Controversial consent to dump Wānaka human waste on farmland reviewed after 'inaccuracies' found

Otago Regional Council will review a controversial consent to dump treated human waste from Wānaka on farmland near Lauder after discovering inaccuracies in the original application.

The non-notified consent was granted in January for Queenstown Lakes District Council contractor SJ Allen Holdings.

The decision led to outcry from locals who were worried about the potential impact on their water and health as well as frustration about a lack of consultation.

The council said the review would consider whether the consent conditions were adequate, after finding inaccuracies relating to the site.

"Council has reached the view that there are inaccuracies in the consent-holder's application and as a result, the actual or potential adverse effects on the environment arising from the activity were not adequately identified and assessed in the application," a council report said.

"These inaccuracies materially influenced the council's decision on the application."

The review would include considering the scope of the consent, the discharge limits, soil contamination limits, restrictions to the land disposal area, reporting and groundwater monitoring.

The review was expected to cost the contractor approximately $80,000 but the council said the company did not need to stop work while it was carried out.

Council chief executive Richard Saunders said staff had notified the contractor, including which consent conditions would be examined and the reasons for the review.

He said the decision had been made after "careful consideration", including examining information that was available at the time the original consent decision was made.

The council would continue to monitor the site and assess compliance, Saunders said.

Federated Farmers Otago president Anna Gillespie welcomed the decision, saying it was a major win for rural New Zealand.

"(Otago Regional Council) should never have issued this consent but I do thank them for now recognising the widespread concerns and environmental risk by initiating a review," she said.

"Just one of the reasons farmers and others have been so angered by what's happened is that the original consent application was discussed and decided in-house by (Otago Regional Council), with no hearing or invitation for submissions.

"When news broke that trucks were rolling into Lauder to begin dumping up to 2000 tonnes of wastewater sludge a year in their neighbourhood, it was a complete surprise and a very unwelcome one."

Gillespie called for the consent to be cancelled and for Otago councillors to investigate how to deal with urban human effluent within their own boundaries.

Earlier in the week Central Otago mayors and councillors wrote to their Queenstown Lakes counterparts about their significant concerns and urged them to halt the operation.

At the time, Central Otago mayor Tamah Alley said locals were frustrated they had been denied a say and felt the decision was inherently unfair.

"They understand that sludge needs to go somewhere - they are farmers - but they are concerned that particular piece of land is not necessarily the right piece of land for that activity to take place," she said.

"They're worried about the odour. They're worried about the dust coming off the site. They're worried about the impact on local waterways, which includes the places where people get their drinking water."

Alley asked councils to work together to find a mutually agreeable long-term solution.

In response, Queenstown Lakes mayor John Glover said he understood locals' concerns and was open to discussing alternatives.

He said his council had relied on the consent in good faith, which was saving more than $1 million compared to carting the waste to Winton landfill.

Central Otago District Council last month voted to send its growing volume of sludge to Winton following community pushback and the discovery that the Lauder site was not going to meet its needs or save money.

Otago Regional Council has indicated that if the review was notified there would be a 20 working-day timeframe for submissions and a hearing could potentially be held.

The council invited the contractor to propose new consent conditions to address its concerns.

"Changes to the monitoring regime of the consent are necessary to require the consent-holder to adopt the best practicable option to remove or reduce adverse effects on the environment," the council said.