Closed Landfills in Victoria

21 October 2014

Stefan Fiedler, Principal

Outline

> EPA regulation of closed landfills> Closed Landfill Guidelines 2012

> Notices issued

> VCAT challenges

> VAGO audit of landfill management> Active and closed landfills

> September 2014

How many closed landfills in Victoria?

> Operating landfills (approx. 100)> Licensed or unlicensed (remedial notice) EPA

> Closed landfills (~unknown)> Remedial notice/s EPA

> Planning identification (i.e. Overlay) PA / RA

> 2009 – EPA assessment > 115 closed landfills (closed pre-1999)

> 2013 Draft MWRR Strategic Plan > 40 closed landfills (Melbourne, excluding Mornington Peninsula)

EPA Regulatory Approach

> Issue notices to identify occupier and produce documents

> Issue series of PANs to occupier or operator)> Hydrogeological assessment

> Landfill rehabilitation plan

> Aftercare management plan and monitoring program

> Implement plans until auditor determines that landfill poses no risk

> Require PA/RA to maintain 500m/200m buffer distance for 30yrs post closure or be satisfied that reduction is appropriate (s.53V audit)

Rehabilitation Standard

> BPEM – Siting, Design, Operation and Rehabilitation of Landfills (788.2 - Oct 2014)> Capping; leachate; LFG; monitoring

> Closed Landfill Guidelines (1490 – Dec 2012)> Impose BPEM standard or lesser augmentation (undefined)

> Legislation amended periodically since 1950> Landfills closed and rehabilitated to standards at that time

> EPA remedial notices revisiting rehabilitation> Retrospective application of standards

RK recommendation to Council’s

> Identify closed landfills in municipalities

> Assess each landfill> Lateral extent of each landfill

> Landfill infrastructure (capping, leachate, LFG, monitoring, drainage)

> Monitoring data (LFG, leachate, groundwater, surface water)

> Risk assessment (protection of human health)

> Develop and implement remedial works to protect the community (and the Council)

RK recommendation to Council’s

> Potential litigation or EPA intervention retain experts through lawyers to maintain legal professional privilege> Privilege may be waived at the Council’s discretion

> Retain expert advice on any EPA notice issued (cost of compliance?) file application for review in VCAT within 21 days of issue

> Outcome closed landfill rehabilitated and managed to protect community (and Council) preferably with EPA agreement

VAGO Audit

> Scoping survey to all councils (Feb 2014)> Selected 4 municipalities (2 regional and 2 metropolitan)

> Audit Specification (March 2014)> Objective: determine if landfills appropriately, designed, managed

and rehabilitated to prevent unacceptable risk to public health and environment

> Assess:

> EPA administration of regulatory framework and compliance

> Active landfills operated in compliance with framework

> Closed landfills managed in compliance with framework

> Report (September 2014)

VAGO Audit

> Assumption> All landfills owned by LG or private entity

> No consideration of Crown land State Government owner

> Findings> EPA developed better risk based approach

> Closed landfills not effectively managed (localised risk)

> EPA & LG slow to implement key initiatives

> complexity & cost

> shortfalls in EPA risk based approach

> complex, and at time ambiguous, EPA policy/guidelines

> uncertainty of roles and responsibility

VAGO Audit

> Recommendations> 15 recommendations (5 for LG and 10 for EPA)

> EPA & DEPI develop options for Minister to use landfill levy to fund rehabilitation of high-risk landfills

> No consideration of Crown land State Government owner

> Comments> Recommendations to LG consistent with RK advice

> Understates cost of rehabilitation to BPEM standard

> No recognition that State Government is an owner of closed landfills or that EPA has not issued any notice to State Gov’

> Distribution of landfill levy skewed to State Gov not LG

Questions?

Thank you

Stefan FiedlerPrincipal

Telephone: 9609 1672Email: sfiedler@rk.com.au