This story was originally published by the Louisiana Illuminator.
State officials have denied a request from Smitty’s Supply Inc. to dispose of wastewater and stormwater from its disaster cleanup into drainage ditches that lead to the Tangipahoa River.
The company submitted a short-term emergency general permit request Dec. 3 to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality asking for its permission to discharge up to 200,000 gallons of contaminated water per day for two months into the local drainage system. Over the two-month period, it would have allowed Smitty’s Supply to get rid of as much as 12 million gallons of potentially harmful stormwater that has pooled at the site and mixed with oil and chemicals.
That would be nearly double the amount of waste materials and fluids authorities have already recovered from the surrounding environment since the Smitty Supply’s petroleum products facility in Roseland was destroyed in an Aug. 22 fire and explosion. The fire that burned for two weeks decimated the 20-acre facility, causing several large oil tanks to explode and spread pollutants for miles across Tangipahoa Parish.
The Department of Environmental Quality denied the Smitty’s Supply permit request Dec. 5, with records pointing out the collected stormwater was still too contaminated despite it being run through a commercial filtration and treatment process.
The company has been exploring multiple disposal options for various wastes accumulating at the site, including stormwater and washwater contaminated with various oils, solvents and chemicals strewn into the air, surrounding land and waterways during and after the August disaster.
In an email Tuesday to the Illuminator, a Smitty’s Supply spokesperson said the company is grateful for community support, remains focused on cleanup operations and remains dedicated to supplying products that “keep industries operating and communities moving.”
“The company has replaced personal property lost during the fire, cleaned homes, vehicles, and yards, and helped former employees connect with new job opportunities through local career fairs — continuing to invest in the well-being of its neighbors as remediation progresses,” the statement read. “Smitty’s Supply will continue working closely with state and federal agencies to ensure the cleanup remains comprehensive, safe, and transparent for the community.”
After leading the initial recovery of spilled materials from surrounding land and water bodies, the state Department of Environmental Quality and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have largely removed their personnel and equipment from the area. On Dec. 8, Smitty’s Supply took over cleanup operations at its facility site with continued monitoring from state and federal officials.
The company has recovered an unspecified volume of contaminated stormwater mixed with ash, residues and chemicals. It has settled into various sumps and containment areas at the site, according to reports EPA officials compiled and filed with the state.
In their statement, Smitty’s Supply said cleanup teams this month have processed liquids from modular storage tanks, transported ash and excavated soil for proper disposal, vacuumed oil and other residues, and continued equipment decontamination. Demolition of steel structures remains on track for completion by the end of 2025, with full cleaning of paved areas expected by the end of January, the email stated.
“To date, the company has removed 2,644 tons of debris and recycled 3,725 tons of scrap metal from the site, reflecting measurable progress in safely reducing impacts and preparing the facility for further remediation steps,” the statement read, in part.
After crews collected the stormwater in temporary storage tanks, Smitty’s Supply hired a business to treat and filter the wastewater in an effort to make it clean enough to return to the environment, records show.
However, when Smitty’s Supply had it tested, the recovered water was still too contaminated to be discharged, records show. The Department of Environmental Quality rejected the company’s permit application, noting lab reports showed pollution was “above the permissible limits” contained within the emergency general permit rules.
The recent lab results indicated elevated levels of organic waste, carbon and dissolved solids. The organic waste was particularly high, at more than five times the maximum threshold allowed under state regulations. Ethanol was also present in the sampled water at 25 parts per million, though the state didn’t mention this in its denial letter.
Smitty’s Supply also wants permission to discharge water contaminated during cleanup operations at the facility. Cleanup crews have been using the local water supply to pressure wash concrete slabs at the facility, creating another stream of wastewater in addition to the rainfall. When the company included this in its Dec. 3 notice to the Department of Environmental Quality, it didn’t clarify whether the 200,000 gallons per day rate applied to wash water, stormwater or both. The agency seemed surprised by the company’s request.
In a phone interview last week, LDEQ spokesman Greg Langley said the agency was initially unaware that Smitty’s Supply had plans to discharge its wash water along with the stormwater.
“[In] initial discussions with Smitty’s Supply, Inc., it was this Office’s understanding that the proposed … clean up discharges consisted only of contaminated stormwater collected from within the bermed areas of the site,” the agency’s denial letter states.
Smitty’s Supply indicated in its notice that it plans to adjust the stormwater treatment process and retest the effluent, though it’s unclear when those lab results will be released. As of Friday, they were not yet publicly available, and the Department of Environmental Quality confirmed it had still not granted the company any emergency permits.
The state can approve the discharge of stormwater and water used to clean pavement and buildings, but the Department of Environmental Quality can deny a permit if a facility has “previously been in violation of state water quality regulations” or it is in an “environmentally sensitive area.”
In its denial letter, the agency told Smitty’s Supply it might need a more permanent discharge permit in order to move forward with its planned discharges.
Some neighbors of the facility are urging state officials not to grant the company permission to release its wastewater into the drainage system. As of Monday, six residents filed written objections with the state to the company’s permit application even though the matter is not open for public comment.
“That’s one of the problems,” Matthew Allen said in a phone interview. “They file under a general permit so the public doesn’t hear about it and get to comment on it.”
Allen, a retired science teacher who lives in Folsom, started the environmental nonprofit Northshore Riverwatch about three years ago to protect the rivers that run through the parishes north of Lake Pontchartrain.
“Relying on the Tangipahoa River as a de facto disposal mechanism to ‘carry away’ hazardous compounds is fundamentally incompatible with the purpose, scope and legal constraints of a general permit,” Allen wrote in his objection letter.
Other residents have been surveilling the Smitty’s Supply facility, taking photos and videos of nearby public ditches containing discolored water and then posting them on social media. The posts typically draw criticisms of the company and government agencies, and they often raise questions about what health and environmental problems might persist.
“Everybody’s just scared to death,” Allen said. “They don’t know what they’ve been exposed to, so everything’s just a big reaction.”
Some residents are collecting their own water, soil and material samples for lab analysis.
Evan Wooten, who lives on a small farm within a half-mile of the Smitty’s facility, said he found several shards of mangled metal on his land that appeared to come from an exploded storage tank. A basic metals analysis showed the shards to be mostly iron, he said in a phone interview.
Wooten said his goats were eating leaves and vegetation on his property that were contaminated with black oily residue, so he relocated them to a different farm. Two ultimately died, though he believes they contracted a parasite from the other farm, he said.
Wooten said he wants to test some of his other animals for chemical toxins, but he can’t find any local veterinarians willing or able to do it, he said.
“They don’t want to get involved,” Wooten said. “We’re not getting any real help from anybody.”
