Back to top

Innovations in Bottom Ash Conversion Technologies

Coal-fired power plants affected by changes in coal combustion residual (CCR) management rules and effluent limitation guidelines (ELG) are required to make changes to bottom ash management systems. While some have implemented technologies to achieve compliance, others want to start planning. It's time to review your options.

Achieving a Plan for Compliance With Equipment Redundancy

Upgrading an existing coal plant’s bottom ash system frequently creates space constraint challenges for the new equipment. For Platte River Power Authority, meeting coal combustion residual (CCR) requirements became an opportunity to adopt new, innovative technologies while also keeping desired redundancy for the utility’s largest source of power.

New Guidelines Drive Power Plant Update

As the EPA worked to prohibit coal-fired power plants from disposing of waste ash in ponds, KCP&L welcomed an alternative solution: an integrated dry ash handling system.

A Cost-Effective, Innovative Solution for Ash Handling and Dewatering

With critical ash handling equipment at the end of life, the San Juan Generating Station needed an immediate replacement option that would also provide an excellent return on investment. A Submerged Grind Conveyor was identified as the strategic solution.

Meeting CCR Requirements With a Proactive Project

As rules and regulations around coal combustion residual (CCR) landfills and surface impoundments become stricter, owners and operators of coal-fired plants face new compliance challenges. Ameren Missouri took an aggressive, progressive approach to program implementation as it tackled its first ash pond closures under the EPA’s CCR rule.

Enhancing Surface Impoundment Closures to Support Groundwater Compliance

The federal rule regulating the disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCRs) generated at coal-fired power plants also governs groundwater quality at these sites. Careful consideration of groundwater issues during impoundment closure planning and design can significantly benefit groundwater quality and reduce long-term risk.

Exploring the Implications of Proposed CCR and ELG Requirements

With a seemingly constant influx of new, revised and proposed requirements for CCR and ELG compliance, it can be difficult for coal-fired power plants to know where and how to start. While a variety of technologies and solutions exist, each plant’s unique design should ultimately inform the right approach. Leverage our decision tree to determine your path forward.


Combined Experience Contributes to Innovative Fish Handling Solution

After years of development of Section 316(b) regulations under the Clean Water Act, the time had come to select and implement compliance options. At Nearman Creek Power Station, an uncommon approach was customized to achieve compliance while minimizing complications.

An Integrated Team Drives Coal Pond Closures

Coal-fired power plant owners and operators are closing ponds that have long-stored coal combustion residuals (CCRs). These pond closures are complex and have impacts far beyond the pond’s banks, demanding an integrated team of engineering and environmental professionals to customize effective, compliant solutions.

Implications of the EPA’s Proposed CCR Rule Decisions

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought new clarity to its rules for coal combustion residuals (CCR) in written responses to applicants requesting deadline extensions for closing their unlined CCR surface impoundments. Here are some ways the EPA’s proposed CCR rule decisions could impact its review of other sites.

EPA Proposes to Tighten Coal Plant Discharge Rules for 3 Types of Effluent

After a lengthy period of speculation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking signaling its intent to issue stricter effluent limitation guidelines (ELG) for three types of coal plant effluent — flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater, bottom ash transport water, and combustion residual leachate (CRL).