❓ A parliamentary question addresses delays and notification concerns regarding the remediation of a landfill site in Hazelmere, Western Australia. The Minister's response provides explanations and defers comment on an ongoing appeal.
AnsweredQoN 1330Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
ADELAIDE
STREET, HAZELMERE — LANDFILL SITE
1330. Hon SAMANTHA ROWE to the
minister representing the Minister for Environment:
I refer to the landfill site in Adelaide Street, Hazelmere.
(1) Why did
the Environmental Protection Authority take more than two years to set a level
of assessment for the remediation of the site, and was this time frame in
compliance with the Environmental Protection Act 1986?
(2) Why did
the Department of Environment Regulation advertise a works approval process
prior to the EPA's level of assessment decision for the project, and
was this compliant with the Environmental Protection Act?
(3) Why have
members of the community who live within five metres of the classified
contaminated site not been afforded any notification of the proposed project by
the EPA or DER?
(4) How does
the Minister for Environment justify the EPA's decision not to assess
this project and allow it to proceed without adequate separation distances as
prescribed by the EPA's environmental assessment guidelines for waste
disposal facilities?
STREET, HAZELMERE — LANDFILL SITE
1330. Hon SAMANTHA ROWE to the
minister representing the Minister for Environment:
I refer to the landfill site in Adelaide Street, Hazelmere.
(1) Why did
the Environmental Protection Authority take more than two years to set a level
of assessment for the remediation of the site, and was this time frame in
compliance with the Environmental Protection Act 1986?
(2) Why did
the Department of Environment Regulation advertise a works approval process
prior to the EPA's level of assessment decision for the project, and
was this compliant with the Environmental Protection Act?
(3) Why have
members of the community who live within five metres of the classified
contaminated site not been afforded any notification of the proposed project by
the EPA or DER?
(4) How does
the Minister for Environment justify the EPA's decision not to assess
this project and allow it to proceed without adequate separation distances as
prescribed by the EPA's environmental assessment guidelines for waste
disposal facilities?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of the question.
(1) The
proposal to remediate the landfill site was referred by a third party in August
2013. The Environmental Protection Authority considered that it did not have
enough information to enable it to decide whether to assess the proposal. The
EPA requested further information about the proposal in accordance with the
requirements of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The EPA made its
decision once the information was received in late September 2015.
(2) Although
section 54(4) of the EP act prevents the Department of Environment Regulation
from making a decision to grant or refuse a works approval before the EPA has
decided whether to assess a proposal, the EP act does not prevent DER accepting,
advertising and assessing an application for a works approval while part IV of
the EP act processes are underway.
(3) DER wrote
to 48 landowners on 9 November 2015. This included all adjacent landowners
immediately to the north, east and west of the proposed premises in Hazelmere
and residential households to the south along Adelaide Street between Stirling
Crescent and Roe Highway in High Wycombe.
(4) The EPA
published its decision not to assess the proposal on 9 November 2015 and
provided public advice on the future regulation of the site remediation. This
decision was appealed and, as the Minister for Environment will have a future
decision to make in relation to these appeals, it is not appropriate for him to
comment at this time.
(1) The
proposal to remediate the landfill site was referred by a third party in August
2013. The Environmental Protection Authority considered that it did not have
enough information to enable it to decide whether to assess the proposal. The
EPA requested further information about the proposal in accordance with the
requirements of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The EPA made its
decision once the information was received in late September 2015.
(2) Although
section 54(4) of the EP act prevents the Department of Environment Regulation
from making a decision to grant or refuse a works approval before the EPA has
decided whether to assess a proposal, the EP act does not prevent DER accepting,
advertising and assessing an application for a works approval while part IV of
the EP act processes are underway.
(3) DER wrote
to 48 landowners on 9 November 2015. This included all adjacent landowners
immediately to the north, east and west of the proposed premises in Hazelmere
and residential households to the south along Adelaide Street between Stirling
Crescent and Roe Highway in High Wycombe.
(4) The EPA
published its decision not to assess the proposal on 9 November 2015 and
provided public advice on the future regulation of the site remediation. This
decision was appealed and, as the Minister for Environment will have a future
decision to make in relation to these appeals, it is not appropriate for him to
comment at this time.
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.