❓ Question regarding the Water Corporation's decision to reduce the odour buffer zone for the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme, despite internal concerns about the uncertainty of odour modelling. The answer claims the changes were for administrative practicality and did not impact effectiveness.
AnsweredQoN 1534Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Minister to page 12 of the Water Corporation’s Mdour Modelling Study contained in the Water Corporation’s Amendment Report dated 31 March 2010 relating to the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme Amendment and the reduction of its wastewater treatment plant odour buffer which states under section 9 in the eighth bullet point, “there is not a strong argument to change the boundary of the buffer zone”; and “applying the precautionary principle is warranted because there is
always a degree of uncertainty about the predictions of odour modelling
for plants that are still to be designed, constructed and operated”, and I ask: (a) given the above statements, why did the Water Corporation agree to the
amendment to the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme to reduce the odour
buffer; (b) why did the Water Corporation agree to further reduce the odour buffer
from what is shown in Figure 18 of the Study (Further Reduction); and (c) did the Department of Housing or any other government agency ask or
represent to the Water Corporation to consider reducing its odour buffer
or agree to the Further Reduction?
always a degree of uncertainty about the predictions of odour modelling
for plants that are still to be designed, constructed and operated”, and I ask: (a) given the above statements, why did the Water Corporation agree to the
amendment to the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme to reduce the odour
buffer; (b) why did the Water Corporation agree to further reduce the odour buffer
from what is shown in Figure 18 of the Study (Further Reduction); and (c) did the Department of Housing or any other government agency ask or
represent to the Water Corporation to consider reducing its odour buffer
or agree to the Further Reduction?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
19 September 2023
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Water
Response time
7 days
1) The buffer was amended to conform to cadastral boundaries when it was officially administered by DPLH. This was done to make it more practical for the region scheme and did not impact on the effectiveness of the buffer.
2) The further minor adjustment to the amended buffer aligned to updated cadastral boundaries and again did not impact the effectiveness of the buffer.
3) No.
2) The further minor adjustment to the amended buffer aligned to updated cadastral boundaries and again did not impact the effectiveness of the buffer.
3) No.
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.