❓ A WA parliamentary question regarding the environmental assessment of the Fimiston 2 tailings dam expansion, focusing on the rationale for assessment levels and alternative tailings storage options. The Minister's response clarifies the EPA's role and the proponent's responsibilities.
AnsweredQoN 3756Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Fimiston 1 and Fimiston 2 tailings dams operated by Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd (KCGM) owned by Barrick Gold Australia and Newmont Mining and answers provided for question on notice number 3540 of 25 May 2006 -
(1) Given that the Minister has stated that the Fimiston 2 tailings dam proposal to raise the height of the dam to between 55 and 60 metres is being assessed by the Environmental Protection Authority at a Public Environmental Review (PER) level as part of the Fimiston Stage 3 expansion, can the Minister state the reasons and rationale as to how this proposal was determined to be at the PER level?
(2) If no to (1), what specifically is correct?
(3) Can the Minister state the reasons and rationale as to how the proposal to raise height of Fimiston 2 tailings dam to heights of between 42.2 and 45 metres were determined by the Environmental Protection Authority as not being subject to formal environmental impact assessment?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) Will the Minister determine that the Fimiston 2 tailings dam proposal to raise the height of the dam to between 42.2 and 45 metres be assessed at the PER level or a higher level of assessment?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) As part of the PER level mentioned in (1), will the Minister ask or request that the Environmental Protection Authority ensure that KCGM, as the proponent, specifically evaluate alternatives with specific costings/benefits and sites for a new tailings dam, rather than simply proposing increasing height of the Fimiston 2 to heights of between 55 and 60 metres?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(9) Can the Minister state what is the estimated cost of building a new tailings dam the size of the current Fimiston 2 tailings dam in the area?
(10) If no to (9), why not?
(11) Can the Minister indicate what was the total cost of building the Fimiston 2 tailings dam with cells a, b, c and d?
(12) If no to (11), why not?
(1) Given that the Minister has stated that the Fimiston 2 tailings dam proposal to raise the height of the dam to between 55 and 60 metres is being assessed by the Environmental Protection Authority at a Public Environmental Review (PER) level as part of the Fimiston Stage 3 expansion, can the Minister state the reasons and rationale as to how this proposal was determined to be at the PER level?
(2) If no to (1), what specifically is correct?
(3) Can the Minister state the reasons and rationale as to how the proposal to raise height of Fimiston 2 tailings dam to heights of between 42.2 and 45 metres were determined by the Environmental Protection Authority as not being subject to formal environmental impact assessment?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) Will the Minister determine that the Fimiston 2 tailings dam proposal to raise the height of the dam to between 42.2 and 45 metres be assessed at the PER level or a higher level of assessment?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) As part of the PER level mentioned in (1), will the Minister ask or request that the Environmental Protection Authority ensure that KCGM, as the proponent, specifically evaluate alternatives with specific costings/benefits and sites for a new tailings dam, rather than simply proposing increasing height of the Fimiston 2 to heights of between 55 and 60 metres?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(9) Can the Minister state what is the estimated cost of building a new tailings dam the size of the current Fimiston 2 tailings dam in the area?
(10) If no to (9), why not?
(11) Can the Minister indicate what was the total cost of building the Fimiston 2 tailings dam with cells a, b, c and d?
(12) If no to (11), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
22 August 2006
Responded by
Minister for Education and Training representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
54 days
(2) Not applicable. (3) The proposal to raise the Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to between 42.2 and 45 metres was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) with information detailing potential environmental impacts and management, including tailings storage facility stability and seepage modelling. There was sufficient information provided that it could be concluded that the environmental impacts of the proposal could be managed to meet the EPA's objectives. (4) Not applicable. (5) The level of assessment for the proposal is under appeal and a decision has not been reached yet. (6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(3) The proposal to raise the Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to between 42.2 and 45 metres was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) with information detailing potential environmental impacts and management, including tailings storage facility stability and seepage modelling. There was sufficient information provided that it could be concluded that the environmental impacts of the proposal could be managed to meet the EPA's objectives. (4) Not applicable. (5) The level of assessment for the proposal is under appeal and a decision has not been reached yet. (6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(4) Not applicable. (5) The level of assessment for the proposal is under appeal and a decision has not been reached yet. (6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(5) The level of assessment for the proposal is under appeal and a decision has not been reached yet. (6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(3) The proposal to raise the Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to between 42.2 and 45 metres was referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) with information detailing potential environmental impacts and management, including tailings storage facility stability and seepage modelling. There was sufficient information provided that it could be concluded that the environmental impacts of the proposal could be managed to meet the EPA's objectives. (4) Not applicable. (5) The level of assessment for the proposal is under appeal and a decision has not been reached yet. (6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(4) Not applicable. (5) The level of assessment for the proposal is under appeal and a decision has not been reached yet. (6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(5) The level of assessment for the proposal is under appeal and a decision has not been reached yet. (6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(6) Not applicable. (7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(7) No. However I understand that the EPA has requested the proponent to present options for the storage of tailings in the PER. (8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(8) As an alternative to raising the height of Fimiston 2 tailings storage facility to heights of between 55 and 60 metres the proponent has proposed re-opening the Kaltails tailings storage facility. The EPA will be considering both of these options in the PER assessment. It is the role of the proponent to propose the management of their tailings. It is the EPA's function to provide advice on the environmental acceptability of the proposal. Costs of the proposal are not generally considered in an environmental impact assessment. (9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(9) No. (10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(10) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment. (11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(11) No. (12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
(12) This information is not relevant to the environmental impact assessment.
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.