It’s taken 18 years, but a group of campaigners believe the Rutherford stink could be gone within 24 months.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The foul smelling odour that began wafting through the Rutherford Industrial Estate and into homes from about 1996 has been the subject of multiple investigations.
The most recent two-year study, the results of which were released by the Environment Protection Authority in May, identified Fulton Hogan asphalt plant and Wax Converters as dominant sources of odour.
“The EPA’s got all the tools now to do the job out at Rutherford,” anti-stink campaigner and Rutherford Air Quality Liaison Committee member Steve Jordan said yesterday.
“Some of the work that’s been done [in the study] we were told couldn’t be done; the ball’s in [the EPA’s] court to solve the problem.
“We can’t expect to solve it in five minutes, but in six to 12 months they should be able to solve the majority of problems.”
In yet another twist in the stink saga, Rutherford waste oil refinery Truegrain pleaded guilty to breaching a condition of its environment protection licence in the Land and Environment Court last week.
The company could face a $1 million fine after it admitted to not carrying out activities in a competent manner.
Mr Jordan said most of the industries in the area did the right thing regarding pollution control.
He believes the root of all problems lies with the site itself; that the horseshoe shape bordered by hills traps the odours.
“The industrial estate should never have been where it is,” Mr Jordan said.
“It’s badly located.”
In addition to the smell, campaigners want to see regional air monitors installed in Telarah to monitor particulates in the air as promised.
“I feel it is necessary to complete the chain [of air monitors installed in the Upper Hunter and in Newcastle],” Mr Jordan said.
“Maybe there’s not a drama, but if there is we have a right to know.”
1996: Rutherford Stink begins.
2001: Reports of the stink appear in the Mercury.
June 6, 2007: Department of Environment and Climate Change investigate source of the smell after 60 complaints.
September 10, 2008: Truegrain’s operating licence suspended after it was found to have an inefficient odour control system in place.
October 9, 2008: Anti Stink Group calls for designated monitoring station.
June 18, 2009: Truegrain waste oil refinery, at the centre of the Rutherford stink saga, continues its operations after court-ordered improvements to its waste processing plant were completed.
August 6, 2009: A Hollywood Close family report smelling the foul odour inside their home near the Rutherford industrial estate.
July 14, 2010: Maitland City Council writes to then premier Kristina Keneally to take action on the issue after hearing from Rutherford residents about the impacts on their health and quality of life.
September 28, 2010: The Department of Environment and Climate Change and Water say an NEPM (National Environment Protection Measure) air monitor was not suitable or practical for monitoring odour emissions at Rutherford.
April 20, 2012: Truegrain is successful in gaining a court order demanding the EPA pay the company’s legal costs for a recent trial.
October 18, 2012: Odours sourced from up to 20 Rutherford industrial sites are sampled as part of a long-term plan to eradicate foul smells from the area.
February 8, 2013: EPA carry out comprehensive testing and odour sampling on at least nine sites across the Rutherford Industrial Estate to track down the suburb’s notorious stink.
March 20, 2013: Six businesses in the Rutherford Industrial Estate form the Rutherford Industrial Precinct Alliance determined to ensure the latest EPA program is methodical, efficient, fair and in the public interest.
May 06, 2014: Retail workers in the Rutherford Industrial Estate hospitalised over stink.
May 19, 2014: EPA identifies Fulton Hogan asphalt plant and Wax Converters as two main contributors to the stink.
July 17, 2014: Truegrain pleads guilty to breaching a condition of its environment protection licence and could face a $1 million fine.