Christchurch waste company, BJ Dakin and Company Ltd, has been fined $36,500 after pleading guilty to four charges of unauthorised burial of contaminated material and the discharge of contaminants to land that may have entered water. The company’s director, Brian James Dakin, was also convicted on the four charges but was discharged. The sentencing hearing was before Judge Borthwick, sitting in the Christchurch District Court on December 6, 2010.

Environment Canterbury brought the charges against Mr Dakin and the company following the execution of a search warrant by Environment Canterbury at the company’s Bromley property in October last year. Officers found about 900 kilograms of waste material, including timber treatment or electroplating waste, buried in a polythene tank up to 2 metres below ground. There were also a number of visible spills in a nearby grassed yard.

Other charges related to a spill that the company reported on October 23, 2009 when contaminated stormwater leaked from a storage bund bordering the Charlesworth Drain, which runs into a nearby wetlands reserve, close to the Avon-Heathcote Estuary/Ihutai.

Laboratory tests of soil samples collected showed that the buried industrial waste was composed of 18 percent arsenic. The material discharged onto the grassed area from insecure storage tanks was found to contain cyanide and zinc and the material in the bund came from the clean-up of the Bankside pit in the Selwyn Plantation in 2008.

The company’s actions breached sections 15(1)(d) and 15(1)(b) of the Resource Management Act.

In sentencing the company and Mr Dakin, Judge Borthwick noted the low levels of contaminants found in the samples and that only two breached industrial guidelines, however even small discharges can cause lasting harm to the environment through a process of accumulation. The Judge said that any discharge that may enter water could not be discounted when determining a sentence, that the potential for harm was relevant, and this issue was one of compliance with the RMA, local authority planning and legislation.

Defense counsel stated that the offending was due to a system’s breakdown at the site and that the company could not identify who was responsible for burying the waste. Nevertheless, the Judge said that there had been a lack of supervision of employees and agents and inadequate handling procedures regarding the waste material. She said that pollution was a cost borne by others and financial penalties act as a deterrent to future offending.

Judge Borthwick noted that the company had spent $17,000 on the site and now had protocols in place for better hazard management. She said the company was working with Environment Canterbury’s pollution prevention staff, taking steps to become more environmentally responsible and that Mr Dakin had no previous convictions himself.

The Judge convicted but discharged Mr Dakin on all four charges brought against him and fined the company $21,500 and $15,000 on two charges respectively along with a conviction and discharge for the other two. Mr Dakin and the company were ordered to pay court and solicitors costs.

Kim Drummond, Environment Canterbury director regulation, said the sentences handed down to Mr Dakin and the company will reassure the public that the unauthorized and illegal disposal of waste material in any environment will not be tolerated.

“Waste management and disposal is an important function throughout the country, however there is a public expectation that businesses and individuals undertaking this work will do so in a responsible manner and that the environment will not be damaged,” said Mr Drummond.

“In this case the company was operating from Ruru Road, close to a public place and the estuary, where people enjoy water activities and wildlife flourishes.

“Both management and employees need to ensure that adequate management systems are in place if storing and disposing of hazardous material and that they are implemented effectively. The damage to land and surface and groundwater due to the dumping of waste can take years to recover and it was reassuring that the Judge referred to that point during her sentencing of Mr Dakin and his company.”

ENDS

© Scoop Media