Landowner Warren Buchan, who lives just downstream from the Brou landfill, feared something was wrong just from the smell and colour of water in the creek on his property.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The licensed plumber and former petrochemical worker alleges leachate or runoff water from the Brou landfill tip site, just north of Narooma, is contaminating neighbouring properties and waterways.
Mr Buchan’s southern boundary adjoins the landfill and his property is just downstream from the tip's northern boundary, where he has detected black, foul-smelling water at the headwaters of Brou Creek.
He contacted tip operator Eurobodalla Shire Council and its waste management department, but when no action was taken he conducted his own tests last month using an independent laboratory.
Results showed elevated levels of hydrocarbons, zinc and arsenic in the actual water, while the sediment tests revealed 10 to 60 times the acceptable levels of a number of heavy metals and elements. The Narooma News has the full results.
Mr Buchan alleges the problem is a combination of the old clay-lined tip contents leaching into the groundwater over 35 years and spills from leachate ponds attached to the newer landfill section that do have modern linings.
But these ponds spilled over for three weeks after the last major rainfall event in June and he is concerned none of the neighbouring landowners were notified, as was supposed to happen according to council’s own incident management plan.
Eurobodalla Shire Council said it tested the overflow after the June event and the results were sent to the EPA.
Mr Buchan said he also notified the NSW Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) after the June overflow, and the authority came out in September and tested downstream from these leachate ponds, but no contamination was found.
But he said said the authority only came out three months after the storm event and also did not test further downstream on his property where the leachate emerges as the groundwater surfaces at the start of the creek.
Following his continued protestations, the EPA visited his property on Friday for further tests at the site of the black, pungent water - the same spot he tested.
The 40mm of rain that fell earlier this month had however washed the stagnant pool of black, foul-smelling water down the creek and into Brou Lake, he said.
Council response
A council spokesperson denied there was any serious leaching problem from either the newer or older parts of Brou landfill.
“Groundwater and surface water are monitored regularly as required by the Environment Protection Licence issued by the NSW State Government for Brou waste facility. Testing results do not indicate further investigation is required,” a statement from the council read.
“The leachate pond did overflow during the extreme weather in June 2016 and council’s adopted protocols for notifying the EPA were observed. EPA officers attended the site after the event as a result of complaints received and carried out their own investigation.
“The rainfall recorded at the Brou landfill site weather station during the extreme weather from June 4-6 was an extraordinary 356.6 mm, beyond the design requirements of the leachate pond.”
The council spokesperson acknowledged the adjoining landowners were not notified. “However, this will be rectified in the instance of any future incidents and adjoining landowners will be notified should the leachate pond overflow,” she said.
The council said the Brou landfill site had a leachate collection system directing water to the designated lined leachate dam.
“The site also has a sediment pond and a stormwater pond,” the spokesperson said. “The landfill waste disposal cells have been historically managed with a clay liner. The new landfill waste disposal cells have synthetic liners specifically designed for the purpose.
Both types of liner are designed to prevent water from migrating from the landfill and water testing results indicate they are operating successfully.”
“Council conducts groundwater and surface water testing in accordance with the EPA requirements and also tested the water escaping the site during the peak rain event in June. All test results were forwarded to the EPA by council.”
Regarding any danger to fish and prawns in Brou Lake and creek, the council spokesperson said the results of the water testing gave no indication that the lake would be contaminated by the landfill.
“Council will ensure that the neighbouring landowners are contacted if there are any future incidents. Landfill site operations are highly regulated by the conditions in the Environment Protection licences issued by the Environment Protection Authority NSW.”
EPA checks
A spokesperson for the EPA confirmed the agency sampled discharge in September from the Brou Landfill stormwater system following the June storm.
“As part of our sampling, we looked for pesticides and metals, which are indicators of potential leachate contamination from the landfill,” the spokersperson said.
“The sample results did not detect elevated levels of either metals or pesticides, confirming that the discharge from the landfill site was from the stormwater system, and had not been contaminated with leachate.
“NSW EPA will continue to monitor the performance of the stormwater system at the landfill site during future rainstorm events.”
The Narooma News hopes to get the results from the latest EPA testing done this week.
Landowner vows to continue fight
In regards to notification of leachate overflow, Mr Buchan said he had checked with all neighbours and landholders and none had been notified over the past 35 years.
“Over that time they have had many and numerous leachate releases,” he said. “It’s an EPA requirement of the licence to notify immediately and vacate all infected areas.”
He has concerns about the cattle grazing in that potentially affected paddock after the event and questions why the leachate overflow pond was still overflowing three weeks after the rain event and running down to Brou Creek.
He questioned the council’s response, noting all its monitoring was done inside their boundary and no testing was down downstream or on adjoining paddocks, dams or creeks.
Mr Buchan said he believed his samples were the first time sediment had been tested. “No testing of sediments was done at (any) stage, and I feel our sample could be the first on sediments,” he said.