The Supreme Court made the Order, with the consent of the parties, after finding that Veolia breached its General Environmental Duty and Operating Licence for its Hallam Road Landfill.
The Court also ordered Veolia publicise the outcome of the proceedings, take specific steps to remediate the site and pay EPA's legal costs.
The $1 million will fund a project, or projects, benefitting the environment and community near the Hallam Road Landfill at Hampton Park.
Veolia admitted to the breaches of the company's EPA-issued Operating Licence at the landfill relating to releases of odour, landfill gas and leachate exceedances, which is the contaminated liquid produced when rainwater filters through the waste, dissolves and picks up contaminates on the way through.
EPA received more than 1,300 reports from the community of odour claimed to be from the landfill in 2022 and 2023. EPA officers mapped callers' addresses and conducted odour surveys that independently confirmed the presence of offensive odour that was traced back to the landfill on a number of occasions.
The Operating Licence requires Veolia to notify EPA of any breaches of its conditions, and between July 2022 and September 2023 Veolia notified EPA every month that landfill gas on the site exceeded the allowed levels. Between August 2022 and June 2024, the depth of leachate in several of the landfill cells also exceeded licence limits.
EPA told the Supreme Court the landfill gas issues breached the company's General Environmental Duty under the Environment Protection Act, which requires it to, so far as reasonably practicable, minimise the risk of an adverse effect on the amenity of land in the vicinity of the Hallam Road Landfill.
The court also heard the problems with odour, landfill gas and leachate were the result of failures to comply with the company's licence conditions, including the requirements for an auditor-verified Risk Management and Monitoring Plan, to extract sufficient leachate, and to adequately cover waste each day on the working face of the landfill.
EPA's Southern Metropolitan Regional Manager Viranga Abeywickrema says the $1 million order is an example of restorative justice, where the court can direct that funds go directly to benefiting environmental projects.
"This is vindication for the community. Calls from residents were part of EPA's investigation; people reporting odour with a description and their address helped us to prove the type, the intensity, the areas affected, and the source of the odour," Mr Abeywickrema said.
"EPA will continue to monitor compliance at the site and will continue to take strong action, if necessary,'' he said.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In 2024, another EPA civil enforcement action resulted in SBI Landfill Pty Ltd paying $200,000 for "a project for the restoration or enhancement of the environment in a public place or for the public benefit."
That case was seen as an acknowledgement from SBI to the community that it had not complied with its operating licence by failing to contain odour to its site.
Two more recent examples of restorative justice cases funding environmental projects are:
- A high profile developer ordered to pay to fund local restorative projects over the dumping of industrial waste epa.vic.gov.au/fortek-fined-over-industrial-waste-transport
- A landfill operator charged over a licence breach epa.vic.gov.au/hi-quality-licence-breach
