Springfield officials are pushing back against assertions that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has dealt a blow to a proposed second lake for the city’s future water needs.
Don Hanrahan, a lawyer and rural Springfield resident, told Illinois Times the EPA’s latest recommendation that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers deny a permit for construction of City Water, Light and Power’s proposed Hunter Lake is “a significant black eye” for the municipally owned utility.
Hanrahan, political chairperson of the Sangamon Valley Group in the Sierra Club’s Illinois chapter, said, “It feels really nice that somebody with big guns is finally saying what we’ve been saying for the past 30 years: There’s no need for this lake.”
In addition, he said the recommendation is a “very significant signal” to the Illinois EPA, which eventually would be called upon to issue its own permit for Hunter Lake, that the proposal “can’t pass muster.”
But CWLP officials said it’s wrong to interpret the EPA’s recommendation as a setback in CWLP’s quest for regulatory approval at the federal and state level to build Hunter Lake and help the city deal with future droughts.
The U.S. EPA recommendation was one of more than 400 comments submitted to the Army Corps during a 45-day public comment period that ended Sept. 25 as part of the federal agency’s effort to draft a final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the plan, according to Todd LaFountain, CWLP water division manager.
The U.S. EPA’s comments were “really not a lot different” than what the agency has said in response to the earlier proposals from the city for a water source to supplement Lake Springfield, LaFountain said.
EPA officials believe “there were a few things that needed to be expanded upon” in Springfield’s proposal, he said. The Army Corps will research those issues, and federal regulators may seek more information from the city before a final impact statement is issued, possibly by summer 2024, he said.
The Corps’ decision on a permit would come sometime after the impact statement is issued.
CWLP spokesperson Amber Sabin said the EPA’s observations are “not new.”
However, Hanrahan said the EPA’s latest statements were more explicit in outlining the city’s challenges in satisfying applicable state and federal laws to build the $153 million lake. Hunter Lake would be created on 2,600 acres east of Lake Springfield’s 4,300 acres and north of Pawnee.
Allen Marshall, a spokesperson for the Army Corps’ office in Rock Island, wouldn’t comment on Hanrahan’s characterization of the EPA recommendation and its impact on the future outcome of Springfield’s application.
“Everything is still ongoing,” he said. “The permit application is under evaluation.”
Springfield officials have discussed a potential second lake for the city since the early 1950s. The city’s formal efforts to obtain a permit from the Army Corps began in 1989.
If regulatory hurdles are cleared, the Springfield City Council would need to make a final decision on whether to proceed and how to pay for the project and a second lake’s future ongoing operations. CWLP likely would finance the project through increases in water rates that are among the lowest in the state.
Hunter Lake opponents obtained a copy of the U.S. EPA recommendation through an Illinois Freedom of Information Act request to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. The EPA sent a copy to IDNR when it submitted its recommendation in September as a public comment to the Army Corps.
EPA Wetlands and Watersheds Branch Manager David Pfeifer wrote in the 11-page document that the project, as proposed, “does not comply with” Clean Water Act guidelines.
“Specific deficiencies in the application include the project purpose and need, alternative analysis, water quality impacts to impaired waterways, and the proposed compensatory mitigation,” Pfeifer wrote.
“We recommend that the Corps not issue a permit for the project as proposed unless the noted deficiencies are addressed, and the information provided by the applicant is compliant with the guidelines,” he said.
The document said Lake Springfield is the source of Springfield’s domestic water supply and provides drinking water to about 147,750 people who use an average of 22 million gallons of water each day.
According to the city’s application, Springfield needs a secondary water source because the city’s projections show that the city’s water demand in 42 years could be as high as 33.62 million gallons per day. Springfield officials told the Corps that Hunter Lake would hold more than 12 billion gallons of water and meet the potential need.
But the EPA noted that a water demand analysis completed in 2015 and 2016 showed the “potable and industrial water use demand” in Springfield would decline from 2012 to 2020, and the city’s population has been declining since 2010.
Despite this data, Pfeifer wrote that the city predicts population growth “in the long term without a detailed explanation.”
He added: “The EPA recommends that the applicant use real-time data to justify this projected increase in potable and industrial water demand. If Springfield’s population is expected to decrease, the need for the project may no longer be imminent.”
Dean Olsen is a senior staff writer at Illinois Times. He can be reached at dolsen@illinoistimes.com, 217-679-7810 or twitter.com/DeanOlsenIT.
This article appears in Warriors with a difference.
The very notion that Springfield has been losing population is sophomoric in its conclusion. Perhaps if you take Springfield to be the legal borders and edges of Springfield, perhaps there might be a measure of truth. But look at the close suburbs, where the growth has been massive! If you count the growth in the suburbs it has DOUBLED the size of limited Springfield.
This lake is needed, and almost as an emergency, frankly, as Springfield provides water services to all those suburbs that are growing like wildfire.
CWLP has been making wild predictions of population growth for 58 years. When Hunter Lake was first conceived they predicted there’d been twice the population currently served by 2000.
This time, they took a study that initially claimed modest population growth (before they knew the population has not grown since), and CWLP then insisted on a “high growth” model that grossly inflsted that figure, then added 5 percent more for good measure.
In 7 of the last 11 years, Sangamon County has seen population declines. Overall, down about a percent since 2012. The growth is mostly to areas not served by CWLP (South Sangamon Water District, Curran-Gardner, south and west).
EPA didn’t say that population won’t grow. They said CWLPs projections are unsupported by any evidence. In fact, population trends are, overall, less important than CWLP’s own actual retail water use data, which show a steady decline of 14 percent over the last 9 years, and flat demand for 40 years before that. As CWLP once said, “water conservation is the enemy” of retail sales, and we are reaping the benefits of federally mandated water conservation for water consuming devices like toilets, washers, dishwashers, shower heads, etc. – how we have a larger population than 50 years ago, using less water. And these baked- in measures will bear more fruit over the next years as water hogs are replaced.
And there’s almost 30 percent more water staying in the lake now than there was in 2016 when CWLP re-applied. Plus, we can now draw it down to the “conservation pool,” 8 feet more water, than before 2021. The USEPA agrees there is no demonstrable need (i.e., need supported by more than the smoke and mirrors CWLP uses), and even if there was, there are cheaper, better alternatives that won’t obliterate thousands of acres.
When this lake gets built, it should be called Lake Hanrahan for one week ! In the meantime, the city needs to strike back at the so-called organizations that are causing so much trouble and interfering with past and present issues with CWLP and residents of Springfield, including holding some personally responsible. Yes, other cities have done this before with success.
After reading this article it gives the impression that Mr. Pfeifer from the EPA is looking for another study and does not realize the water supply issue is not the only factor stated to the USACE concerning the purpose and need of this project. I agree with Mr. Edwards though that to think Springfield and its surrounding communities are not going to grow in the coming decades is short sighted. A good example is when the new power plant by Pawnee is completed CWLP is going to pick up a 300,000 gallon per day water customer. I hear they have future plans for expansion which could increase that to 750,000 gallons per day. One thing is for sure though, if Springfield does not have the water to grow it might not, and who thinks having an 8,000 acre State park bordering our city limits will not help Springfield grow in the future? Maybe the following will help some people understand more about the issue.
“8. Purpose and Need.
A. Water Supply: Based on an analysis of the storage and capacity, the Illinois State Water Survey had determined that Lake Springfield is an inadequate water supply system with a 50% probability of not meeting expected water supply demands. Under conditions of reduced water availability, the City is at risk of not meeting demands (both existing and future) for commercial and residential water use, for industrial water supply (health care and energy generation needs), and for providing water for adjacent wholesale communities. Under projected drought conditions, the estimated water deficit (demand minus yield) is currently 8.2 MGD, whereas future deficits (year 2065) are projected at 11.3 MGD. CWLP wishes to meet the supplemental water supply of 12 MGD to the year 2065.
B. Aquatic Recreation: The City hired the University of Illinois to conduct an aquatic recreation supply and demand study which focused on fishing, fishing tournaments, waterfowl bird watching & hunting, boating, kayaking, canoeing, swimming, and water skiing within a 50+ mile radius of Springfield. The study concluded that there is an unmet demand for 12,773 acres of these aquatic recreation activities within the 50+ mile radius of Springfield to the year 2035. The City wishes to meet a portion of the unmet demand for aquatic recreation activities to meet current and future demands to the year 2035. CWLP desires to construct a multi-use reservoir encompassing approximately 2,650 acres in surface area. The reservoir will have a minimum yield of 12 MGD to meet water supply demands under drought conditions and a minimum of 2,500 acres of flat-water area available to recreation to partially address the unmet water-based recreational demand in the Springfield area.
C. Details of the Aquatic Recreation Demand Study and other project documents may be viewed at: http://supplementalwater.cwlp.com/Document… .
D. Other incidental benefits of an increased water supply and aquatic recreation include providing support for regional economic development. As part of the Springfield 2020 strategy, the retention, expansion, and attraction of diverse, stable employers is a priority (City of Springfield 2000). Initial emphasis will be on such business and industry areas as health care, biotechnology, other technology based firms, tourism and hospitality, consumer services, food processing, and product distribution. Based on information from the Springfield-Sangamon County Regional Planning Commission (SSCRPC) and the City, an adequate water supply may be a factor affecting regional economic development.”
Mr Hanrahans comment here about obliterating thousands of acres is utterly laughable to me.
Environmentally, building this project will turn over 3,400 acres of cultivated land, hay lands and pastures into tallgrass prairies, forested lands and wetlands. By comparison, the area of the lake is 2,649 acres. “Total annual load reductions from all CWLP BMPs (Best Management Practices) are estimated at 573,432 pounds for total nitrogen, 60,538 pounds for total phosphorus, and 58,621 tons of sediment.” Because of all this the water quality of Hunter Lake will be much better than Lake Springfield. It will be a gigantic environmental improvement the likes of which Sangamon County will undoubtedly never see again.
Good response, Reg (both of them). I, Hanrahan—who doesn’t live in the city—have gone far past the point of complaining.
Another point is that if the EPA’s recommended clean water rules become permanent, the water systems in the outer communities will be prohibitively expensive to operate.
Make the lake! Surround it with parks and bike trails!
The issue about land usage is a bogus one. A private contractor is building a huge solar project near Lowder, IL, using — get this — over 5,000 acres!! It is prime farmland, some of the best on planet earth. But money talks, eh?
The original goal of the Hunter Lake Expansion Project was to have a 100-year plan, which would provide a sufficient water supply for an ever-increasing population in the event of a catastrophic drought. The solution was simple then and still remains so today. Unfortunately, 60 years have passed, and the cost of these improvements have tripled. However, let’s not get caught up in the addition of parks and recreation for that is not the problem nor the priority.