❓ A WA parliamentary question addresses dust pollution from Cockburn Cement, focusing on the need for baghouse filters, data correction, and pollution control to protect public health. The Minister acknowledges concerns, outlines existing measures, and commits to further action based on an upcoming report.
AnsweredQoN 147Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
COCKBURN CEMENT WORKS — DUST POLLUTION
I draw to the minister’s attention the recently released Department of Health analysis of dust from Cockburn Cement Ltd. (1) Will the minister now include in the company’s new environmental licence a requirement to put a baghouse filter on kiln 5, as recommended by the Department of Health? (2) Given that the Department of Health states that the modelling data for the proposed new Cockburn Cement licence is deficient, will the minister now halt the appeals process and direct the Department of Environment and Conservation to correct the figures that set the dust emission levels? (3) The report states that if dust emissions continue unabated, there is a clear risk of adverse health outcomes for infants, children and older residents. Until Cockburn Cement Ltd installs baghouse filters on both lime kilns, will the minister now direct the company to desist from this level of pollution? I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION
I draw to the minister’s attention the recently released Department of Health analysis of dust from Cockburn Cement Ltd. (1) Will the minister now include in the company’s new environmental licence a requirement to put a baghouse filter on kiln 5, as recommended by the Department of Health? (2) Given that the Department of Health states that the modelling data for the proposed new Cockburn Cement licence is deficient, will the minister now halt the appeals process and direct the Department of Environment and Conservation to correct the figures that set the dust emission levels? (3) The report states that if dust emissions continue unabated, there is a clear risk of adverse health outcomes for infants, children and older residents. Until Cockburn Cement Ltd installs baghouse filters on both lime kilns, will the minister now direct the company to desist from this level of pollution? I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
(1) Will the minister now include in the company’s new environmental licence a requirement to put a baghouse filter on kiln 5, as recommended by the Department of Health? (2) Given that the Department of Health states that the modelling data for the proposed new Cockburn Cement licence is deficient, will the minister now halt the appeals process and direct the Department of Environment and Conservation to correct the figures that set the dust emission levels? (3) The report states that if dust emissions continue unabated, there is a clear risk of adverse health outcomes for infants, children and older residents. Until Cockburn Cement Ltd installs baghouse filters on both lime kilns, will the minister now direct the company to desist from this level of pollution? I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
(2) Given that the Department of Health states that the modelling data for the proposed new Cockburn Cement licence is deficient, will the minister now halt the appeals process and direct the Department of Environment and Conservation to correct the figures that set the dust emission levels? (3) The report states that if dust emissions continue unabated, there is a clear risk of adverse health outcomes for infants, children and older residents. Until Cockburn Cement Ltd installs baghouse filters on both lime kilns, will the minister now direct the company to desist from this level of pollution? I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
(3) The report states that if dust emissions continue unabated, there is a clear risk of adverse health outcomes for infants, children and older residents. Until Cockburn Cement Ltd installs baghouse filters on both lime kilns, will the minister now direct the company to desist from this level of pollution? I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
(1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
(1) Will the minister now include in the company’s new environmental licence a requirement to put a baghouse filter on kiln 5, as recommended by the Department of Health? (2) Given that the Department of Health states that the modelling data for the proposed new Cockburn Cement licence is deficient, will the minister now halt the appeals process and direct the Department of Environment and Conservation to correct the figures that set the dust emission levels? (3) The report states that if dust emissions continue unabated, there is a clear risk of adverse health outcomes for infants, children and older residents. Until Cockburn Cement Ltd installs baghouse filters on both lime kilns, will the minister now direct the company to desist from this level of pollution? I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
(2) Given that the Department of Health states that the modelling data for the proposed new Cockburn Cement licence is deficient, will the minister now halt the appeals process and direct the Department of Environment and Conservation to correct the figures that set the dust emission levels? (3) The report states that if dust emissions continue unabated, there is a clear risk of adverse health outcomes for infants, children and older residents. Until Cockburn Cement Ltd installs baghouse filters on both lime kilns, will the minister now direct the company to desist from this level of pollution? I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
(3) The report states that if dust emissions continue unabated, there is a clear risk of adverse health outcomes for infants, children and older residents. Until Cockburn Cement Ltd installs baghouse filters on both lime kilns, will the minister now direct the company to desist from this level of pollution? I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
I can assure the minister that, as of 10 o’clock this morning, people could virtually not see around the Cockburn Cement facility because of the level of dust and pollution coming from that plant. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
Mr W.R. MARMION replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
I thank the member for Cockburn for giving me a copy of the health department’s report last night, which I managed to read from cover to cover. (1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
(1)–(3) I will commence by saying that I am aware of the community concerns. I know that the member has been pushing their concerns for many years. I have seen photos of the dust from the kiln—I have not seen the one that the member has—on cars and on houses. I know that DEC has put stronger conditions on the new licence that was issued on 20 December. That has been appealed, as the member knows, and the Appeals Convenor is considering the concerns that have been raised. The health department report has gone to the Appeals Convenor, so the Appeals Convenor will consider the content of that report. I will provide some background for the benefit of members. The new licence requires that a baghouse filter be put on kiln 6, and Cockburn Cement has undertaken to put a baghouse filter on kiln 6, at a cost of $ 23 million. That has to be in place by February 2012, as the member already knows. There are also new dust targets for total suspended particles. In addition, Cockburn Cement is required to shut down if the dust limits are exceeded. Mr F.M. Logan : They certainly haven’t done that. That was at 10 o’clock this morning. Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
Mr W.R. MARMION : I expect to get the Appeals Convenor’s report within the next month. He will take into account this health department report. When I receive the Appeal Convenor’s report, I have undertaken to visit some of the residents, and also visit the Cockburn Cement facility. I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
I must say that I was concerned when I read the report. I will not hesitate to require tougher licensing conditions, including the possibility of a baghouse filter on kiln 5, if I determine that the new conditions do not protect the community. I am quite happy to say that. As the member knows, I have asked DEC to keep Cockburn Cement under constant review. Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
Turning to the report, I noted when I read the report that it contains an interesting table showing the measuring of dust. Also, interestingly enough, as the member pointed out to me last night, kiln 6 was shut down when the dust was being measured. Reading the figures, it is interesting to note that the dust levels recorded were not much different from what they were when kiln 6 was operating. That is an interesting statistic, which, of course, I expect the Appeals Convenor to take into account when he is looking at the current licence. The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
The report does not actually say that kiln 5 should have a baghouse filter on it, but I acknowledge that the report suggests that effective controls that prevent dust fallout events originating from kiln 6 should also be implemented for kiln 5 to ameliorate the impacts to amenity and wellbeing of residents living close to the CCL facility. So the report suggests that certainly kiln 5 probably should be looked at, and I undertake to ensure that I will do that.
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.