Victory Against Toxic Pollution

Thanks to the work of CBF, its members, and partners, toxic discharges from Bethlehem Steel’s Sparrows Point plant will be significantly reduced. The Maryland Department of the Environment will soon issue to the company a permit that includes limits and restrictions that adhere closely to those called for by CBF’s Maryland Office.

The original draft permit applied for by Beth Steel would have allowed the plant to discharge as much as 33,400 pounds of lead, 36,500 pounds of nickel, 98,550 pounds of cyanide, 67,340 pounds of zinc, and 21,718 pounds of copper, plus unlimited discharges of total nitrogen and phosphorus. In November 2000, CBF and its members called for tighter controls on Beth Steel. Negotiations among CBF, the U.S. EPA, Maryland Department of the Environment, the University of Maryland Law Clinic, and Beth Steel helped result in a permit that significantly reduces toxic discharges.

The Sparrows Point plant has a long history of sending polluted wastewater to the Patapsco. In 1984, as part of a Bay-wide survey of wastewater treatment compliance with the Clean Water Act, CBF found the Sparrows Point plant discharging well beyond the limits of its National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. In a rare move, CBF and the Environmental Defense Fund sued Bethlehem Steel the following year to force compliance. Bethlehem settled the suit and began operating under a new NPDES permit.

“Under normal circumstances, that permit would have been upgraded every five years, as new technologies and regulations came into place,” said CBF Maryland Executive Director Theresa Pierno. “But it wasn’t, and the plant has operated under that 15-year-old permit and the terms contained in two agreements stemming from lawsuits filed since 1990. The permit that was drafted before CBF recently interceded was an absurd step in the wrong direction.

“If we’re going to get serious about the Bay cleanup, it’s critical we immediately reduce toxics and other recognized pollutants that flow to the Bay,” she added. “If the permit is accepted as currently written, it may go down as a significant achievement in our fight against toxic pollution to the Bay.”



Posted: 1-25-2001