Recycling Plastics Australia Pty Ltd appeals EPA notice it ran a rogue waste processing plant

A recycling plant that stored thousands of tonnes of material without authority posed a “significant challenge to fire fighters”, and has been told to shut up shop.

A rogue recycling facility in Adelaide’s inner north which stored thousands of tonnes of material without authority became a major fire risk, court documents allege.

Recycling Plastics Australia Pty Ltd has appealed an order from the Environment Protection Authority to immediately cease accepting and processing recycled materials at 32-34 Cromwell Rd, Kilburn.

Premier Steven Marshall, Environment Minister David Speirs (left) and Recycling Plastics Australia chief executive officer Stephen Scherer at the company in March, 2019. Picture: David Mariuz.

Recycling Plastics received an order on June 30 this year after the Cromwell Rd land – which adjoins the company’s EPA-approved waste reprocessing facility – was inspected in October and December last year and May this year by EPA officers.

The agency demanded the company cease receiving waste and remove all stockpiles at the site to a licensed location by September 3.

“You have operated a depot for waste recovery, waste reprocessing or waste disposal at the site without an authorisation,” the notice stated.

During the first inspection, company employees told EPA officers they believed its license had been amended to include the Cromwell Rd site.

“However, the licence has not been amended in the manner suggested,” the EPA has claimed in court documents.

During the inspection, EPA officers saw large quantities of baled recycled materials including plastic, paper and cardboard.

The company told the EPA there were over 6000 tonnes of waste spread through the site in buildings and in the open waiting to be processed or reprocessed, the notice revealed.

Then, in an email on April 1 this year, the company told the EPA they were hoping to remove and process some of the waste by the end of May, the notice stated.

“While the attached plan indicates progress has been made (in some areas) … large quantities of waste remain (in other areas),” it claimed.

The premier highlighted the government’s financial support for the expansion of recycling businesses during the tour of the company. Picture: David Mariuz.

Waste and pelletised plastic, both undercover and in the open, was stored in large volumes with “little or no separation”, the EPA claims

“The site has been independently assessed by the Metropolitan Fire Service as being ill-prepared for fire, and to potentially pose a significant challenge to fire fighters should a fire break out.”

An EPA inspection in May found waste stockpiles had been reduced to about 3000 tonnes, the notice revealed.

“It was clear on that occasion that some of the bales of waste were breaking down and much of the site was covered in the resulting litter,” it stated.

The company indicated it planned to seek development approval and a licence to operate the site but this was never sought, the EPA argued.

However, in its notice of appeal, the company said the order was not “validly issued” because the storage of bales was “not a prescribed activity of environmental significance” and was not waste.

Premier Steven Marshall, Environment Minister David Speirs (left) and Recycling Plastics Australia chief executive Stephen Scherer during a tour of the business in March, 2019. Picture: David Mariuz.

It stated the order was also “unreasonable and unnecessary” because it had engaged in “ongoing dialogue” with the EPA, including the “gradual processing of the bales”.

It said the EPA was aware the bales were a “valuable product” and they must be on sold to keep the business viable.

“If not further processed … the bales would not be able to be processed in SA and would likely be disposed to landfill,” it stated.

It also said the order was unreasonable as there was no consultation in respect of the date in the order to remove and further process the bales, giving it an “unreasonably short period”

The matter returns to court in December.