❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding odour complaints and environmental compliance issues related to Loongana Lime, including the number of complaints, enforcement actions, and the effectiveness of environmental field notices.
AnsweredQoN 2969Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to a newspaper article which appeared on page five of
The Kalgoorlie Miner
newspaper dated November 22 2005, titled ‘Loongana Lime issued with Environmental Field Notice’ -
(1) Can the Minister quote the specific text of the wording used and stated in the Environmental Field Notice?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) Since the licence condition requiring waste oil not to be burnt when the wind is blowing towards town was removed, how many complaints in total have been received, validated or otherwise, and on what specific dates were they received?
(4) Can the Minister state how many complaints specifically concerning odour and how many breaches of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
have been identified in the last six years for the Loongana Lime premises?
(5) If no to (4), why not?
(6) Can the Minister state how many Environmental Field Notices have been issued to Loongana Lime in the last three years and the specific text used in each?
(7) If no to (6), why not?
(8) Can the Minister state what specific type and nature of enforcement action if any, has been taken for each complaint in the three last years concerning Loongana Lime?
(9) If no to (8), why not?
(10) Can the Minister state how many complaints have been received in the last two years concerning odour, the specific dates they were received and whether or not they were validated in relation to the burning of diesel or some other fuel other than waste oil?
(11) If no to (10), why not?
(12) Can the Minister explain why odour problems continue to interfere with the comfort, convenience, welfare and health of residents given that the Department of Environment (DoE) has issued a number of Environmental Field Notices over several years that should have prevented continuing complaints being made?
(13) If no to (12), why not?
(14) Can the Minister indicate if the DoE intends to take strong, proactive enforcement action as stated by Wayne Astill on ABC radio by issuing an Environmental Protection Notice to Loongana Lime concerning odour that will offer realistic protection to residents and stop the waste of departmental resources on ongoing complaints?
(15) If no to (14), why not?
The Kalgoorlie Miner
newspaper dated November 22 2005, titled ‘Loongana Lime issued with Environmental Field Notice’ -
(1) Can the Minister quote the specific text of the wording used and stated in the Environmental Field Notice?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) Since the licence condition requiring waste oil not to be burnt when the wind is blowing towards town was removed, how many complaints in total have been received, validated or otherwise, and on what specific dates were they received?
(4) Can the Minister state how many complaints specifically concerning odour and how many breaches of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
have been identified in the last six years for the Loongana Lime premises?
(5) If no to (4), why not?
(6) Can the Minister state how many Environmental Field Notices have been issued to Loongana Lime in the last three years and the specific text used in each?
(7) If no to (6), why not?
(8) Can the Minister state what specific type and nature of enforcement action if any, has been taken for each complaint in the three last years concerning Loongana Lime?
(9) If no to (8), why not?
(10) Can the Minister state how many complaints have been received in the last two years concerning odour, the specific dates they were received and whether or not they were validated in relation to the burning of diesel or some other fuel other than waste oil?
(11) If no to (10), why not?
(12) Can the Minister explain why odour problems continue to interfere with the comfort, convenience, welfare and health of residents given that the Department of Environment (DoE) has issued a number of Environmental Field Notices over several years that should have prevented continuing complaints being made?
(13) If no to (12), why not?
(14) Can the Minister indicate if the DoE intends to take strong, proactive enforcement action as stated by Wayne Astill on ABC radio by issuing an Environmental Protection Notice to Loongana Lime concerning odour that will offer realistic protection to residents and stop the waste of departmental resources on ongoing complaints?
(15) If no to (14), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 March 2006
Responded by
Minister for Education and Training representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
104 days
The Minister for the Environment; Science has provided the following response: The following information is true as at 22 December 2005. (1) Yes. (See tabled paper no ) (2) Not applicable. (3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
The following information is true as at 22 December 2005. (1) Yes. (See tabled paper no ) (2) Not applicable. (3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(1) Yes. (See tabled paper no ) (2) Not applicable. (3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
· issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
· amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
· amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(15) Not applicable.
The following information is true as at 22 December 2005. (1) Yes. (See tabled paper no ) (2) Not applicable. (3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(1) Yes. (See tabled paper no ) (2) Not applicable. (3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(3) Between the licence commencement date of 18 October 2005 (issued on 17 October 2005) and 14 December 2005 there have been 12 complaints made against Loongana Lime. An additional complaint was not registered as neither the complaint or source could be verified. The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
The complaints were received on 21.10.2005, 24.10.2005 (three complaints), 28.10.2005, 31.10.2005, 3.11.2005 (two complaints), 11.11.2005, 15.11.2005, 16.11.2005, 21.11.2005 and 8.12.2005. (4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(4) The Department of Environment (DoE) has received 102 complaints on odour about Loongana Lime in the last six years. The DoE has, to date, recorded no breaches of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. (5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(5) Not applicable. (6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(6) Six Environmental Field Notices have been issued in the last three years. Copies of Environmental Field Notices 897 and 898 were provided with Question on Notice 1643 (of 2003). Four other Environmental Field Notices, issued to Loongana Lime within the time period specified. (See tabled papers no , , and ). (7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(7) Not applicable. (8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(8) For the period prior to 19 February 2004 refer to Questions on Notice 1643 (of 2003), 1266 (of 2003), 1171 (of 2003) and 583 (0f 2003). The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
The outcome of the investigation discussed in Question on Notice 1643 was a letter of warning. (See tabled paper no ). Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
Since that time the DoE and the Minister for the Environment; Science has undertaken a number of actions in response to complaints received. These include: · issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
· issuing Environmental Field Notices as per (6); · amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
· amending the licence to prevent the burning of oil whilst the wind was blowing towards Kalgoorlie Boulder until Loongana Lime could demonstrate improvements in odour emissions from site; and · amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
· amending the licence to ensure Loongana Lime bunded and cleaned up grease drums on site. These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
These actions are considered consistent with the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the DoE. (9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(9) Not applicable. (10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(10) In the previous two years complaints have been received on 13.2.04, 16.2.04 (two complaints), 17.2.04 (three complaints), 18.2.04, 24.2.04 (two complaints), 25.2.04 (five complaints), 26.2.04 (two complaints), 27.2.04, 29.02.04 (two complaints), 3.3.05, 15.3.04 (two complaints), 23.3.04, 30.3.04, 5.5.04, 7.5.04, 6.5.04, 15.6.04, 13.9.2004, 4.1.04, 7.1.05, 17.1.05, 10.4.05, 14.4.05, 20.4.05, 26.4.05, 1.8.05, 26.5.05, 12.9.05, 21.10.05 (two complaints), 24.10.05 (three complaints), 3.11.05, 15.11.05, 16.11.05 and 8.12.05. In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
In the period when Loongana Lime was prevented from burning recycled oil when the wind was blowing towards town, one of the actions was to confirm Loongana Lime had either switched off the kiln or gone onto diesel in accordance with licence conditions. All of the site visits and inquiries in this regard demonstrated that Loongana Lime had complied with licence requirements. (11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(11) Not applicable. (12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(12) See answer to Question on Notice 2881 (3). Refer to Table 7. (13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(13) Not applicable. (14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(14) Refer to Question on Notice 2881 (of 2005) part (3). The DoE will consider the issuing of an environmental protection notice providing the grounds of Section 65(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 can be satisfied. (15) Not applicable.
(15) 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.