GONE TO WASTE
HUGE MESS: ‘Catastrophic’ fire danger and public safety fears at Lara dump
A HUGE recycling dump in Lara considered a “catastrophic” fire risk would cost almost $100 million to clean up.
And if the operators walk away from the 350,000 cubic metre problem, the public would be left with the massive bill.
THE clean-up bill for a large waste facility deemed a “catastrophic” fire risk by authorities is estimated at almost $100 million.
The Lara site hosts an estimated 350,000 cubic metres of materials, with no clear plan or solution as to how the huge stockpiles can be reduced.
If the operators walk “away from the problem”, the public would be left with the massive bill, Victoria’s planning tribunal has warned.
After long-running issues and ongoing concerns about the growing danger of the Broderick Rd facility, the City of Greater Geelong launched legal action to cancel the operator’s permit.
With the support of the CFA and the Environment Protection Authority, the council tried to cancel C & D Recycling’s permit for a recycling centre.
The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal largely supported the bid.
It found there had been “intentional, continuous and persistent non-compliance” with 18 of the 37 conditions of the permit.
These included issues with emergency and fire plans, a materials management plan and exceeding allowed stock- piles height, which were up to more than 12.6m.
But VCAT deputy president Mark Dwyer and member Greg Sharpley last week declared the massive cost of cleaning up the land was not viable for the operator.
Based on current levies and fees, it would cost about $99 million and take up to two years to get rid of all the waste.
Their decision allows the land owner, The Australian Sawmilling Company (TASCO), to try to find a saviour for the site.
“This would presumably lead to an outcome whereby, if the permit was cancelled, CDR and (director David) McAuliffe (and perhaps TASCO) would simply become insolvent and walk away from the problem,” the pair wrote.
“The ultimate cost of cleanup and disposal would be left to the public purse.”
While having “no confidence” that C & D Recycling will ever comply with the permit, VCAT believes the stay provides the best chance to see a majority of the waste recycled.
The EPA and CFA have declared the site, which was hit by a small fire in January, a public safety risk.
CFA operations officer Patrick Geary said a fire on the land was “likely” and the consequences could be “catastrophic”.
But Mr McAuliffe told VCAT that neither he nor his company had the $2 million required to comply with even the basic fire safety conditions of the permit.
“By his own admission, Mr McAuliffe is tired of his poor relationship with the council and looking for ways to exit the business,” the VCAT panel said.
TASCO believes the permit can limit the site’s costs to $45 million, which might be further reduced through subsidised disposal options or a sale of the business.
It is now negotiating with another company to take over the operations.
While it allows the permit, VCAT has issued an enforcement order that aims to contain all waste on the site, and better understand what is in the massive stockpiles of waste.
One report, by EnviroProtect, suggests there are about 4000 used tyres and several drums of oil buried in the piles, but Mr McAuliffe claims both figures are too high.
A site inspection by the EPA and WorkSafe in January found samples of asbestos, although a Hazard Alert report suggests the levels are relatively low.
The dangerous material is not supposed to be accepted at the site.
It (VCAT) found there had been “intentional, continuous and persistent non-compliance” with 18 of the 37 conditions of the permit.