❓ A WA parliamentary question addresses concerns regarding a proposed chicken waste incinerator in Chittering, focusing on environmental impact assessment, community views, and potential effects on wetlands and public health. The Minister's response indicates an environmental assessment was completed, public submissions were considered, wetland impact was deemed low, and air emissions meet health standards.
AnsweredQoN 471Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to a chicken waste incinerator, which I understand has been proposed for Chittering, and is being supported by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. A number of issues have been raised with me by members of the Chittering community about the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure’s apparent determination to support this project in the face of local concerns, and therefore can the Minister please advise -
(1) Has an environmental impact been undertaken on this proposal by your Department? If not, why not?
(2) If an environmental impact study has been undertaken, has it been completed and what was the final recommendation?
(3) Did the environmental study consider the views of local residents? If so, what was that majority view?
(4) Did the environmental study consider the effect of such a treatment plant upon local wetlands? If so, what was the considered opinion?
(5) Did the environmental study consider the effect of such a treatment plant upon the health of local residents? If so, what was the considered opinion?
(1) Has an environmental impact been undertaken on this proposal by your Department? If not, why not?
(2) If an environmental impact study has been undertaken, has it been completed and what was the final recommendation?
(3) Did the environmental study consider the views of local residents? If so, what was that majority view?
(4) Did the environmental study consider the effect of such a treatment plant upon local wetlands? If so, what was the considered opinion?
(5) Did the environmental study consider the effect of such a treatment plant upon the health of local residents? If so, what was the considered opinion?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
10 November 2005
Responded by
Minister for the Environment
Response time
29 days
(2) The assessment was completed in December 2002. The EPA recommended that the proposal could be approved subject to the EPA's recommended conditions. (3) The proponent's PER document was publicly available for four weeks and public submissions were invited. Twenty-five submissions were received from government agencies and the public. While most public submissions had concerns with the proposal, about a quarter were very supportive. (4) The EPA determined that the distance to the nearest wetlands and the type of the facility proposed meant that the potential for impact on the wetlands was so low that detailed consideration by the EPA was not required. Further consideration will be given to the protection of wetlands during the works approval and licensing process. (5) Yes, the air emissions from the plant were assessed to readily meet health based criteria for ambient air quality.
(3) The proponent's PER document was publicly available for four weeks and public submissions were invited. Twenty-five submissions were received from government agencies and the public. While most public submissions had concerns with the proposal, about a quarter were very supportive. (4) The EPA determined that the distance to the nearest wetlands and the type of the facility proposed meant that the potential for impact on the wetlands was so low that detailed consideration by the EPA was not required. Further consideration will be given to the protection of wetlands during the works approval and licensing process. (5) Yes, the air emissions from the plant were assessed to readily meet health based criteria for ambient air quality.
(4) The EPA determined that the distance to the nearest wetlands and the type of the facility proposed meant that the potential for impact on the wetlands was so low that detailed consideration by the EPA was not required. Further consideration will be given to the protection of wetlands during the works approval and licensing process. (5) Yes, the air emissions from the plant were assessed to readily meet health based criteria for ambient air quality.
(5) Yes, the air emissions from the plant were assessed to readily meet health based criteria for ambient air quality.
(3) The proponent's PER document was publicly available for four weeks and public submissions were invited. Twenty-five submissions were received from government agencies and the public. While most public submissions had concerns with the proposal, about a quarter were very supportive. (4) The EPA determined that the distance to the nearest wetlands and the type of the facility proposed meant that the potential for impact on the wetlands was so low that detailed consideration by the EPA was not required. Further consideration will be given to the protection of wetlands during the works approval and licensing process. (5) Yes, the air emissions from the plant were assessed to readily meet health based criteria for ambient air quality.
(4) The EPA determined that the distance to the nearest wetlands and the type of the facility proposed meant that the potential for impact on the wetlands was so low that detailed consideration by the EPA was not required. Further consideration will be given to the protection of wetlands during the works approval and licensing process. (5) Yes, the air emissions from the plant were assessed to readily meet health based criteria for ambient air quality.
(5) Yes, the air emissions from the plant were assessed to readily meet health based criteria for ambient air quality.
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.