met minimum federal requirements.

Georgia was an early adopter.. In 2019, the EPA approved the state’s authority to manage coal ash.. But regulators’ first major action drew intense scrutiny: the state Environmental Protection Division approved a permit allowing coal ash to remain partly submerged in groundwater at a Georgia Power facility.. Communities raised objections, and the EPA rebuked the state.. Even so, the Georgia agency continued to approve additional permits for coal ash ponds across roughly a dozen coal plants.

That dynamic is now part of a broader proposal direction under the Trump administration. which is signaling it wants to move coal ash oversight to more states and reduce federal protections.. Five states have already approved coal ash programs: Georgia, Oklahoma, Texas, North Dakota, and Wyoming.. Oklahoma and Georgia received approval during the first Trump term. Texas during the Biden administration. and the remaining two states were approved in the last year.. The EPA is also in the process of reviewing Virginia’s application for permitting authority.

Critics argue that leaving permits and enforcement primarily in the hands of state agencies creates a structural problem. especially where agencies lack resources and where utilities have disproportionate influence.. Nick Torrey. a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. said state agencies that issue permits have not always been rigorous enforcing standards.. He also pointed to underfunding and underresourcing, describing utilities as often holding significant sway in state policymaking.

The coal ash decision is also being framed as part of a wider campaign to transfer regulatory authority away from the federal level and toward states.. During Trump’s first term. the EPA handed over wetlands permitting in Florida to state regulators. the first state to receive such authority in 25 years.. More recently. the administration began accepting so-called “Good Neighbor Plans” from eight states after the Biden administration had rejected similar plans over concerns about whether they would prevent ozone emissions from crossing state lines.. Over the past year. the administration expanded state authority over underground carbon sequestration. with West Virginia. Arizona. and Texas receiving supervisory authority over carbon injection wells.

Coal ash oversight is high stakes because coal plants have left behind a massive footprint.. According to the EPA, there are more than 670 coal ash ponds nationwide.. They vary widely in size. from only a few acres to a thousand or more. and many have experienced failures and releases into nearby waterways.. One of the most serious accidents occurred in 2008. when a dike at a Tennessee Valley Authority pond failed and released more than a billion gallons of coal ash.. The flood buried homes and residents have continued reporting health problems.. Similar disruptions have been linked to the Dan River in North Carolina and to incidents in eastern Kentucky.

The 2015 Obama-era rules aimed to reduce those hazards by requiring groundwater monitoring near coal ash ponds and by requiring lining for new ponds.. When testing suggested coal ash was leaching into water. companies were directed to close ponds by draining them or excavating the ash and relocating it elsewhere.

However, the rule set had significant gaps.. It did not cover certain situations, including lagoons that were no longer receiving new material at retired coal plants.. It also failed to include “dump sites,” where coal ash is stored before being moved into lagoons.. In practice. Torrey said. this created opportunities for utilities to shift blame toward exempt areas—arguing that groundwater contamination exemptions applied because leaching could be tied to portions of the system that were not governed by the monitoring and closure requirements.

In Georgia. the consequences of those gaps are described by local advocates as having moved beyond groundwater monitoring into daily life.. About six years ago. the Altamaha Riverkeeper tested groundwater near the coal-fired Plant Scherer in Monroe County and began notifying residents that well water contained compounds associated with coal ash.. County officials eventually arranged water lines. but some lower-income residents—unable to afford water bills—continued to rely on church water-filling stations.

Altamaha Riverkeeper’s executive director, Fletcher Sams, described the area as rural with a median household income of about $30,000. He said the cost of running pipe from the road and paying monthly fees can make basic connection to municipal water inaccessible for some families.

For its part, the EPA and Georgia’s Environmental Protection Division did not respond to requests for comment.

The legal and regulatory struggle has continued across administrations.. In 2024. the Biden EPA attempted to close loopholes by expanding coverage with a new rule that applied to all coal ash disposal sites. including “legacy ponds.” The Trump administration is now moving in the opposite direction. seeking to unwind those protections.

In April. the EPA proposed exempting older or inactive coal ash disposal sites from the newer requirements and giving state officials more flexibility in overseeing coal ash monitoring plans.. In communications announcing the overhaul effort. EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said the agency would pursue “cooperative federalism. ” aiming to allow states to handle local issues with federal support.

This shift lands at a moment when state governments face pressure that can affect enforcement capacity.. Budget reductions for environmental agencies have been reported across the country.. An analysis by the Environmental Integrity Project. a nonprofit founded by former EPA enforcement officials under both parties. found that more than half of states have cut funding for environmental agencies over the last 15 years.. The report highlighted a drop of more than 70% in Mississippi’s budget and a 61% reduction in South Dakota’s.. Three of the five states overseeing coal ash disposal—Texas, Georgia, and Wyoming—have experienced budget cuts of at least 20%.. Georgia, the analysis said, has reduced staffing by about 16%.

Not every state request for coal ash oversight has passed.. In 2024. the EPA rejected Alabama’s application to manage its coal ash ponds. citing that the proposed permit program did not meet federal standards.. The agency noted that Alabama’s framework did not require groundwater contamination to be adequately addressed during the closure of coal ash units.

Torrey argued that, despite some denials, the Trump administration appears likely to approve state requests more quickly, potentially leaving public health and the environment exposed.

“There’s a real retreat from the EPA doing the job it was created to do,” Torrey said.. He added that reduced federal oversight combined with “the weakening and choking of funds for state agencies” could translate into dramatically less protection from pollution for communities facing contamination risks.

coal ash monitoring EPA state authority groundwater contamination environmental regulation toxic metals coal plant pollution