After the Environmental Protection Agency confirmed Ameren as the source for two toxic chemicals found in St. Charles groundwater wells, the city is demanding the power company bear the cost for cleanup.
The city already had known the power company’s Huster Road Substation was the source of vinyl chloride and dichloroethene, which are linked to cancer and other negative health effects. These chemicals are byproducts of a cleaning solvent for heavy metal equipment called TCE (trichloroethylene), according to the EPA.
“There seemed to be a lot of bureaucratic witch hunting going on over the years to try and find someone else they can hang blame on besides Ameren,” Mayor Dan Borgmeyer said.
City officials investigated all of the businesses in the Wellfield district and found none of them was contributing toxins except for Ameren, the mayor said. St. Charles has seven wells that produce 6 million gallons of water a day. Five of the seven wells are contaminated.
According to the EPA, the Elm Point Wellfield has been a Superfund site since the early 2000s when other companies polluted one of the wells. Cleanup was successful on that one groundwater source, but when a toxic plume started spreading in another aquifer in 2021, the city had to shut down more wells.
As a result, St. Charles buys 4 million gallons of water a day from St. Louis. “Our water costs us 70 cents per 1,000 gallons to produce, and when we buy it from St. Louis, it’s $1.07,” Borgmeyer said. Alone, this will cost a half-million dollars for the year if St. Charles has to continue getting water from St. Louis.
St. Charles is working to build new wellfields and bring in expensive equipment that will clean the water without Ameren’s help. Borgmeyer said St. Charles has the resources without taxing residents or increasing water rates for now, but that won’t continue forever.
“We can’t wait a year and a half for all the bureaucracy to work its way out. We need clean water now,” Borgmeyer said. “So we are moving forward to go back to what we had before Ameren polluted our water.”
Residents are concerned about who is going to pay for the cleanup. St. Charles resident and environmental scientist Kristin Heideman believes the EPA hasn’t done its due diligence to provide proper oversight on Ameren.
“This has been going on for over 10 years. It’s not cleaned up yet because our government has dismantled and defunded the EPA,” Heideman said. “Why is the city having to front up money to get our wellfield fixed when it’s very clearly caused by another responsible party?”
Heideman is proud St. Charles took quick action and shut down the wells before the toxins reached dangerous levels and the water treatment plant. “I’m happy to know that I never had to be concerned about chemicals in my drinking water because the local government took a proactive approach,” she said.
Ameren, which is involved in legal proceedings with the city over water cleanup costs, said only that it is working with the EPA to put a barrier between the power substation and the water supply. The power company is also taking steps that will further break up the toxins.
The EPA said that it will take years to clean up the groundwater and that there have been no detections of toxins in the city’s drinking water. Despite St Charles residents’ misgivings, the EPA plans to hold Ameren solely responsible for cleanup.
“We operate under the polluter pays principle,” said EPA representative Ben Washburn. “And we believe that those who are responsible for contamination are liable for that cleanup.”
This story was republished from St. Louis Public Radio.
Welcome to the discussion.
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.