❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice addresses concerns about a mining license potentially causing pollution from cyanide, alkaline, saline constituents, toxic chemicals and heavy metals entering a prospecting license, and the Department's handling of seepage management.
AnsweredQoN 2892Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Given that the Department has a obligation to issue a licence with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring can the Minister explain why the Department has then imposed licence condition W2 and others which maximise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring from emissions of cyanide, alkaline and saline constituents along with other toxic chemicals and heavy metals being allowed to enter Prospecting Licence 26/3126?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) Can the Minister explain why the option of completely preventing seepage from crossing the boundary is not considered practical in this situation?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) Will the Department now write and apologise for misleading Mr L Mills by stating ‘You claim in your letter that KCGM’s emissions should be contained within mining lease 26/383 and not be permitted to enter my tenement Prospecting Licence Licence 26/3126 to cause pollution or the likelihood of pollution. In order to require KCGM to do this, the DOE would need to demonstrate that the emissions from KCGM’s operations are likely to cause pollution’ given the Department is now stating that it is not considered practical in this situation?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) Can the Minister explain how the seepage and groundwater management plan maps out KCGM’s process to ensure that groundwater levels are maintained below 4 metres given that the plan dated September 29 2005 states ‘It may not be practical to lower groundwater levels within this operational area below 4m BGS while the TSF’ are operational and so this area is not considered as part of the primary goal of the SGMP. Groundwater levels inside the operational area will be considered in the annual review of the SGMP however may require exemption with respect to target depths applied beyond the operational area’?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) Can the Minister explain why the option of completely preventing seepage from crossing the boundary is not considered practical in this situation?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) Will the Department now write and apologise for misleading Mr L Mills by stating ‘You claim in your letter that KCGM’s emissions should be contained within mining lease 26/383 and not be permitted to enter my tenement Prospecting Licence Licence 26/3126 to cause pollution or the likelihood of pollution. In order to require KCGM to do this, the DOE would need to demonstrate that the emissions from KCGM’s operations are likely to cause pollution’ given the Department is now stating that it is not considered practical in this situation?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) Can the Minister explain how the seepage and groundwater management plan maps out KCGM’s process to ensure that groundwater levels are maintained below 4 metres given that the plan dated September 29 2005 states ‘It may not be practical to lower groundwater levels within this operational area below 4m BGS while the TSF’ are operational and so this area is not considered as part of the primary goal of the SGMP. Groundwater levels inside the operational area will be considered in the annual review of the SGMP however may require exemption with respect to target depths applied beyond the operational area’?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 March 2006
Responded by
Minister for Education and Training representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
124 days
The Minister for the Environment; Science has provided the following response: (1) The Department of Environment (DoE) does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution. (2) Not applicable. (3)The Environmental Protection Act 1986, Section 3 states that practicable means: " reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(1) The Department of Environment (DoE) does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution. (2) Not applicable. (3)The Environmental Protection Act 1986, Section 3 states that practicable means: " reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3)The Environmental Protection Act 1986, Section 3 states that practicable means: " reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(3)The Environmental Protection Act 1986, Section 3 states that practicable means: " reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
" reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(8) Not applicable.
(1) The Department of Environment (DoE) does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution. (2) Not applicable. (3)The Environmental Protection Act 1986, Section 3 states that practicable means: " reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3)The Environmental Protection Act 1986, Section 3 states that practicable means: " reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(3)The Environmental Protection Act 1986, Section 3 states that practicable means: " reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
" reasonably practicable having regard to, among other things, local conditions and circumstances (including cost) and the current state of technical knowledge " The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
The DoE considers that capturing all seepage is not practicable when considered against the above criteria. (4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(4) Not applicable. (5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(5) No. (6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(6) The DoE has an obligation to ensure that a license is issued with conditions that minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm. As per question (1) the DoE does not consider that seepage entering prospecting lease 26/3126 constitutes pollution and practicable conditions have been imposed on the license to minimise the likelihood of pollution or environmental harm occurring. (7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(7) The DoE considers that the area within the operational area of the Fimiston I and Fimiston II tailings storage facilities is, in general, highly disturbed. Therefore the impact from water levels increasing to less than 4m below ground level is unlikely to cause pollution or environmental harm. The DoE also considers that it may not be practicable to prevent water levels getting within 4m of the ground surface adjacent to the toe of the tailings storage facility. Given that environmental harm and/or pollution are unlikely, and it is not considered practicable to achieve water levels less than 4m below ground level, it is unreasonable to require this within the operational area of the tailings storage facility. (8) Not applicable.
(8) Not applicable.
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.