Residents and advocates press City Council for stronger oversight after EPA consent decree for CWLP coal ash ponds

Brandon Durman, speaking for the Coalition for Springfield’s Utility Future, told the Springfield City Council on March 4 that the public utility City Water, Light & Power (CWLP) has “been alarmingly far out of compliance with environmental laws” and urged council oversight after a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency consent decree.

Durman said the consent decree lists repeated failures at CWLP’s coal ash ponds, including insufficient monitoring wells, use of contaminated wells as background samples and persistent arsenic detections. “CWLP found arsenic contamination in almost every sampling event from May 2018 to January 2023,” he said, and added that a February 2020 sampling showed six heavy‑metal contaminants at levels that require notification and corrective measures under federal rules.

The speaker said CWLP’s 2016 closure plan also falls short of EPA standards because it does not show how the proposed “cap in place” would prevent post‑closure infiltration or stabilize wastes sufficiently to support a final cover. He warned that if the city accepts an inadequate cap and later must remove ash, ratepayers could bear the cost twice.

Why it matters: coal ash can contain arsenic, lead and other contaminants that threaten groundwater. Durman told the council that the consent decree and supporting attachments impose dozens of technical requirements CWLP must meet to lawfully close or cap ash ponds, and that the city’s oversight should include a comprehensive, unbiased integrated resource plan (IRP) that weighs long‑term costs and environmental risks.

Anne Logue, a member of the public who addressed the council after Durman, said she is concerned about “watered down” explanations from CWLP leadership and called for full transparency so council decisions reflect the complete picture rather than “a piecemeal portrait.” Alderman Williams requested a copy of the consent decree; a staff member offered to provide one to him.

Council action and next steps: this item was raised during public comment; the council did not vote on policy changes at the meeting. Durman and other speakers urged the council to treat CWLP oversight “like a board of directors” and to obtain the technical compliance documents listed in the decree. Alderman Williams asked staff to provide the decree to council members.

Community context: speakers tied the issue to recent utility rate increases and long‑term fiscal risk to the city, recommending an IRP to compare alternatives and to show the financial implications of compliance or noncompliance.

The council took no formal vote specific to CWLP oversight at the March 4 meeting but city staff committed to circulate the consent decree to council members.