Court rules: Laverton North company’s muck-up costs to pay for clean-up

ENVIRONMENTALISTS have praised the EPA after a Laverton North company was made to pay $55,000 for discharging herbicide into Altona’s Cherry Lake.

Drum reconditioner Schutz DSL last week pleaded guilty in the Sunshine Magistrates Court to two breaches of the Environment Protection Act for polluting Cherry Creek, which flows into Cherry Lake, and for breaching its EPA licence.

On September 21, 2010, the company unintentionally discharged trifluralin when a new pipe temporarily connected Schutz’s wastewater treatment plant to the stormwater system.

Wastewater containing chemicals toxic to aquatic life entered the local drain and then Cherry Creek.

Water samples collected at the point of entry showed a concentration of trifluralin 500 times higher than the recommended level regarded as safe for aquatic life.

The court heard the creek was a valuable habitat for wetland plants and water birds.

Schutz was ordered to fund a $40,000 environmental project next to Cherry Creek, near Cherry Lake, involving weed clearing, building a rabbit-proof fence and restoring the area to its natural state by planting indigenous grasses. It was also ordered to pay the EPA’s costs of $15,000.

Friends of Lower Kororoit Creek president Geoff Mitchelmore said it was pleasing that an industry had been made to rectify its mistake. “Too often in the past, environmental issues caused by poor management practice by industry have been missed by the authorities,” he said.

The EPA is today holding a forum at Macleod on pollution issues in 21 municipalities, including Hobsons Bay, Maribyrnong and Wyndham.

EPA metro manager Richard Marks said Brooklyn was a focal point. “EPA has focused on specific sites and environmental issues, such as improving the liveability for residents in the Brooklyn area through driving improvements in western Melbourne.

“Community reporting tells us Melbourne’s metro communities have in the past six months been most concerned by odour, water pollution and noise. Half the calls to EPA’s pollution hotline were in regard to odour, while water and noise accounted for about 20 per cent each of calls.” —Goya Dmytryshchak