❓ A WA parliamentary question probes the Department of Environment's stance on toxic seepage from the Fimiston 2 tailings dam and the practicability of preventing it, particularly concerning a proposed height increase. The Minister's response outlines the DoE's position, citing cost, lack of apparent environmental benefit, and ongoing appeals process.
AnsweredQoN 3637Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Fimiston 2 tailings dam and the recent proposal to raise the height and capacity of the dam, Prospecting Licence 26/1848, and the Independent Technical Review Thompson and Brett report dated October 2004 -
(1) Does the Department of Environment (DoE) consider it practicable to prevent all toxic water seepage emissions (which are harmful to persons interacting with the water and which may cause pollution or environmental harm), from entering Prospecting Licence 26/1848 and adversely affecting the environment?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) If yes to (1), can the Minister explain why?
(4) Will the Minister quote and table all of the evidence which the DoE relies upon to determine that it is impracticable to prevent all toxic water seepage emissions from entering Prospecting Licence 26/1848?
(5) If no to (4), why not?
(6) Will the Minister or the DoE reject KCGM’s proposal for the Fimiston 2 tailings dam as being environmentally unacceptable given that the DoE already verbally claims it is impracticable to stop all toxic seepage emissions from entering P26/1848, regardless of whether they cause pollution or environmental harm, which then provides the perfect defence under the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
for any unacceptable environmental impacts?
(7) If no to (6), why not?
(8) Can the Minister state and quantify how much seepage in litres per day is practicably capable of being captured from the Fimiston 2 tailings dam?
(9) If no to (8), why not?
(10) Can the Minister state in normal metres the current height above the ground of the Fimiston 2 tailings dam?
(11) If no to (10), why not?
(1) Does the Department of Environment (DoE) consider it practicable to prevent all toxic water seepage emissions (which are harmful to persons interacting with the water and which may cause pollution or environmental harm), from entering Prospecting Licence 26/1848 and adversely affecting the environment?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) If yes to (1), can the Minister explain why?
(4) Will the Minister quote and table all of the evidence which the DoE relies upon to determine that it is impracticable to prevent all toxic water seepage emissions from entering Prospecting Licence 26/1848?
(5) If no to (4), why not?
(6) Will the Minister or the DoE reject KCGM’s proposal for the Fimiston 2 tailings dam as being environmentally unacceptable given that the DoE already verbally claims it is impracticable to stop all toxic seepage emissions from entering P26/1848, regardless of whether they cause pollution or environmental harm, which then provides the perfect defence under the
Environmental Protection Act 1986
for any unacceptable environmental impacts?
(7) If no to (6), why not?
(8) Can the Minister state and quantify how much seepage in litres per day is practicably capable of being captured from the Fimiston 2 tailings dam?
(9) If no to (8), why not?
(10) Can the Minister state in normal metres the current height above the ground of the Fimiston 2 tailings dam?
(11) If no to (10), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
22 August 2006
Responded by
Minister for Education and Training representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
70 days
The Environmental Protection Act 1986 defines "practicable" as meaning "reasonably practicable having regard to, amongst other things, local conditions and circumstances (including costs) and to the current state of technical knowledge". Even if it was possible to contain all of KCGM's seepage within their tenement boundaries the Department of Environment(DoE) considers that this would be a hugely expensive exercise and would not achieve any apparent environmental outcome. As per Questions on Notice 2612, 2610, and 2611 the DoE does not believe that seepage crossing a tenement boundary constitutes pollution or environmental harm as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 . (2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable. (4) and (5) As per answer (3) in Question on Notice 3636. The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable. (4) and (5) As per answer (3) in Question on Notice 3636. The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(3) Not applicable. (4) and (5) As per answer (3) in Question on Notice 3636. The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(4) and (5) As per answer (3) in Question on Notice 3636. The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
· A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
· C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
· D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(11) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable. (4) and (5) As per answer (3) in Question on Notice 3636. The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(3) Not applicable. (4) and (5) As per answer (3) in Question on Notice 3636. The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(4) and (5) As per answer (3) in Question on Notice 3636. The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
The DoE does not see any benefit in demonstrating the practicability of preventing seepage from crossing the proponent's lease as there is no apparent environmental benefit to taking this action. (6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(6) The office of the Appeals Convenor is currently considering appeals against the Environmental Protection Authority's decision to set the level of assessment for the height increase of Fimiston 2 as "not assessed public advice given". As such, I cannot comment further on this matter until the outcome of this appeal has been determined. (7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(7) Not applicable. (8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(8) No. (9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(9) The DoE cannot answer this question in a short time period as a complex modelling exercise would have to be undertaken to provide such estimates. The DoE can see no benefit to asking KCGM to undertake this work given that there is no evidence that seepage is currently causing pollution or environmental harm. (10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
(10) The current height of the Fimiston 2 Tailings Storage Facility in metres above ground level is as follows: · A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
· A/B Paddock: 28.5m · C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
· C Paddock: 29.5 m · D Paddock: 26.0m (11) Not applicable.
· D Paddock: 26.0m (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.