❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice addresses a letter from the Department of Environmental Protection to Westrac Equipment regarding contaminated stormwater discharge and potential breaches of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The questioner also probes why similar letters haven't been sent to other companies allegedly in breach.
AnsweredQoN 1649Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to a letter which I understand is dated 14 July 2003 from the Dept of Environmental Protection addressed to the Manager Westrac Equipment Pty Ltd, Lot 26 Gt Eastern Highway, Kalgoorlie, titled ‘Notice to show cause regarding overflow of contaminated stormwater pond onto road reserve’ -
(1) Is it correct that part of this letter states ‘I believe that the discharge of contaminated stormwater observed on the 9 July is likely to cause pollution, It is an offence under section 49 and 50 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
to cause pollution, or to discharge waste in circumstances in which it is likely to cause pollution. These offences carry a penalty up to $1 000 000, with a daily penalty of up to $200,000. Therefore I instruct you to immediately cease the release of water into this stormwater pond. It appears from my inspection of the site that the stormwater is collected over an area that includes washdown from within your workshop. During the inspection it was evident that any spills in the workshop or outside pad go directly into the unlined stormwater pond. This practice is unacceptable and needs to cease. Westrac should examine several engineering options to resolve this issue, including but not limited to Lining the stormwater pond and preventing further overflow;
(2) Installing a triple interceptor on the stormwater pipe prior to the stormwater pond, Divert the stormwater to the washdown bay oily water treatment system. With appropriate treatment the water in the stormwater pond could be reutilised around your site.’
(3) If no to (1) will the Minister table a copy of this letter dated 14 July 2003?
(4) If no to (1) why not?
(5) Can the Minister explain the reasons why the officer believed that the discharge of contaminated stormwater was likely to cause pollution as defined under the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
?
(6) If no to (4) why not?
(7) Can the Minister state how did the officer factually know that the stormwater was in fact ‘contaminated’ by Westrac?
(8) If no to (6) why not?
(9) Can the Minister explain the reasons why the officer believed that the discharge of stormwater was likely to cause pollution under section 50 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
?
(10) If no to (8) why not?
(11) Can the Minister explain why this type of letter with the wording used has not been sent to Loongana Lime, Total Waste Management, Kalgoorlie Cement Works or Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd when they have been in breach of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
?
(12) If no to (10) why not?
(1) Is it correct that part of this letter states ‘I believe that the discharge of contaminated stormwater observed on the 9 July is likely to cause pollution, It is an offence under section 49 and 50 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
to cause pollution, or to discharge waste in circumstances in which it is likely to cause pollution. These offences carry a penalty up to $1 000 000, with a daily penalty of up to $200,000. Therefore I instruct you to immediately cease the release of water into this stormwater pond. It appears from my inspection of the site that the stormwater is collected over an area that includes washdown from within your workshop. During the inspection it was evident that any spills in the workshop or outside pad go directly into the unlined stormwater pond. This practice is unacceptable and needs to cease. Westrac should examine several engineering options to resolve this issue, including but not limited to Lining the stormwater pond and preventing further overflow;
(2) Installing a triple interceptor on the stormwater pipe prior to the stormwater pond, Divert the stormwater to the washdown bay oily water treatment system. With appropriate treatment the water in the stormwater pond could be reutilised around your site.’
(3) If no to (1) will the Minister table a copy of this letter dated 14 July 2003?
(4) If no to (1) why not?
(5) Can the Minister explain the reasons why the officer believed that the discharge of contaminated stormwater was likely to cause pollution as defined under the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
?
(6) If no to (4) why not?
(7) Can the Minister state how did the officer factually know that the stormwater was in fact ‘contaminated’ by Westrac?
(8) If no to (6) why not?
(9) Can the Minister explain the reasons why the officer believed that the discharge of stormwater was likely to cause pollution under section 50 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
?
(10) If no to (8) why not?
(11) Can the Minister explain why this type of letter with the wording used has not been sent to Loongana Lime, Total Waste Management, Kalgoorlie Cement Works or Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd when they have been in breach of the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
?
(12) If no to (10) why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
4 March 2004
Responded by
Minister for Local Government and Regional Development representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
83 days
(1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable. (4) The Inspector under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 noted the source of the discharge, the colour of the discharge and the olfactory nature of the discharge. Given the time, place and circumstances, the Inspector required the company to cease the practice until an investigation could be undertaken. (5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable. (4) The Inspector under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 noted the source of the discharge, the colour of the discharge and the olfactory nature of the discharge. Given the time, place and circumstances, the Inspector required the company to cease the practice until an investigation could be undertaken. (5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(3) Not applicable. (4) The Inspector under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 noted the source of the discharge, the colour of the discharge and the olfactory nature of the discharge. Given the time, place and circumstances, the Inspector required the company to cease the practice until an investigation could be undertaken. (5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(4) The Inspector under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 noted the source of the discharge, the colour of the discharge and the olfactory nature of the discharge. Given the time, place and circumstances, the Inspector required the company to cease the practice until an investigation could be undertaken. (5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(11) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable. (4) The Inspector under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 noted the source of the discharge, the colour of the discharge and the olfactory nature of the discharge. Given the time, place and circumstances, the Inspector required the company to cease the practice until an investigation could be undertaken. (5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(3) Not applicable. (4) The Inspector under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 noted the source of the discharge, the colour of the discharge and the olfactory nature of the discharge. Given the time, place and circumstances, the Inspector required the company to cease the practice until an investigation could be undertaken. (5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(4) The Inspector under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 noted the source of the discharge, the colour of the discharge and the olfactory nature of the discharge. Given the time, place and circumstances, the Inspector required the company to cease the practice until an investigation could be undertaken. (5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(5) Not applicable. (6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(6) The officer noted that there was an overflow pipe from the Westrac property. This overflow pipe came from a settlement pond within the property that was fed by a number of pipes from various parts of the Westrac property. Further investigation included questioning staff from Westrac. (7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(7) Not applicable. (8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(8) Answered by (4). (9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(9) Not applicable. (10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(10) Each circumstance is different and individual investigations may result in different outcomes. However, all investigations are subject to the Department’s Environmental Enforcement Policy, which is now strongly administered through both the central Environmental Enforcement Unit and local Environmental Enforcement Group in each region. This is as a direct result of the Government’s significant resource injection into this area. (11) Not applicable.
(11) 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.