2020 08 014 Buck HOR Final with comments

STATE F
OVA
"+<1L 12,1 `
�£ QuAnn vtoE��
NCDEQ Coal Ash Impoundment Closure Plan
Decision
Buck Combined Cycle Station
Attachment 1: Hearing Officer's Report and Public
Comments
August 14, 2020
�E
1

Hearing Officer's Report — Proposed Closure Plan for the Coal Ash
Impoundment at Buck Combined Cycle Station
Date: August 14, 2020
Facility: Buck Combined Cycle Station
County: Rowan
Owner & Operator: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
Purpose
The purpose of this document is to provide an administrative record of the public input process on
the proposed Closure Plan for the subject facility as required by G.S. 130A-309.214(b) of Session
Law 2016-95 House Bill 630 (referred to as the Coal Ash Management Act or CAMA).
Regulatoly Background Summary
CAMA, enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly in August 2014, required that the North
Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) develop proposed classifications for all
coal combustion residuals surface impoundments, including active and retired sites, for the
purpose of closure and remediation based on these sites' risks to public health and the environment.
In July 2016, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted House Bill 630, which added N.C.G.S.
§ 130A-309.216 requiring the impoundment owner to identify three sites in North Carolina at
which to install and operate ash beneficiation projects capable of processing coal combustion
residuals (CCR) to specifications appropriate for cementitious products. The statute requires the
impoundment owner to use commercially reasonable efforts to produce 300,000 tons of usable
CCR at each site annually. On October 5, 2016, Duke Energy selected the Buck Steam Station as
one of the three ash beneficiation sites. Pursuant to subsection (c) of N.C.G.S. § 130A-309.216,
CCR surface impoundments located at a site at which an ash beneficiation project is installed and
operating shall be closed no later than December 31, 2029.
In April 2019, NCDEQ established submittal dates for an updated Comprehensive Site Assessment
(CSA) and updated Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for CCR surface impoundments and other
primary and secondary sources. Consistent with this direction, Duke Energy will submit to
NCDEQ the updated CSA for the Buck Combined Cycle Station by February 1, 2021, and the
updated CAP by July 1, 2021.
On December 30, 2019, NCDEQ received the proposed Closure Plan for the Buck Combined
Cycle Station per the CAMA deadline. Staff from the NCDEQ's Division of Waste Management;
Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources; and Division of Water Resources have reviewed
the Closure Plan for completeness and the requirements of 130A-309.214(a)(4). NCDEQ also
received the proposed CAP for groundwater remediation for the Buck Combined Cycle Station.
The Division of Water Resources staff also reviewed the CAP as some of its components are part
of the Closure Plan.
2

Site History/Background Summary
Buck Combined Cycle Station is owned and operated by Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke
Energy). The approximately 640-acre Buck Combined Cycle Station site is located at 1555
Dukeville Road in Rowan County near Spencer, North Carolina on the southern bank of the Yadkin
River. Commercial operations of the station began in 1926 with two coal-fired units and later
expanded to six units. Units 1 and 2 were retired in 1979, Units 3 and 4 were retired in 2011, and
Units 5 and 6 were retired in 2013. There are no coal-fired units currently in operation at the Buck
Combined Cycle Station. The Buck Combined Cycle Station began transitioning to a 620
megawatt, gas -fired combined cycle plant in 2009, and it became operational in December 2011.
The property contains three coal ash impoundments, two closed and one inactive covering
approximately 150 acres, and containing an estimated 6.6 million tons of ash.
Closure Plan Summary
The Closure Plan indicates that all coal ash at the site will be excavated. Duke Energy has
developed plans for on -site recovery and reclamation/recycling of a significant portion of the CCR
at the Buck Combined Cycle Station at a rate of 400,000 tons of CCR processed per year in
accordance with NCGS § 130A-309.216. Duke Energy will implement a concurrent excavation
plan in which any remaining excavated CCR will be transported to an approved lined landfill
facility in order to meet the deadline of December 31, 2029 for complete removal of the CCR. The
beneficial use activities consist of removing and transporting CCR from the basins for processing
at the onsite STAR® facility currently being constructed. The STAR® facility will process the
reclaimed CCR to a level of quality and condition suitable for future reuse in the concrete industry.
Public Input Summary
In accordance with the requirements of 130A-309.214(b)(1), the Closure Plan was made available
to the public for review and input on January 22, 2020. A copy of the proposed closure plan was
available to be reviewed at the Rowan County Health Department, Rowan County Public Library,
and at the NCDEQ Mooresville Regional Office. The Closure Plan was also made available online
at:
hgps:HDEQ.nc. gov/newslkey-issues/coal-ash-excavationl2020-coal-ash-closure-plans-buck-
cape-fear-hf--lee-and
Per 130A-309.214(b)(2)(a), a notice and summary of the proposed Closure Plan was published in
the Salisbury Post newspaper for three consecutive weeks beginning on January 26, 2020. Copies
of the Notice were provided as required by 130A-309.214(b)(2)(b) and (c). Per 130A-
309.214(b)(4), the 30-day comment period began on January 25, 2020 and ended on March 16,
2020. Comments could be sent to the NCDEQ via email, mail, and oral and/or written comments
submitted during the public hearing. As NCDEQ was reviewing the public comments, it was noted
that the wrong email address for public comment was included in the original notice in January.
The agency determined that an additional 30-day comment period was needed to make sure all the
public comments were received and considered as part of the public process. The agency noticed
the second comment period for three consecutive weeks starting on June 25, 2020 and the comment
period remained open through July 24, 2020.
3

Public Hearing and Oral Comments SummarX
In accordance with the requirements of 130A-309.214(b)(3), a Public Hearing was held on
February 24, 2020 at 6:00 pm in the North Rowan High School located at 300 North Whitehead
Avenue in Spencer, North Carolina. The purpose of the public hearing was to allow the public to
comment on the Buck Combined Cycle Station Closure Plan. Interested parties were able to
submit oral or written statements regarding the proposed Closure Plan. Persons wishing to speak
registered at the hearing. Speaking times were allotted per speaker as time allowed.
Approximately 51 people attended the public hearing including 16 staff members from the
Division of Waste Management; Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources; Division of
Water Resources, and Division of Air Quality, as well as a Public Information Officer and the
Hearing Officer. A total of 51 individuals signed the attendance sign in sheets at the hearing. The
Hearing Officer provided opening comments, and Elizabeth Werner of the Division of Waste
Management gave a brief overview of the Closure Plan. Three individuals registered in advance
of the hearing to make comments, and one additional individual made comments after the three
that registered spoke. Speakers had three minutes for initial presentations and additional time was
provided after everyone who registered to speak was finished.
Response to Comments
Aside from the comments provided by the speakers at the public hearing, NCDEQ initially
received no additional comments via email, written, and/or spoken during the comment period. At
the public hearing, the PowerPoint directed email comments be submitted to
rowancommentskncdenr.gov, however the outlook address apparently set up was for
buckcomments(kncdenr.gov. Following this discovery in June of 2020, the comment period was
re -opened and advertised, and three emails were received. The main concerns were noise control,
environmental monitoring, stormwater and wastewater runoff, air quality from the STAR® plant,
the Buck Combined Cycle Station being constructed on/near the most historic site in Rowan
County, and how the community would be notified if an environmental impact occurred.
There were four public commenters who made oral comments at the February 24, 2020 public
hearing, and there were three public comments submitted by email, all addressed below.
1. Comments from the February 24, 2020 Public Hearing
Comment: All four commenters expressed support and appreciation for the closure plan as they
felt that excavation and transport to a lined landfill was the best way to protect the environment
and surrounding communities.
Response: NCDEQ agrees with this comment and has determined that excavation of the CCR
impoundment at Buck, followed by utilization for approved beneficial reuse activities and
placement in a lined landfill, is the best closure method to protect the environment and surrounding
communities.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the dams at Buck are classified as "large size,
high -hazard, Class C structures" due to the effect a dam failure at Buck would have, and expressed
concern about how the community would be notified during an emergency. The commenter
suggests that community members meet regularly with NCDEQ and Duke Energy where the Star
system is being installed to improve communication with the community.
4

Response: Duke Energy will be required to meet all applicable legal statutes and regulations
addressing emergency plans at Buck. Generally, the statutory authority to regulate emergency
plans is vested in local, state, and federal agencies other than NCDEQ.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern there was no mention of noise control for the site
during the closing process.
Response: Duke Energy will be required to meet all applicable legal statutes and regulations
addressing worker safety at Buck. Generally, the statutory authority to regulate noise control is
vested in local, state, and federal agencies other than NCDEQ.
Comment: All boring logs are from 2008 and not more recently, and the commenter worries about
what change has happened since, and about letting Duke pick sample sites.
Response: DWR staff review all sample locations and analytical parameters based on
hydrogeologic conditions. All such plans are subject to approval by our staff.
Comment: One commenter has concerns about the onsite wastewater and stormwater runoff from
the facility especially related to the planned dam breaches, specifically that this water does not
make it into the Yadkin River untreated.
Response: NCDEQ has determined that excavation, followed by utilization for approved
beneficial reuse activities or placement in a lined landfill, at Buck is the best closure method to
protect the water quality of the Yadkin River. Duke Energy will be required to comply with both
an industrial stormwater permit and an industrial NPDES permit, both of which are intended to
protect the receiving waters from exceeding the water quality standards. If Duke Energy remains
in compliance with these permits, NCDEQ believes the Yadkin River will be protected.
Comment: One commenter has concerns about groundwater pollution and remediation, and wants
to be able to review the data during monitoring.
Response: Groundwater data provided by Duke Energy to NCDEQ are a public record and will
be provided to the public upon request. Additionally, the federal Coal Combustion Residual Rule
requires Duke Energy to post the groundwater and other data on a publicly available website.
Comment: Once commenter has concerns about whether the coal ash handled by the Star System
will be monitored for toxic metals found in coal ash (but is aware the air permit was issued).
Response: Duke Energy performed a site specific ash analysis taking samples from the ash pond
to calculate the emission rate for each toxic metal. The data were used in both the emissions
analysis and the air toxic modeling used to set the allowable emission rate in the permit for each
of the toxic metals.
Comment: One commenter thinks Duke Energy should have to pay for maintenance costs for their
coal ash ponds and power plants.
Response: The North Carolina Utilities Commission has statutory authority to determine who will
pay the costs associated with cleanup of coal ash at the site, including those costs associated with
storage of excavated coal ash in a lined landfill. These cleanup costs will be the subject of future
rate cases before the North Carolina Utilities Commission. The public will have an opportunity to
provide comments during those rate case hearings.
Comment: One commenter stated his organization was in favor of beneficial use but shares
concerns about air quality.
Response: The air quality permit for the recycling facility addresses the necessary controls to
ensure the ambient standards are protected and the toxics emissions are minimized.
Comment: One commenter opposed bringing in coal ash to the Buck site from others in order to
undertake the STAR process, raising specific concerns about its proximity to the Yadkin River.
5

Response: The only coal ash to be used at the site is the ash that is currently stored in
impoundments at the Buck facility. Other ash is not planned to be brought in at this time. NCDEQ
has determined that excavation, followed by utilization for approved beneficial reuse activities or
placement in a lined landfill, at Buck is the best closure method to protect the water quality of the
Yadkin River.
Comment: One commenter noted that the Buck site is located "at the most historic site in all of
Rowan County" and was frustrated with Duke Energy's protection of the site's "historic features."
Response: NCDEQ will consider this comment as future detailed planned submittals are reviewed
for the planned excavation process.
2. Comments received from email.
Comment: One commenter expressed support and appreciation for the closure plan as they felt
that excavation and removal of coal ash from unlined pits was the best way to protect the
environment and surrounding communities. The commenter hopes that the revised plan will
include groundwater monitoring and flow data.
Response: NCDEQ agrees with this comment and has determined that excavation of the CCR
impoundment at Buck, followed by utilization for approved beneficial reuse activities or placement
in a lined landfill, is the best closure method to protect the environment and surrounding
communities.
Comment: One commenter raises concern about stormwater management and suggests that any
revised NPDES permit include effluent limitations for heavy metals.
Response: NCDEQ will consider this comment during the NPDES permitting process.
Comment: One commenter suggests further public meetings once annual reports of groundwater
sampling data are available and before monitoring/remediation plans are finalized. The commenter
suggested that health concerns and drinking water supplies be part of the plans.
Response: NCDEQ will consider this comment.
Comment: One commenter would like a more detailed emergency spill response plan.
Response: NCDEQ will consider this comment.
Comment: One commenter is concerned about the remaining 2.7 million tons of CCR that will be
left after 10 years of recycling the 4 million tons of CCR, and asks for a definitive answer for the
plans for these 2.7 million tons of CCR.
Response: The coal ash will be excavated. The Closure Plan allows for on -site recovery and
reclamation/recycling of a significant portion of the coal ash. The remaining excavated coal ash
will be transported to an approved lined landfill facility in order to meet the end date of December
31, 2029 for complete removal.
Comment: While the commenter supports beneficial reuse of CCR, they have air quality concerns
for the STAR system emissions of heavy metals.
Response: The air quality permit for the recycling facility addresses the necessary controls to
ensure the ambient standards are protected and the toxics emissions are minimized. The STAR®
facility must meet all applicable environmental regulatory standards and permit conditions.
Comment: One commenter expresses their approval and support of the Buck site and expresses
gratitude for working to resolve these environmental issues.
0

Response: NCDEQ appreciates the participation of the public in the public comment process as
the department determined the best closure method to protect the environment and surrounding
communities.
Comment: One commenter insisted that complete removal and landfill disposal is the only
acceptable resolution.
Response: In July 2016, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted House Bill 630, which
added N.C.G.S. § 130A-309.216 requiring Duke Energy Progress, LLC (Duke Energy) to identify
three sites in North Carolina at which to install and operate ash beneficiation projects capable of
processing coal combustion residuals (CCR) to specifications appropriate for cementitious
products. The statute requires Duke Energy to use commercially reasonable efforts to produce
300,000 tons of usable CCR at each site annually. On October 5, 2016, Duke Energy selected the
Buck Steam Station as one of the three ash beneficiation sites.
Hearing Officer Recommendations
Based on my review of the record and in consultation with subject matter experts in NCDEQ, I
recommend approval of the submitted Closure Plan for the coal ash impoundment at Duke
Energy's Buck Combined Cycle Station located in Rowan County. I conclude that the Closure
Plan is protective of public health, safety and welfare, the environment and natural resources and
otherwise complies with the requirements of CAMA.
Jag& Watkins, Hearing Officer
August 14, 2020
Date
7

From:
Edgar Miller
To:
Buckcomments
Cc:
Trey Bender; brianf
Subject:
[External] Resubmission of YRK Comments on Buck Power Station CCR Closure Plan
Date:
Friday, July 24, 2020 2:32:06 PM
Ex te n attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
a�chment to reoort.spamCCDnc.gov
Yadkin Riverkeeper Comments to the NC Department of Environmental Quality
Duke Energy Buck Station Coal Ash Closure Plans
Originally submitted March 16, 2020. Revised and resubmitted on July 24, 2020.
Edgar Miller, YRK Executive Director
Yadkin Riverkeeper (YRK) is a 501(c)(3), nonprofit environmental advocacy organization based in
Winston Salem, NC. YRK has more than 325 members and its mission is to protect and enhance the
Yadkin River through education, advocacy and action. YRK and our national affiliate, Waterkeeper
Alliance, represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center, sued Duke Energy Carolinas over
the management of the coal ash basins at the Buck Station in 2015 over concerns about
groundwater and potential surface water contamination. The parties to the lawsuit reached a
settlement at the end of 2016, requiring removal of all coal ash on site by 2030.
YRK has supported statewide efforts by community organizations and other NC Riverkeepers to
advocate for removal of coal ash from all of Duke Energy's unlined coal ash pits and ponds as the
most environmentally sound alternative. We applaud and strongly support NC DEQ's decision to
require removal of coal ash at the remaining plants across NC and commend Duke Energy for
agreeing to do that plan of action. We hope this will usher in an era of better communications and
relationship building between all interested parties to make sure this gets done right and that the
neighboring communities' concerns are addressed by NCDEQ and Duke Energy. If successful, this
approach will ensure this is a true community partnership that will reestablish trust and that this
plan is fully supported by the impacted communities and other stakeholder organizations.
In the original comments YRK submitted by email on March 16, 2020, which were subsequently lost
by NCDEQ, we stated our position that the draft closure plan for Buck Station submitted by Duke
Energy on December 30, 2019, was a good start to the cleanup process, but noted that the plan did
not include key pieces of information including the comprehensive site assessment (CSA),
groundwater monitoring data and corrective action plan -(CAP). The December 30, 2019, plan
indicated that based on a letter from DEQ on April 5, 2019, the updated CSA would be submitted on
October 1, 2020, and the CAP would be submitted on July 1, 2021.
However, in the Duke Energy's revisions to the draft closure plan submitted on April 2, 2020, after
the public meeting in Spencer held on February 24, 2020, and after the previous comment deadline
of March 16, 2020, the plan stated that the CSA had been submitted to Duke to DEQ on August 23,
2015, and the CAP (Part 2) had been submitted to DEQ on February, 19, 2016, and both were noted
to be, "herein incorporated by reference..." In addition, the revised plan indicates groundwater
monitoring and flow data has been previously submitted as part of the CSA and CAMA annual
monitoring reports.
YRK has been unable to locate these documents and has requested copies from DEQ but as of the
filing of these comments, we have not heard back from DEQ's Division of Waste Management or
Division of Water Resources staff about the availability of these documents. As a result, we reiterate
our concerns expressed in our original comments that we cannot fully evaluate the plan without
those documents and the information contained therein. While we understand both the CSA and
CAP are still scheduled to be updated per the schedule outlined in the April 5, 2019, DEQ letter, YRK
respectfully request that these documents be made part of the public record and that DEQ not issue
any final approval of the closure plan until the public has an opportunity to review and comment on

both the existing and to -be -updated CAP and CSA, as well as the annual CAMA reports
In addition to the need for additional information on groundwater sampling and corrective action
plans being available, our other major concerns include:
• On -site wastewater and stormwater management and runoff and impacts of direct
discharges to the river.
• Groundwater pollution and remediation.
• Emergency spill response plans and water supply wells and pumping stations.
• The overall coal combustibles residuals or CCR management plan.
• The beneficiation/recycling process and related air and water impacts of the Staged
Turbulent Air Reactor or "STAR" facility.
Wastewater/Stormwater/Direct Discharge
The draft plan mentions concern about increased water flow from breaching dams, but does not
address how those will be effectively managed to reduce stormwater runoff. The plan needs to
specify if/how the stormwater will be retained, pumped and treated and these provisions should
be in the amended 404 permit needed from the Army Corps of Engineers.
The plan also lacks detail on how wastewater generated from the CCR dewatering process will
be managed, including if and how it will be tested, and if it will require treatment in order to
meet any effluent limitations imposed by the NPDES permit. Under the current NPDES permit,
Duke currently monitors for arsenic, selenium and mercury, however there are no effluent
limitations for those heavy metals. YRK recommends the revised NPDES permit include effluent
limits for these three heavy metals as well as cadmium and chromium, to ensure protection of
water quality in the Yadkin River.
Groundwater Concerns
As noted above, it is difficult to fully assess the Buck Closure Plan without groundwater sampling
data and proposed monitoring and remediation plans included. Current place holders in the
December 31, 2019, plan called for this information to be part of the CSA due on October 1 of
this year and the CAP due July 1, 2021, but as noted above, the revised plan incorporates
previous reports and CAMA annual reports as containing this information. YRK recommends
NCDEQ hold additional public meetings and opportunities for impacted communities and
stakeholders to review this information and provide comments once they are available and
before they are finalized. The plans must address ongoing health concerns of nearby residents
and provision of drinking water supplies.
III. Other Water Related Concerns
In addition to water quality concerns, YRK would like to see a more detailed emergency spill
response plan and better understand the purpose, need and impact of new water supply wells
and pumping stations mentioned in the Plan.
IV. CCR Management
YRK applauds Duke Energy for maintaining the 2030 CCR removal deadline and its decision to
not pursue a landfill permit for on -site disposal of any CCR. However, we are concerned about
the disposition of the remaining 2.7 million tons of CCR left over after 10 years of recycling 4
million tons of CCR on site and potential environmental impacts of this material being
transported off site, which should include a mitigation plan to minimize transportation impacts.
Duke Energy needs to provide a definitive answer to the question of what the plans are for
handling the remaining 2.7 million tons of CCR, which is currently not addressed in either the
initial or revised draft Closure Plan.

V. CCR Recycling
YRK supports beneficial reuse of CCR, however we do have air quality concerns related to the
proposed lack of monitoring for the STAR system emissions for heavy metals associated with
coal ash. We understand the air quality permit has already been granted for this facility and is
based on modeling predictions for processing 400,000 tons of CCR per year for 10 years, with
projected emission levels well below current air quality standards. YRK recommends the facility
be required to monitor for heavy metal emissions in its first year of operations to ensure the
projections are accurate, which will build public confidence and support the recycling process.
YRK also would like to see a stronger commitment from Duke Energy to not accept any CCR from
off -site facilities for recycling.
In conclusion, YRK supports NCDEQ and Duke's plans to remove all CCR onsite by the 2030 deadline
and Duke Energy's plans to recycle the bulk of the material onsite into materials that can be
beneficially reused. We want to work with NCDEQ and Duke Energy to ensure the final plans and
their implementation will enjoy broad public support, address ongoing health concerns and protect
water quality and natural resources critical to the citizens of the Yadkin River basin and particularly,
Davidson and Rowan Counties and High Rock Lake. Millions in economic impacts from the River and
Lake are at stake, as well as the quality of life of future generations of North Carolinians depending
on the River for drinking water and recreation.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Edgar Miller
Executive Director
Yadkin Riverkeeper, Inc.
edgar&yadkinriverkee en r.org
336.688.2651
www.yadkinriverkee en r.org

From: Molly Jenkins
To: Buckcomments
Subject: [External] Buck facility closure public comment
Date: Monday, July 20, 2020 2:22:26 PM
• External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as a
to reoort.spamPnc. oovv
Hi,
In accordance with the public comment period for the excavation and closure of the Buck coal
ash basin, I would like to use this opportunity to voice my approval and support for the
excavation and closure of this site. Thank you for working to resolve the environmental issues
associated with coal ash basins, and thank you for moving forward with this project. It makes
me proud to be a citizen of North Carolina, and proud to be raising my young son here.
Regards,
Molly Jenkins
Molly F. Jenkins
Science Communication & Outreach ORISE Participant
Public Health & Environmental Systems Division I Environmental Pathways Modeling Branch
Center for Public Health & Environmental Assessment
U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development
C: [phone]
ienkins.molly(@epa.gov

From: Deirdre Woolard
To: Buckcomments
Subject: [External] Buck Power Station
Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 11:45:48 AM
• External email. Do not cIIcK IInKS or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
to v
Anything other than complete excavation and disposal (not repurpose or landfill disposal) is
unacceptable and criminal.
Allowing power companies to continuously reep record profits without liability has to stop!
NC needs to hold them accountable on their dime!
Sincerely,
Deirdre Woolard
Concerned citizen of Planet Earth