❓ Hon Robin Chapple raises serious safety concerns regarding a Normet charge vehicle at Barrick Gold's Raleigh Mine, citing photographic evidence of multiple defects and potential breaches of the Mines Safety and Inspection Act. The Minister's response refers to another parliamentary question, indicating a lack of direct answer.
AnsweredQoN 2550Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to photographs available for viewing at,
http://www.robinchapple.org.au/node/460
entitled ‘2010-02-06 Normet Charge Vehicle Raleigh.pdf’ of a Normet charge vehicle taken on 6 February 2010 in the main explosives magazine at the Raleigh Mine in the Kalgoorlie region owned by Barrick Gold, and ask -
(1) With regards to the photographs referred to above which clearly depict the following on the Normet Charge Vehicle at the Raleigh Mine, -
(a) a step made from a piece of hydraulic hose;
(b) gates on the basket that do not open and close properly or fasten securely;
(c) lights that are not clean or clear;
(d) a coupling coming undone and completely unsecured that when in use would be under extreme pressure;
(e) a charge hose split and held together partially with electrical tape;
(f) an earth strap not properly secured at both ends;
(g) a pressure vessel still loaded with Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil (ANFO); and
(h) a fire extinguisher that is not maintained in a fit and proper working order, -
(i) can the Minister state why this Normet charge vehicle was allowed to be in this condition by the management of Barrick Kanowna and of the Raleigh Mine?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) Can the Minister state the importance of, and quote the full text of the relevant sections from the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1995 and Regulations 1994
, for the following in all underground mines in Western Australia, -
(a) having a step made from the correct material and in the correct dimensions as opposed to having a step made from a piece of hydraulic hose;
(b) having gates on the basket that open and close properly and fasten securely;
(c) having lights that are clean and clear so as to allow good vision when charging and especially when hooking the signal tube to the detonating cord;
(d) having a coupling properly done up and completely secured with a second mechanism so that, when in use under extreme pressure, it cannot come undone;
(e) having a charge hose that is in one piece and free from defects;
(f) having an earth strap properly secured at both ends to all charge vehicles and/or charge vessels;
(g) emptying a pressure vessel completely of ANFO when it is no longer in use and has been parked and stored; and
(h) having the correct number of fire extinguishers that are maintained in a fit and proper working condition on all vehicles and machines in an underground mine?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) Can the Minister state for how long in months and years that the management of Barrick Kanowna and Raleigh Mine, have permitted and instructed that the Normet charge vehicle be operated in the condition as depicted in the photographs referred to in (1)?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) Can the Minister state how many inspections have taken place by the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) inspectorate at the Raleigh mine site in the last 30 months?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(9) Has any complaints/concerns recorded, both on the internal reporting system including in the Safety Toolbox Meeting Minutes Book and/or with the DMP, concerning this Normet Charge Vehicle as depicted in the photographs referred to in (1) in the last 30 months?
(10) If yes to (9), how many complaints/concerns were received by management of the company, on what date was each complaint/concern received, what specifically was each complaint/concern, what was done by the management of the company to resolve each issue and how long did each issue take to resolve?
(11) With reference to (9), -
(a) how many complaints/concerns were received by DMP inspectorate;
(b) on what date was each complaint/concern received;
(c) what specifically was done by the DMP inspectorate to address each issue that was raised; and
(d) on what date was each issue resolved?
(12) In light of (1), (3), (5), (9) , (10) and (11), have any sections of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994 and Regulations 1995
been breached, which specific sections have been breached and what is the maximum penalty for each breach?
(13) If yes to (12), will any responsible persons from Barrick Kanowna, including the resident manager, be prosecuted for these breaches?
(14) If no to (13), why not?
http://www.robinchapple.org.au/node/460
entitled ‘2010-02-06 Normet Charge Vehicle Raleigh.pdf’ of a Normet charge vehicle taken on 6 February 2010 in the main explosives magazine at the Raleigh Mine in the Kalgoorlie region owned by Barrick Gold, and ask -
(1) With regards to the photographs referred to above which clearly depict the following on the Normet Charge Vehicle at the Raleigh Mine, -
(a) a step made from a piece of hydraulic hose;
(b) gates on the basket that do not open and close properly or fasten securely;
(c) lights that are not clean or clear;
(d) a coupling coming undone and completely unsecured that when in use would be under extreme pressure;
(e) a charge hose split and held together partially with electrical tape;
(f) an earth strap not properly secured at both ends;
(g) a pressure vessel still loaded with Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil (ANFO); and
(h) a fire extinguisher that is not maintained in a fit and proper working order, -
(i) can the Minister state why this Normet charge vehicle was allowed to be in this condition by the management of Barrick Kanowna and of the Raleigh Mine?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) Can the Minister state the importance of, and quote the full text of the relevant sections from the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1995 and Regulations 1994
, for the following in all underground mines in Western Australia, -
(a) having a step made from the correct material and in the correct dimensions as opposed to having a step made from a piece of hydraulic hose;
(b) having gates on the basket that open and close properly and fasten securely;
(c) having lights that are clean and clear so as to allow good vision when charging and especially when hooking the signal tube to the detonating cord;
(d) having a coupling properly done up and completely secured with a second mechanism so that, when in use under extreme pressure, it cannot come undone;
(e) having a charge hose that is in one piece and free from defects;
(f) having an earth strap properly secured at both ends to all charge vehicles and/or charge vessels;
(g) emptying a pressure vessel completely of ANFO when it is no longer in use and has been parked and stored; and
(h) having the correct number of fire extinguishers that are maintained in a fit and proper working condition on all vehicles and machines in an underground mine?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) Can the Minister state for how long in months and years that the management of Barrick Kanowna and Raleigh Mine, have permitted and instructed that the Normet charge vehicle be operated in the condition as depicted in the photographs referred to in (1)?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) Can the Minister state how many inspections have taken place by the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) inspectorate at the Raleigh mine site in the last 30 months?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(9) Has any complaints/concerns recorded, both on the internal reporting system including in the Safety Toolbox Meeting Minutes Book and/or with the DMP, concerning this Normet Charge Vehicle as depicted in the photographs referred to in (1) in the last 30 months?
(10) If yes to (9), how many complaints/concerns were received by management of the company, on what date was each complaint/concern received, what specifically was each complaint/concern, what was done by the management of the company to resolve each issue and how long did each issue take to resolve?
(11) With reference to (9), -
(a) how many complaints/concerns were received by DMP inspectorate;
(b) on what date was each complaint/concern received;
(c) what specifically was done by the DMP inspectorate to address each issue that was raised; and
(d) on what date was each issue resolved?
(12) In light of (1), (3), (5), (9) , (10) and (11), have any sections of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994 and Regulations 1995
been breached, which specific sections have been breached and what is the maximum penalty for each breach?
(13) If yes to (12), will any responsible persons from Barrick Kanowna, including the resident manager, be prosecuted for these breaches?
(14) If no to (13), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
10 August 2010
Responded by
Minister for Mines and Petroleum
Response time
42 days
Please refer to parliamentary question 2516.
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
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.