Community questions

19 March 2024 – asbestos investigation, falsifying records of compliance, WMI fires, types of waste processed in the Swanbank industrial area, development buffer distances

Background to the questions: most questions from 19 March 2024 focus on the joint Queensland investigation into asbestos in compost between our department, Queensland’s environmental regulator, and the Asbestos Safety Unit of Workplace Health and Safety Queensland (WHSQ). The detection of asbestos came following concerns in NSW. More information about this investigation is available at our Compost asbestos investigation web page and WHSQ’s updates are available at their website (accessible by visiting our investigation page).

1. How easy is it for waste operators to falsify records of compliance? And how often are they testing their soil?

   It is possible that records can be falsified. In cases where this is suspected, the department may pursue seeking further information to help verify or substantiate facts.

   The holder of an environmental authority (EA) must comply with the conditions of their EA, and keep records for at least five years as required by their EA. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1994, it is an offence for a person to provide false and misleading information and the department will take action if an offence is identified.

   If land contamination is identified, a site will be listed on the environmental management register and the department may require the operator to engage a specialist to conduct testing to delineate the extent of the contamination and remediate if necessary.

2. Has the mulch piles found in NSW schools and parks come from Nugrow or can it be traced back to any of the businesses in the Swanbank area?

   The department has been in contact with NSW EPA and does not have any information that alleges the contaminated mulch found in NSW came from operators in Queensland. Similarly, the department has no information to suggest the contaminated mulch in NSW has been transported to Queensland.

3. Should we be concerned about the recent fires at NuGrow, is there any further information regarding investigation?

   The recent fire at NuGrow’s Swanbank facility was small (approx. 3m x 1m) and was dealt with in a prompt manner by the NuGrow. The fire was in a stockpile of larger size green waste that is too big to be included in products at the site. The department is currently investigating potential offences and will advise the community when a decision has been made.

   No asbestos has been identified in the material that caught fire at NuGrow.

   Unless the fire debris is significantly disturbed, the risk of exposure to airborne asbestos fibres to the public and neighboring residents is very low. Information on the risks of asbestos exposure from fires is available at the Queensland Government asbestos website.

   View more information relating to health impacts from smoke from organic material such as that in bushfires.

4. Do we have any sort of timeframe of how long asbestos has contaminated NuGrow?

   The department’s investigation has only identified a small amount of asbestos which was found in a general purpose stockpile of a compost and soil blend material. Of the four initial samples taken, only one returned a positive result confirmed by laboratory testing to contain asbestos, described as two fibrous fragments each measuring approximately 1.5mm by 3mm.

   A further 17 samples were taken by the department, and all have returned negative results, which do not indicate further contamination.

   NuGrow is prohibited from using asbestos in their products.

5. Has any of this contaminated asbestos waste from NSW been transported to Queensland landfills or compost sites to dispose of incorrectly rather than disposing of it correctly? Asbestos contaminated waste and asbestos itself is very expensive to dispose of.

   The department is aware that there is the potential for asbestos to be unlawfully transported interstate and has enquired with NSW EPA to understand the risk of any unlawful movements of asbestos waste into Queensland. Information known to date, indicates no increased risk of unlawful movements to Queensland.

6. Will air monitoring on-site at NuGrow now include monitoring for airborne dust particles? Asbestos may be disturbed during mechanical processing. Does this instigate a review or extra controls for the processing of waste under the relevant ERA for mechanical processing?

   NuGrow has engaged an appropriately qualified person regarding management of the site which has included conducting air monitoring for asbestos. Asbestos is not permitted to be in feedstocks being used in the composting process and the department is working to ensure that the necessary controls are in place to prevent it inadvertently being included in feedstocks.

   In addition, on becoming aware of the presence of asbestos, the department undertook asbestos air monitoring around the Swanbank industrial area, which has not indicated any elevated levels.

7. The site-based management plan will now need reviewing under Workplace Health and safety legislation too won’t it?

   The department expects that NuGrow maintains currency of their onsite management plans. Maintaining the necessary procedures and practices as part of a workplace is a matter for Workplace Health and Safety Queensland of the Office of Industrial Relations to review and action as it deems appropriate.

8. When will NuGrow be fined for the Asbestos found on their site, surely this means they have broken numerous environmental laws and not followed procedures?

   NuGrow is responsible for taking all reasonable and practicable measures to ensure they don’t receive asbestos, and the department will be assessing NuGrow’s practices to determine if they were reasonable. Should an offence be identified, the department will take enforcement action in accordance with its Enforcement Guidelines. As green waste collected through local governments forms a significant proportion of feedstocks, the department is also focusing on educating local governments to minimise risks. It is important to note that detection of asbestos is not proof of an offence, other elements have to be satisfied to determine if an offence can be substantiated. The department did issue an emergency direction when made aware of the positive asbestos sample.

9. How is asbestos getting into the mulch? Is it being illegally disposed of and snuck into mulching as a lazy way to get rid of it?

   Through the recent inspection and sampling program of waste sites, the department found that controls were lacking at several facilities, and the department and Workplace Health and Safety Queensland have initiated improvement processes at those facilities. There is also a risk community members may be placing material in green bins or unloading at self-haul facilities.

10. Have TMR transport operator licenses and permits for soil movement been checked, ERA licences and also fire ant distribution permits? Has this information been communicated to the community alert?

    Asbestos at the NuGrow Swanbank facility is most likely inadvertently or deliberately being concealed in green waste prior to delivery at the site. While asbestos is controlled, if it is hidden in material unknowingly, it is not able to be tracked and is difficult for the department to identify and trace.

    As part of the investigations, the department has looked at sources delivering material to the site including a number of waste transfer facilities that were checked through the initial proactive inspections and additional facilities subsequently. Not every aspect of this has been communicated as it has been expansive, however the department has shared key information through the electronic newsletter and media alerts. Biosecurity matters such as fire ants have been looked into by the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF) and DESI has been providing any information it receives in relation to that aspect to DAF. DESI has been inviting DAF to contribute to community newsletter and representatives have been attending community drop-in sessions.

11. What government departments website lack links and information, will the relevant information be published online for community reference?

    Updates are being made and published online including information on sites that have been potentially contaminated. These links were published in previous electronic newsletter to the community including the newsletter sent on 8 March 2024:

    • For information about the DESI investigation visit Compost asbestos investigation.
    • For information about WHSQ’s work with businesses in the supply chain and the list of locations that may have received potentially contaminated soil, visit WorkSafe Queensland: Update on asbestos in soil.
    • For information about asbestos, including what the risk of exposure is and health effects visit the Queensland Government Asbestos website.
12. Court case outcomes from DESI vs NuGrow, further information?

    No decision has been made yet and the department is unable to comment on matters before the court, however when a decision is made, this will be communicated to the wider community. Next review is listed for 18 March 2024.

13. What percentages of each type of waste is disposed of or processed in Ipswich?
14. What percentage of waste comes from various locations around Australia to be disposed of in Ipswich?
    There are legislative provisions that permit waste to be received interstate if it is going to a facility that is lawfully able to receive it. If it is proposed to go to a facility that is not lawfully able to receive it, we have grounds to refuse it coming into Queensland.
    
    While we don’t have information readily available at this time about Ipswich specifically, information about waste recovery, recycling and disposal in Queensland is collected through an annual waste data survey and monthly waste data returns from landfill operators.
    
    Some of the relevant statistics from the last report (22/23  FY) are:
    • Queensland received 41% less waste from interstate sources than 2021–22 (272,647 tonnes received).
    • Organic processors converted 1.93 million tonnes of organic material into products such as soil conditioners, manufactured soil, potting mixes and mulches.
    • Twelve councils provided 413,509 Queensland households with a regular green waste (green bin lid) kerbside collection service – an increase of 73,400 households (21.6%) from 2021–22.
    • Green bin lid services collected 113,933 tonnes of garden and food organic wastes, 2,900 tonnes greater than the amount collected in 2021–22. This is a 2.6% increase.
    • Organic processors converted 1,927,208 tonnes of inputs (such as green waste, timber, sawmill residues, biosolids, manure, grease trap waste, abattoir waste, drilling mud and ash) into products such as soil conditioners, manufactured soil, potting mixes and mulches.

Information on annual waste data surveys and links to open data sources can be in the Recycling and waste in Queensland report.

15. What is the current status of the fires in compost at WMI?
    The stockpile continues to smoulder, however has reduced in size by approximately two-thirds, it is expected that this smouldering stockpile will be completely removed in the next few weeks.
16. What were the results for the DESI investigations with QFES regarding advice to WMI from QFES surrounding control measures for fighting the compost fires?
    The material that caught fire was a stockpile of unprocessed green waste, not compost. Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (QFES) has been providing information to WMI to allow it to manage the smoldering stockpile while minimising any potential nuisance that could be generated.
17. What buffer distances are recommended between residential development and composting and landfill activities? Noting that there is residential development that appears to be continuing to go ahead within 1km of composting and landfill activities at Swanbank.
    As the department is responsible for regulating certain industrial activities such as composting facilities and landfills that have a potential to impact residents through odour, it has published guidelines for industry to consider when planning and designing the activity they are undertaking.
    
    Local governments, including Ipswich City Council (ICC), are responsible for approving new and expanding residential development. This includes assessing residential development near existing industrial activities. While ICC is not obligated to consider the department’s guidance on buffer distances in its decision-making process, the department has taken opportunities to remind ICC of the need to ensure that land uses are compatible to help prevent potential future impacts on the community.

    Industrial activity	Buffer distance requirements	Guideline
    Landfill	500 metres from a noise, dust or odour sensitive place risk assessment for the site should be undertaken to determine the appropriate buffer distances.	Landfill, siting, design, operation and rehabilitation This guideline is in the process of being revised and the department is considering amending the recommended buffer distances to sensitive places (including residents), up to 1.5km for general and regulated waste landfills.
    Composting	odour impact assessment to be undertaken at the planning and design stage by a suitably qualified and experienced person to determine what the appropriate buffer distance is for that operation based on several factors including what waste type is being received, the management processes used, weather and climate conditions, etc.	Best Practice Environmental Management—Environmentally relevant activity 53(a) Organic material processing by composting