Search

Changes to Contaminated Land Management Act

Focus: Property
Services: Property & Projects
Industry Focus: Property
Date: 18 November 2009
Author: Jane Robins, Senior Associate, Sydney

THE LATEST CHANGES IN CONTAMINATION OBLIGATIONS IN NSW:
DO YOU HAVE A DUTY TO REPORT?

Changes to Contaminated Land Management Act

Since December 2008, the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 has been undergoing an overhaul, with new waves of provisions coming into force in December, then July. Significant changes have included:

  • a change in the trigger for intervention by the EPA from “significant risk of harm” to “significantly contaminated land”;
  • the introduction of Preliminary Investigation Orders to force a range of people to undertake investigation;
  • “Management Orders” replacing “Investigation” and “Remediation” Orders;
  • the removal of the “no knowledge” defence;
  • the introduction of an offence for providing the EPA or a Site Auditor with false or misleading information;
  • the introduction of Penalty Infringement Notices to enable certain breaches to be dealt with by way of fine rather than court; and
  • the ability for the EPA to impose conditions on or revoke a voluntary proposal.
Duty to report contamination

In addition, section 60, the provision imposing a duty to report contamination, has been amended. On 1 December 2009, new Guidelines under section 60 come into effect. The Guidelines provide further detail on:

  • how to determine when to report, including a checklist for site owners and responsible people;
  • the notification triggers, i.e. the concentration of contaminants. It should be noted that these are set quite low, especially in relation to groundwater, to trigger reporting in more cases;
  • situations which are not intended to require reporting, such as diffuse urban pollution, the EPA is already involved, or a Site Audit Statement has been issued certifying the use of the land;
  • the factors as to whether a person should have been “reasonably aware” of the contamination, such as their qualifications and training, whether they could reasonably have sought advice and the circumstances of the contamination;
  • the form of the report to the EPA.
Penalties

Failure to comply with this duty to report can result in prosecution by the EPA, with maximum penalties currently set at:

  • Corporations: $165,000, with a further penalty of $77,000 for each day the offence continues; and
  • Individuals: $77,000, with a further penalty of $33,000 for each day the offence continues.
To learn more about these changes and how they might affect you, please contact Jane Robins at jane.robins@dibbsbarker.com. DibbsBarker will be conducting a seminar regarding these changes. Please register your interest by contacting Katie Graham at katie.graham@dibbsbarker.com.
 
Jane Robins, Senior Associate, Sydney
Recent Publications
09 Mar 2010
The Government has responded to the Expert Panel's Report on amendments to the Franchising Code...
05 Mar 2010
Recent decisions regarding: liability, exclusions, section 6A: unintentional consequences, journey claims, jurisdiction, procedure & costs, notice provisions & time limits, recovery of compensation, incapacity, permanent impairment, medical expenses, rehabilitation, aids and appliances and household assistance
01 Mar 2010
Recent decisions regarding: liability, exclusions, section 6A: unintentional consequences, journey claims, jurisdiction, procedure & costs, notice provisions & time limits, recovery of compensation, incapacity, permanent impairment, medical expenses, rehabilitation, aids and appliances and household assistance
Privacy Disclaimer Contact Us Site Map CLIENT & STAFF LogIN © 2010 DIBBSBARKER