Skip to content

Breaking News

Maryland sues waste management company for $2.1M over Magothy River pollution

Brooks DuBose, Capital Gazette City Hall and Naval Academy reporter
PUBLISHED: | UPDATED:

Maryland sued a Columbia-based waste management and recycling company for an estimated $2.1 million Monday, claiming the company operated without permits for most of last year and violated a stormwater discharge agreement at a site in Pasadena.

The lawsuit, filed by the Attorney General’s Office in Anne Arundel Circuit Court, includes two counts against Ecology Services, Inc. for alleged violations at its Baltimore-Annapolis Boulevard property. One count is for operating without a permit for 213 days from Jan. 3 to Aug. 3, 2020. It comes with a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each day with a permit, according to the suit.

The second count is for four times breaching multiple parts of a stormwater discharge agreement issued by the Maryland Department of the Environment in August. The state is seeking $10,000 per day for that violation, according to the suit.

“We have a strong case and a clear urgency to take enforcement action now. We were already looking at a possible enforcement action weeks ago and as soon as we confirmed the noncompliance and the gravity of the situation we wanted to take action immediately,” said Maryland Environment Secretary Ben Grumbles in a statement. “It’s important to prevent further harm and send a strong signal to all that violations of stormwater pollution will not be tolerated.”

Calls to Ecology Services were not returned Monday.

“It’s about time,” said Paul Spadaro, president of the Magothy River Association. “This company has been in violation for over a year, and it has certainly caused massive damage to the upper Magothy.”

During a series of visits to the property last year starting on Jan. 3, 2020, following a complaint of “sediment-laden stormwater emanating from the [property],” state inspectors observed numerous violations, including vehicles tracking sediment onto Baltimore-Annapolis Boulevard, which “mixes with stormwater from the Boulevard and is discharged to the Magothy River.”

Other violation included unpaved roadways, waste storage containers, vehicle parts and trash exposed to precipitation and signs of soil stains indicating the discharge of oil at the site, according to the lawsuit.

Ecology Services stores, operates and fuels its fleet of trucks used to serve the greater Anne Arundel County at the site near Lake Waterford, according to the lawsuit. The company also stores waste containers and vehicle parts there, actions considered “industrial activity,” that require general and discharge permits, which Ecology Services did not have at the time.

Those permits require permitholders to contain runoff, minimize erosion and sediment discharge and keep chemicals, waste and other materials from leaking into nearby waterways.

Follow-up inspections on Feb. 12, and Feb. 21, Sept. 10, and Oct. 16, 2020, found additional violations, including continued sediment tracking, vehicle parts and “stains on the ground from unknown liquids, and unidentified containers exposed to precipitation in un-paved areas…,” according to the lawsuit. At the Feb. 12 follow-up, an Ecology Services employee also confirmed the company had not obtained the proper permits or agreed to the terms of the consent order.

On Aug. 3, the state and Ecology Services agreed to a consent order for the site to control polluted stormwater discharge at the property. Inspectors witness additional violations after the consent order was agreed, some as recently as March 18, 2021.

In March, a nearby spawn of yellow perch was almost entirely compromised by stormwater runoff from the Ecology Services property, Spadaro said.

The lawsuit will serve as a warning to other companies that are “tiptoeing on rules and regulations” around pollution and stormwater discharge, he said.

“It could have easily been avoided if they had put some filter socks or really complied with the requirements of their permits,” he said. “But they chose not even to have a permit.”