❓ A parliamentary question regarding the timeline of air monitoring data sharing between the Department of Environmental Protection and the Health Department concerning the Omex site remediation in Bellevue. It seeks to understand when data was shared and why there was a delay in informing the Health Department about exceeded action levels.
AnsweredQoN 215Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) What was the earliest date upon which the Department of Environmental Protection provided air monitoring data to the Health Department since the commencement of the remediation of the Omex site in Bellevue on 18 April 2000? (2) Since commencing on 18 April 2000, on what date did the Department of Environmental Protection first receive air monitoring data from the remediation of the Omex site in Bellevue from the contractors, Theiss Environmental? (3) Was the Department of Environmental Protection aware of the action levels for sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds being exceeded prior to 13 May 2000 at the Omex site? If not, why not? (4) If yes, why was information not provided to the Health Department prior to 13 May 2000? Hon PETER FOSS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(2) Since commencing on 18 April 2000, on what date did the Department of Environmental Protection first receive air monitoring data from the remediation of the Omex site in Bellevue from the contractors, Theiss Environmental? (3) Was the Department of Environmental Protection aware of the action levels for sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds being exceeded prior to 13 May 2000 at the Omex site? If not, why not? (4) If yes, why was information not provided to the Health Department prior to 13 May 2000? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(3) Was the Department of Environmental Protection aware of the action levels for sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds being exceeded prior to 13 May 2000 at the Omex site? If not, why not? (4) If yes, why was information not provided to the Health Department prior to 13 May 2000? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(4) If yes, why was information not provided to the Health Department prior to 13 May 2000? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(2) Since commencing on 18 April 2000, on what date did the Department of Environmental Protection first receive air monitoring data from the remediation of the Omex site in Bellevue from the contractors, Theiss Environmental? (3) Was the Department of Environmental Protection aware of the action levels for sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds being exceeded prior to 13 May 2000 at the Omex site? If not, why not? (4) If yes, why was information not provided to the Health Department prior to 13 May 2000? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(3) Was the Department of Environmental Protection aware of the action levels for sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds being exceeded prior to 13 May 2000 at the Omex site? If not, why not? (4) If yes, why was information not provided to the Health Department prior to 13 May 2000? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(4) If yes, why was information not provided to the Health Department prior to 13 May 2000? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(1) 11 May 2000. It was for lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon levels in dust. (2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(2) 27 April 2000. (3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(3) Progress reports by Theiss Environmental for the weeks ending 26 April and 3 May stated alert or action levels for sulphur dioxide or volatile organic compounds had not been exceeded. On 12 May, Theiss Environmental informed the Department of Environmental Protection in its weekly progress report to 10 May that sulphur dioxide action levels had been exceeded on 8 and 9 May and volatile organic compound levels had been exceeded on 10 May 2000. (4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
(4) The Health Department was advised of the exceeding of sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds action levels when it was provided with the Theiss Environmental weekly progress report to 10 May at a meeting with community representatives at the Omex site on 13 May 2000.
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.