Polluting a stream costs more than $13,000

Two firms have been slapped with more than $13,000 in fines after allowing sediment to flow into a stream while they built a passing lane near Te Kuiti last year.

In a Hamilton District Court case, Transfield Services (NZ Ltd) and Schick Construction and Cartage Ltd were fined $7370 and $6000 respectively after earlier pleading guilty to one charge each of breaching the Resource Management Act.

The court heard that during a period of heavy rainfall in April last year there were significant problems with erosion and sediment control measures at the construction site.

Those problems led to excessive levels of sediment getting into watercourses running through the site.

The water courses are tributaries of the Mangarama Stream.

As a result, testing of water quality at various sites showed levels of suspended solids were far higher than permitted levels.

Judge Melanie Harland noted both companies took steps to sort out the problems once they were identified by regional council Environment Waikato and the site was fully compliant by May 2008.

The judge noted that remedial works were undertaken at the site costing more than $100,000.

She was also satisfied the offences were "one-offs".

Schick Construction and Cartage Ltd's managing director Pat Peoples told the Times the company's staff at the Te Kuiti site were caught in the same heavy rain event which led to the death of six Elim College students and their teacher in the Turangi canyoning tragedy.

Mr Peoples said the circumstances which led to the prosecution were essentially "bad luck".

"We were unfortunate to get such a heavy downpour in that short period, and unfortunate we were only a matter of days away from having the site earthworks finished and covered in top soil, where it probably would've handled it (the rain) better."

Staff at the site on the day of the incident had been "up to their waists in water" trying to unblock a culvert with a jetting unit when Environment Waikato staff visited.

The blocked culvert meant water from the stream flowed over its banks and on to the companies' work site, resulting in the non-compliance.

On-site staff took more than a day to unblock the culvert, and work to repair the damage took the two firms more than a month.

Mr Peoples accepted the company "could've had our controls on-site a little better than they were".

The company had pleaded guilty "in an acceptance the law is written in such a way there is no realistic avenue to defend the charges", he said.

"We're not blameless, but there was an element of bad luck involved."

Mr Peoples said environmental compliance was costly and the company would learn from any situation where it found itself appearing before a judge.

Mr Peoples believed the $7370 fine reflected Judge Harland's acceptance the offence was also at the "lower end".

Mr Peoples said the firm was in an industry exposed to the intricacies of the Resource Management Act, which it had concerns about.

However, it had no plans to appeal the conviction or the fine.

Transfield corporate affairs manager David Jamieson said the company took its obligations to protect the environment around works sites extremely seriously. "We accept the court's judgment.

"Following this incident we completed a full investigation.

"We have now made a number of changes to procedures regarding site protection and selection of subcontractors."

Environment Waikato programme manager Grant Blackie said the decision sent a clear signal that companies involved in road building had ultimate responsibility for ensuring they designed and operated effective erosion and sediment controls in compliance with resource consent conditions.