A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

East Hampton authorizes litigation against two battery storage sites over PFAS contamination

October 02, 2026 | EAST HAMPTON UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT, School Districts, New York


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

East Hampton authorizes litigation against two battery storage sites over PFAS contamination
The East Hampton Town Board voted Oct. 1 to authorize the town attorney to commence litigation against operators of two battery energy storage facilities after state tests found PFAS contamination in soil and groundwater near the Cove Hollow and Montauk sites. Supervisor Burke Gonzales introduced a walk‑on resolution directing the town to seek declaratory and injunctive relief and to require remediation and removal of the fire‑suppressant chemical identified in DEC sampling.

The resolution cites a 2026 DEC determination that a man‑made PFAS compound was present in soil and groundwater surrounding the Cove Hollow facility and notes the town’s July–September letters asking the operators to remove the suppressant and confirm safer fire‑suppression measures. The resolution authorizes Regano LLC as outside counsel with a retainer not to exceed $50,000 and permits up to $10,000 for expert retention. "Therefore, I'm offering a resolution tonight that will take affirmative steps to accomplish what we have called for," the supervisor said when introducing the measure. Counsel told the board that necessary property owners may need to be named in the suit to secure injunctive relief; the board voted in favor of the resolution.

The resolution requests that the Cove Hollow facility excavate and remove contaminated soil and that both facilities cease using the suppressant identified in the DEC report. It also seeks confirmation that appropriate fire‑suppression and emergency response measures are in place. The board did not discuss a timetable for filing the suit at the meeting; town counsel said naming all necessary parties is a legal requirement to obtain relief. The resolution passed on a voice vote with "Aye" recorded.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee