Hon Giz Watson questions the Minister for the Environment regarding a saline water spill at KCGM's Mt Percy operation, including its extent, impact on an Aboriginal reserve, potential breaches of the Environmental Protection Act, and preventative measures. The Minister acknowledges the spill, its impact, and ongoing investigations, but denies a breach of the Act in the initial incident.

AnsweredQoN 4973Legislative Council
Asked
27 June 2007
Portfolio
the Environment

QuestionView source ↗

(1) Is it correct that the saline water spill went outside of the bunding and travelled along a road?
(2) If no to (2), why not?
(3) Can the Minister state how far in metres did the saline water spill travel from the pipeline bunding and the amount of area in square metres that the saline water spill impacted upon?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) Did this saline water spill flow onto an Aboriginal reserve in the Mt Percy area?
(6) If yes to (5), how was this allowed to occur?
(7) If no to (5), has a saline water spill occurred onto an Aboriginal reserve in the Mt Percy area over the last 14 months?
(8) Did KCGM breach section 50 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
by discharging waste water which was likely to cause pollution?
(9) If no to (8), why not?
(10) Will KCGM be prosecuted for breaching any section of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
in causing the saline water spill at the Mount Percy operation?
(11) If no to (11), why not?
(12) Can the Minister state what extra controls are now in place for the KCGM operations to prevent ongoing saline water spills outside of the pipeline bunding so that no further breaches of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
will occur?
(13) If no to (12), why not?

AnswerView source ↗

Answered
5 September 2007
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
70 days
(1) Yes. It is important to note that the road forms part of the bund however the spill was not contained within the road and bund structures.
(2) Not applicable.
(3) The distance travelled outside the bund varied. It is estimated that 1000 square metres of land outside the bunding was affected.
(4) Not applicable.
(5) No.
(6) Not applicable.
(7) Yes. A saline water spill on 22 May 2007 flowed onto an Aboriginal reserve.
(8) No.
(9) A Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) Inspector examined the 18 June 2006 spill on 21 June 2006 and considered that:
· native vegetation was unlikely to be impacted.
· the vegetation in the area was rehabilitation and unlikely to be considered native vegetation as it was vegetation still under mining area bond arrangements.
· given the saline constituents of the pipeline are not on Schedule 1 of the Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharge) Regulations 2004 a breach had not occurred.
(10) No. See (8) and (9).
(11) See (9). The pipeline in question is not a prescribed activity under the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
or its various regulations.
(12) Normal pipeline management controls and earthworks are in place. DEC will continue to investigate any spills from this area to determine whether a breach of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 has occurred. DEC is investigating a saline water spill at Mt Percy operations that occurred on 22 May 2007. This investigation is currently underway and it is not appropriate for me to comment on the details at this stage. KCGM has been required to provide a full investigation report into these incidents, including outlining actions to minimise the risk of such incidents occurring again
(13) 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