U.S. Steel permit a 'call to arms' for lawmakers

GARY, Ind. -- Illinois lawmakers are vowing to fight a proposed U.S. Steel Corp. water discharge permit that they fear could relax or eliminate limits on toxic chemicals and heavy metals the company dumps into the Grand Calumet River.

Environmental lawyers who have reviewed the document say Indiana regulators eliminated or failed to include limits on toxic chemicals at some points where the steel mill discharges waste into the Lake Michigan tributary, according to a published report.

Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin said the U.S. Steel permit was a "call to arms," for the Illinois congressional delegation; Durbin, Sen. Barack Obama and Illinois Reps. Rahm Emanuel and Jan Schakowsky sent a letter to U.S. Steel and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Friday asking for a meeting.

"It troubles me why month after month we have to worry about the governor of Indiana asking for another permit to pollute this lake," Durbin said at a news conference. "I wish Gov. (Mitch) Daniels would come up and take a look at this beautiful lake.

"It is not just the backyard and sewage dump for the heavy industries that happen to be in Indiana. It happens to be a great asset for his state, for our state and for many others in the Midwest."

This is the second time in recent months that Durbin and other Illinois lawmakers got involved in a permit issued by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management. IDEM also took heat over its handling of a pollution permit for BP's Whiting oil refinery, about 10 miles west of U.S. Steel's Gary Works along Lake Michigan.

BP faced growing public and political outrage over the permit -- including from lawmakers and Chicago officials -- because it allowed the company to boost the volume of pollutants dumped into the lake. The company later said the refinery would stay within the limits set in its previous permit.

Critics say Indiana also should take a hard look at the new U.S. Steel permit.

"There are very serious problems with this permit that must be addressed," said Ann Alexander, a Chicago attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group. "Given what happened with the BP situation, there should be much greater public scrutiny before Indiana moves forward."

Daniels was out of state Friday and unavailable for comment, but his spokeswoman, Jane Jankowski, noted that the permit was not final.

"The final permit will be compliant with all standards," she said.

In a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press on Friday, IDEM repeated its stand that the draft permit is "more protective" than U.S. Steel's current permit, which was issued in 1994.

"Much has changed since then, and state and federal standards are more stringent today than in 1994," the statement said.

The company reports discharging oil and grease, lead, arsenic, benzene, fluoride and nitrates from wastewater pipes at the mill. The draft permit does not limit emissions of these pollutants at all discharge points, the newspaper reported.

Indiana regulators, in a document posted online, said some pollution limits were removed from the old permit because they concluded the mill wasn't likely to exceed them in the future.

The Gary Works -- a series of blast furnaces, coke ovens and steel-finishing mills -- is the largest source of water pollution in the Lake Michigan basin. The complex dumped more than 1.7 million pounds in 2005.

"This isn't supposed to be happening," said Dale Bryson, chairman of the Alliance for the Great Lakes and former chief of the EPA's regional water office. "The whole purpose behind these laws and rules is to reduce pollution, not allow it to increase."

The proposed permit changes are part of a 117-page, densely worded draft document. IDEM gave citizens and environmental groups until the beginning of October to file comments about the proposed U.S. Steel permit. But many who tried to read the permit have struggled to determine whether overall levels of pollutants would change.

"This permit is indecipherable," said John Crayton, a Chesterton physician. "They tell me I'm going to get some answers, but I'm still waiting."

IDEM said it is reviewing comments submitted by environmental groups to decide whether revisions are needed.

"This is a very big permit, and I understand why people are confused," Bruno Pigott, the agency's assistant commissioner, told the Tribune. "Our analysis shows we are protecting water quality."

U.S. Steel's permit is one of 11 major discharge permits IDEM is trying to update.