Questions raised over source of asbestos contaminated mulch
The company accused of supplying mulch infected with asbestos to dozens of locations has made explosive claims amid a legal battle with the environmental watchdog.
The company accused of supplying mulch contaminated with asbestos to dozens of locations has argued the contamination could have arisen from other sources after it left the facility.
Greenlife Resource Recovery has launched an appeal in the NSW Land and Environment Court against an order made by the Environment Protection Authority that restricts it from producing or selling mulch.
The EPA made the order on January 25 after mulch contaminated with asbestos was detected at a park in Rozelle.
Asbestos has since been detected in recycled mulch at 76 locations across Sydney, including a primary school, a hospital, and numerous public parks.
If damaged, asbestos is capable of releasing fibres into the air that pose a risk to public health and safety.
In a letter sent to Greenlife, which was cited in the court documents, the EPA alleged the facility had supplied landscaping mulch containing traces of asbestos to various sites.
The environmental watchdog ordered the facility to cease production or exportation of mulch because it suspected the production was “carried out in an environmentally unsatisfactory manner”.
Yet Greenlife’s parent company VE Resource Recovery has hit back at the allegations in its appeal to the state’s specialist environmental court.
In the court documents, the company’s lawyers state the prevention notice doesn’t specify any basis for the EPA’s claim that the mulch production method is “environmentally unsatisfactory”.
VE Resource Recovery claims seven EPA officers tested multiple samples of the recycled mulch and soil at their Bringelly facility on January 15 but no traces of asbestos were found.
The recycling company said it sent off two rounds of its own samples of the recycled mulch which returned the same negative result.
An EPA spokesperson previously said it was concerned about mulch that was produced and sold between March and December 2023.
In its appeal, VE Resource Recovery argued contamination from other sources “cannot be discounted.”
“From the moment the mulch products leave the premises there is a risk of contamination of the mulch from other sources,” the appeal asserts.
The asbestos-infected mulch found at the Rozelle park didn’t contain any traces of the pollutant when it left the southern Sydney facility, VE Resource Recovery claims.
On Friday, the court heard the company had requested an extensive tranche of documents from the EPA, including any documents identifying the presence of asbestos in mulch not supplied by Greenlife and all documents related to the investigation of alternative sources of asbestos.
EPA’s lawyer Henry El-Hage SC said VE Resource Recovery sought a “plethora of material” that encapsulated “hundreds of documents running to thousands of pages”.
He said the EPA was not “resting on its laurels” and it would be able to provide the documents by the end of next week, pending clarification of certain “factual matters” in the request.
Land and Environment Court registrar Sarah Froh acknowledged the “enormous amount of public interest in this matter”.
She adjourned the matter until March 28 for a reconciliation conference, which will include a visit to the Greenlife facility in Bringelly.
VE Resource Recovery’s lawyer Lauren Sims told the court her client wanted the matter to be heard “at the earliest available opportunity”.
In the court documents, the company alleged the prohibition on mulch production and sales “is having an unreasonable and unjustified impact on the applicant’s business”.
Earlier this month, VE Resource Recovery disposed of the stockpile of recycled mulch “without admissions” due to concerns about the risk of combustion due to heat.