Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves additional $100,000 for outside counsel on CWLP coal‑ash/CCR compliance
Summary
The committee approved an additional $100,000 payment to outside counsel to support the Office of Public Utilities on coal‑combustion residual (CCR) landfill and ash‑pond regulatory work; city officials said most issues with the EPA were resolved late in the fiscal year, producing higher‑than‑expected legal costs.
The Springfield Committee of the Whole on Tuesday approved Ordinance 2025022, authorizing an additional $100,000 payment to Aaron Fox Shift LLP for legal assistance on coal combustion residual (CCR) rules and the city’s flue gas desulfurization sludge landfill. The additional payment raises the total not to exceed amount for the firm to $195,000 for work supporting the Office of Public Utilities.
Council members sought clarification on whether the work relates to litigation or regulatory compliance. The city attorney and the CWLP director said the work was not a lawsuit but assistance responding to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency inspections and information requests related to ash ponds and the landfill. The director said the city initially budgeted funds for some of the work in the next fiscal year but a surge of activity late in the prior fiscal year accelerated the work and exhausted the current budget line, prompting the request for additional funds.
Alderman Williams and others asked for specifics about the “numerous requests” from the EPA. The director told the committee the EPA had conducted inspections and issued information requests; part of the work was determining whether the city must follow federal CCR rules or state landfill rules. The director said those discussions had been ongoing for several years, but there was a particularly intensive period in November and December that required more staff and legal time.
Alderman Gregory asked whether the city was seeking to “change the EPA’s mind” about whether the landfill is subject to CCR rules. The director said the utility believes its program is protective and had previously relied on Illinois EPA permitting, but that to resolve the dispute the utility is undertaking work to refile or “redo” materials under the EPA CCR program so the city would be in compliance.
The measure was moved for debate and approved by voice vote.
Ending: The director said she expects most work to be wrapped up and does not anticipate requiring the full amount budgeted next year; the additional appropriation is meant to close out current fiscal‑year needs and cover any remaining loose ends related to the CCR/landfill work.
