Mulch processing site previously contaminated with asbestos

The waste facility site at the centre of Sydney’s asbestos-in-mulch emergency has been the subject of multiple asbestos contamination pollution incidents in the past eight years.

The crisis is escalating with asbestos now detected in mulch at more than 30 sites across the city, including two schools, a supermarket, two hospitals and numerous public parks. In each case the mulch was traced back to a waste facility at Bringelly in Sydney’s south-west.

The Bringelly site has been subject to four clean-up notices issued by the Environmental Protection Authority, including in 2016 when officers discovered asbestos fragments, along with pieces of plastic, asphalt, concrete and bricks, mixed into a stockpile of what was meant to be natural soil and rocks.

An aerial view of Greenlife’s Bringelly site.Credit: Max Mason-Hubers

A penalty notice was issued in 2017, but more asbestos was found in 2020, mingled with 8450 square metres of waste material in the three-hectare yard. Another warning was issued.

The site’s current owner, Greenlife, bought the plant from another waste processing company, Hi-Quality Waste Management, in 2022. It denies responsibility for previous breaches of the site’s environmental protection licence and reiterated there was no connection between the companies.

Hi-Quality Waste Management held the licence until 2022. A Hi-Quality Group spokesperson said the company appointed an EPA approved auditor prior to the sale to verify the site conditions to ensure it was acceptable for sale.

A Greenlife director, Domenic Vitocco, was separately issued with a caution by the EPA in July 2021 for operating a nearby waste and composting facility without lawful authority and in an “environmentally unsatisfactory manner”. The caution did not relate to asbestos. His company, Greenlife Fertilisers, complied with the prevention notice.

NSW Environment Minister Penny Sharpe said the Environmental Protection Authority was undertaking one of the most significant investigations in its history as the number of sites with contaminated mulch grows. An asbestos taskforce has been convened to co-ordinate government agencies and boost staffing levels to deal with the crisis.

Greenlife Resource Recovery co-director Domenic Vitocco at the company’s Bringelly premises.Credit: Wolter Peeters

“There is clearly a problem and a regulatory gap when it comes to how the asbestos has got there. It should not be there. It’s illegal for it to be there. I want the EPA to get to the bottom of this investigation,” she said.

Investigators from the EPA estimate that the task of tracing all mulch trucked out of the Bringelly site between March and December last year is more than 90 per cent complete. They are combing through supply chain data, examining trucking records, weighbridge data and CCTV.

“It is a painstaking job – you’re looking at a whole web of possible sites including subcontractors, and the list is growing day by day,” said a senior EPA staff member, who is involved in the work but not authorised to speak publicly.

The mulch pile at the Bringelly site is now locked down again, and the EPA is not commenting on the progress of its investigation, which may take months.

Staff at the environmental watchdog have been warned not to speak to the media, but a source said that, despite what investigators described as compelling circumstantial evidence, there are no test results showing the presence of asbestos in mulch inside the Bringelly plant in the crucial period from March to December last year.

Asbestos testing of mulch is not routinely undertaken, with the law only requiring a visual inspection of the product before sale.

Results obtained by this masthead show the EPA tested nine samples of mulch and three of soil from Greenlife’s stockpiles in January, after asbestos was first found in mulch in Rozelle, and none of those samples came back positive for asbestos.

An EPA spokesperson said the authority was “concerned about mulch that was manufactured and sold between March and December 2023 and is no longer on site”.

Greenlife has launched a legal action against the EPA for prohibiting it from processing or selling its mulch.Credit: Wolter Peeters

However, Greenlife has said the mulch used for Rozelle Parklands was independently tested by John Holland, the contractor in charge of the development, following 20 site visits between January and November.

“On all occasions, it was cleared of any asbestos contaminates. [Greenlife] was then permitted to deliver it to the head contractor at Rozelle,” the spokesperson said.

Greenlife said two other samples of mulch collected from its site in October and November 2023 have also been tested by an independent testing lab and found not to contain asbestos.

“There are media reports suggesting [that] because [Greenlife] is the common source, then it must be responsible for the asbestos contamination. This is incorrect,” a spokesperson said.

The company stressed there are multiple different occasions when their mulch is handled, and could be contaminated after leaving its facilities, such as on contractor’s trucks, in holding yards, or onsite.

“Many of the sites the mulch is delivered to are remediated sites, meaning those sites have had asbestos buried there many decades ago,” the spokesperson said.

Greenlife Resource Recovery co-director Domenic Vitocco, pictured alongside company lawyer Ross Fox, said the mulch is produced from clean timber products. Credit: Wolter Peeters

In January, the EPA issued a prevention notice prohibiting the company from supplying any more of the product. Greenlife has launched a legal challenge against the ban.

When The Sun-Herald visited the facility last week, the mulch at the centre of the EPA’s investigation had been pushed up into five-metre high piles. The company said its mulch is manufactured from wooden pallets and natural timber products.

Some of the mulch material has come from trees cut down from a nearby farm owned by a Vitocco family company. Greenlife said this was in accordance with council consent, and in line with EPA regulations.

The timber is trucked to the facility and the truck weighed while viewed on camera. It’s then tipped out and spread out along the ground for a visual inspection.

Once inspected by Greenlife staff and approved, the timber is pushed up into a large pile. It’s then ground down into woodchips.

A screening machine then filters out any chunks of material larger than two centimetres, and the mulch is trucked offsite, either by Greenlife staff or a third party.

The mulch is screened using a machine which filters out pieces larger than two centimetres.Credit: Wolter Peeters

Greenlife accepts some building waste in the form of gypsum boards, which it grinds down to form soil additives, but said that despite being licensed to do so it does not accept demolition waste – a major source of asbestos contamination.

Vitocco said the business had been hit from “every side” but was sympathetic to the stress caused to the public.

“We are extremely concerned, just like everyone else, on the discovery of asbestos at even one location, let alone multiple locations, and the impact it is having on the people of Sydney,” he said.

According to a government briefing prepared in 2018 and seen by The Sun-Herald, about 10,000 cubic metres of asbestos-laced soil was dug up during works to widen The Northern Road, which runs past the gate of the Bringelly facility.

A witness recalls seeing piles of earth covered with tarpaulins along the road in the vicinity of the waste recovery plant in 2018.

At least some of the soil was removed by contractors, and it is unclear if the historic contamination in the area is related to the current asbestos emergency.

The company also processes building waste in the form of gypsum board from new homes, but does not accept demolition waste even though it is licensed to do so. Credit: Wolter Peeters

Asked if asbestos-contaminated soil was stored at the site and whether the plant might still be contaminated from any previous asbestos exposure, a spokesperson said: “The site was subject to comprehensive clean-up and remediation works, which were supervised by the EPA. The remedial works included the capping of the site, and the installation of a hardstand material. The clean-up and remedial works were accepted by the EPA.”

The EPA has been battling widespread asbestos contamination for decades. According to internal briefing documents seen by The Sun-Herald, an audit of NSW waste processing facilities producing “recovered fines” – a soil additive made from construction waste that can be used in landscaping – found alarming levels of asbestos.

In late 2019, the agency tested 73 samples from 14 facilities and 57 per cent contained traces of asbestos.

“Changes to industry practice are needed following compliance testing by the EPA which found that over 50 per cent of facilities were producing recovered fines that contained asbestos, plastics and other contaminants,” the agency said in a letter to industry stakeholders in May 2022.

But after consultation with industry players, the EPA elected not to bring in a tougher regime of mandatory testing of recovered fines before sale.

It was congratulated by the government at the time, which said stricter rules would place higher costs on small operators and lead to more waste being dumped in landfill.

NSW Greens MLC Sue Higginson called for earlier testing for contaminants to avoid future catastrophes.

“We have a system that in some ways is barely regulated, where a visual inspection is considered to be enough to sell a product,” she said. “It’s got to change.”