❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the lack of prosecution against KCGM for odour emissions, referencing a previous incident and a letter acknowledging the issue. The Minister defers to a previous answer and states the investigation is ongoing.
AnsweredQoN 3840Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to a media statement dated 16 June 2008, from the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) entitled, ‘Hazelmere rendering company pays $25 000 penalty for odour emission’, and unreasonable odour emissions of ammonium nitrate fumes from blasts which seriously impacted upon residents which occurred on 11 and 16 February 2010, at a site managed by Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd (KCGM ), who is the management company for Newmont and Barrick at the Mount Charlotte gold mining operations, and ask -
(1) Will KCGM be prosecuted under the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
, for causing unreasonable odour emissions for the incidents on 11 and 16 February 2010, in the same/similar manner as other companies referred to, in the DEC media statements above?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) If yes to (1), when will prosecution proceedings be commenced or implemented?
(4) Is it correct that the DEC has evidence in the form of a copy of a letter from KCGM dated 3 February 2010, addressed to a resident which in part states, ‘As discussed on the phone, the odour was the result of post-firing blast fumes that were not appropriately contained by the spray system … However, on behalf of KCGM, I would like to apologise to you and your family for the inconvenience experienced for both of these incidents regarding the failure of sprays to activate (a copy of previous letter attached, as requested)’?
(5) If no to (4), what was specifically stated in the letter dated 3 February 2010?
(6) Was the above mentioned letter in (4), considered by the DEC as part of its investigation before it was finalised into these matters along with many statements from persons affected?
(7) If no to (6), why not?
(8) If yes to (6), how was the letter dated 3 February 2010 taken into consideration?
(1) Will KCGM be prosecuted under the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
, for causing unreasonable odour emissions for the incidents on 11 and 16 February 2010, in the same/similar manner as other companies referred to, in the DEC media statements above?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) If yes to (1), when will prosecution proceedings be commenced or implemented?
(4) Is it correct that the DEC has evidence in the form of a copy of a letter from KCGM dated 3 February 2010, addressed to a resident which in part states, ‘As discussed on the phone, the odour was the result of post-firing blast fumes that were not appropriately contained by the spray system … However, on behalf of KCGM, I would like to apologise to you and your family for the inconvenience experienced for both of these incidents regarding the failure of sprays to activate (a copy of previous letter attached, as requested)’?
(5) If no to (4), what was specifically stated in the letter dated 3 February 2010?
(6) Was the above mentioned letter in (4), considered by the DEC as part of its investigation before it was finalised into these matters along with many statements from persons affected?
(7) If no to (6), why not?
(8) If yes to (6), how was the letter dated 3 February 2010 taken into consideration?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
21 June 2011
Responded by
Minister for Mental Health representing the Minister for Environment
Response time
68 days
The Minister for Environment has provided the following response:
(1-8) I refer the Honourable Member to the answer to Question on Notice 3215 on 15 March 2011. The Department of Environment and Conservation has advised that the findings of this investigation are still being reviewed pending a final determination in accordance with its
Enforcement and Prosecution Policy 2008
.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
(1-8) I refer the Honourable Member to the answer to Question on Notice 3215 on 15 March 2011. The Department of Environment and Conservation has advised that the findings of this investigation are still being reviewed pending a final determination in accordance with its
Enforcement and Prosecution Policy 2008
.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.