❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding the Golden Pike expansion and its potential impact on nearby residents due to blasting activities, specifically flyrock. The Minister acknowledges the risks and refers to ongoing appeals regarding the project's conditions.
AnsweredQoN 6018Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) With reference to the email dated 9 August 2006, referred to above, which in part states ‘the approximate blast clearance area for each of these blasts to the nearest property not owned by KCGM has been determined and is shown in the table below’, how many of these blasts require a blast clearance area of, -
(a) 400 metres;
(b) 350 metres;
(c) 300 metres;
(d) 250 metres; and
(e) 200 metres?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) Will all the blasts requiring a blast clearance area of greater than 200 metres up to 400 metres, according to the table referred in the email dated 9 August 2006 referred to above, impact on properties (not owned by KCGM) in which people are residing approximately 200 metres from the Golden Pike expansion?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) If yes to (3), which specific ones and how will they impact on these people and properties?
(6) Does the Minister recognise, understand the risks and dangers of flyrock that are clearly alerted to in the letter dated 28 March 2006 which in part states ‘It may be that this is adequate to provide a reasonable likelihood that public safety would not be adversely affected, however this is not the same thing as compliance with the relevant (EPA) standard as stated. Neither does it provide a guarantee that no flyrock will ever impinge on the general public. The likelihood of such a problem eventuating is, however, much greater in the near- surface zones than as the blasting work progresses to deeper areas of the extended pit’?
(7) If no to (6), why is the Minister making decisions about this project that may seriously injure or kill people?
(8) If yes to (6), can the Minister explain what he understands are the risks associated with flyrock?
(9) To provide a buffer of protection for orderly development in accordance with the answers provided for in question on notice No. 3645 on 13 June 2006 and clearly protect people from death or injury from flyrock, increased risk of pit wall failure, property damage, increased noise and dust for people living in properties not owned by KCGM in Johnson Street East, will the Minister alter recommended condition 10-1 from Bulletin 1273 of December 2007 as part of Ministerial approval to require that the proponent shall not undertake active mining operations within 400 metres of a occupied property, regardless of zoning without the written consent of the owner of that property?
(10) If no to (9), why not?
(a) 400 metres;
(b) 350 metres;
(c) 300 metres;
(d) 250 metres; and
(e) 200 metres?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) Will all the blasts requiring a blast clearance area of greater than 200 metres up to 400 metres, according to the table referred in the email dated 9 August 2006 referred to above, impact on properties (not owned by KCGM) in which people are residing approximately 200 metres from the Golden Pike expansion?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) If yes to (3), which specific ones and how will they impact on these people and properties?
(6) Does the Minister recognise, understand the risks and dangers of flyrock that are clearly alerted to in the letter dated 28 March 2006 which in part states ‘It may be that this is adequate to provide a reasonable likelihood that public safety would not be adversely affected, however this is not the same thing as compliance with the relevant (EPA) standard as stated. Neither does it provide a guarantee that no flyrock will ever impinge on the general public. The likelihood of such a problem eventuating is, however, much greater in the near- surface zones than as the blasting work progresses to deeper areas of the extended pit’?
(7) If no to (6), why is the Minister making decisions about this project that may seriously injure or kill people?
(8) If yes to (6), can the Minister explain what he understands are the risks associated with flyrock?
(9) To provide a buffer of protection for orderly development in accordance with the answers provided for in question on notice No. 3645 on 13 June 2006 and clearly protect people from death or injury from flyrock, increased risk of pit wall failure, property damage, increased noise and dust for people living in properties not owned by KCGM in Johnson Street East, will the Minister alter recommended condition 10-1 from Bulletin 1273 of December 2007 as part of Ministerial approval to require that the proponent shall not undertake active mining operations within 400 metres of a occupied property, regardless of zoning without the written consent of the owner of that property?
(10) If no to (9), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
6 May 2008
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
47 days
(1) (a) - (e) The table referred to appears in KCGM's draft Blast Management Plan of July 2006. The table estimates what clearance areas to the nearest property not owned by KCGM can be achieved for 86 blasts from surface level to 30 metres below surface for the Golden Pike cutback. The blast clearance areas determined by KCGM were:
200 m for 4 blasts;
250 m for 14 blasts;
300 m for 21 blasts;
350 m for 19 blasts; and
400 m for 28 blasts.
(2) Not applicable.
(3) No.
(4) It is KCGM's aim to modify its blasting practices so that flyrock throw does not exceed 50 m. According to the table and figures presented in Appendix 1 of KCGM's draft Blast Management Plan, a minimum of 200 m clearance area to all non-KCGM owned property will be achieved. Should KCGM require a blast clearance area of greater than 200 m for any reason, it is the responsibility of the company to ensure that injury to persons is prevented and to minimise the risk of damage to property under the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
.
(5) Not applicable.
(6) Yes.
(7) Not applicable.
(8) An independent review of flyrock potential in the Golden Pike Cutback concluded that, provided that stemming length (5 m or more) and related blast parameters were strictly controlled, the risk of death or severe injury by flyrock was negligible beyond a 200 m blast clearance area.
(9) The Environmental Protection Authority's report to the Minister on this proposal, Bulletin 1273, is under appeal and the Minister is awaiting advice from the Appeals Convenor before making a decision.
(10) Not applicable.
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
200 m for 4 blasts;
250 m for 14 blasts;
300 m for 21 blasts;
350 m for 19 blasts; and
400 m for 28 blasts.
(2) Not applicable.
(3) No.
(4) It is KCGM's aim to modify its blasting practices so that flyrock throw does not exceed 50 m. According to the table and figures presented in Appendix 1 of KCGM's draft Blast Management Plan, a minimum of 200 m clearance area to all non-KCGM owned property will be achieved. Should KCGM require a blast clearance area of greater than 200 m for any reason, it is the responsibility of the company to ensure that injury to persons is prevented and to minimise the risk of damage to property under the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
.
(5) Not applicable.
(6) Yes.
(7) Not applicable.
(8) An independent review of flyrock potential in the Golden Pike Cutback concluded that, provided that stemming length (5 m or more) and related blast parameters were strictly controlled, the risk of death or severe injury by flyrock was negligible beyond a 200 m blast clearance area.
(9) The Environmental Protection Authority's report to the Minister on this proposal, Bulletin 1273, is under appeal and the Minister is awaiting advice from the Appeals Convenor before making a decision.
(10) Not applicable.
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.