Laserfiche WebLink
4. What is the City's Obligation under a Ground Water Ordinance? <br /> In order to protect public health,the City must prohibit new drinking water wells from tapping into <br /> groundwater within an area determined by the IEPA following an in depth ground water review by <br /> an engineer. Normally the IEPA's rules do not require existing wells to be closed unless they have <br /> become contaminated. Since the City has a public water supply, this prohibition is not usually a <br /> hardship. <br /> 5. What benefit does the City of Decatur gain by enacting a Ground Water Ordinance? <br /> 1. Public health is protected by prohibiting the use of ground water from contaminated sites. <br /> 2. Redevelopment of"brownfield" sites is facilitated, thereby returning them to productive use. <br /> 3. By exercising choices provided by TACO rules, site owners and operators may reduce <br /> remediation costs, return more sites to productive use, hasten property redevelopment, and <br /> still fully comply with environmental laws and regulations. <br /> 6. Can the City establish rules more strict than those imposed by the IEPA? <br /> The City is generally able to establish rules that are equal to or greater than those established by the <br /> IEPA. The legality of additional rules will likely vary depending on the desired measure and should <br /> in each circumstance be addressed by the Corporation Counsel. The Ground Water Ordinance used <br /> by the City is a"typical" document required by the IEPA. The City is able to add conditions and <br /> requirements through separate agreements such as removal of some or all contaminated soil, the <br /> payment of fees, liability indemnification, etc. <br /> 7. Is the owner of the contamination source obligated to address the contamination issue? <br /> Yes, the IEPA requires all contamination sources be addressed and remediated in some fashion. <br /> Remediation options range from the total removal of the contaminated material to isolating it or to <br /> requiring no action at all. The IEPA requires that the issue be addressed and resolved before any <br /> development or redevelopment of the property. Until the IEPA signs off on the remediation plan <br /> proposed by a property owner, the property is essentially in limbo and of no realistic value. <br /> 8. Can the City force the owners of a contamination source to clean up the right of way and <br /> remove all contaminated soil? <br /> The owner of a leaking underground gas tank or other contamination source is obligated by the <br /> IEPA to remediate the contamination which can include removal. In the past it has been <br /> successfully argued that removal of contaminated material from the right of way is impractical. It <br /> may require a significant amount of legal effort and cost to force the removal of all contaminated <br /> material from the right of way due to the significant costs involved. The courts would likely make <br /> the ultimate determination as to whether it is practical or not to complete such a removal effort. <br /> 9. If the City can require the owner of a contamination source to clean it up,why not do so <br /> and clean up the right of way? <br /> There are several reasons not to force the removal of all contamination from the City's right of way: <br /> Page 12 <br />