❓ A parliamentary question investigates safety concerns regarding the Minegem automated bogger system at Barrick's Kanowna Belle mine, specifically regarding reported incidents of loss of control and collisions. The Minister's response denies any such reports were made to the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) and states the company denies the incidents occurred.
AnsweredQoN 2426Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Kanowna Belle Operations owned and operated by Barrick, and ask -
(1) Has it been reported to the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP), and is it correct that, when the Minegem system was first introduced at the Kanowna Belle Mine for remotely controlling boggers on an automated system, there was a failure of this system and the bogger ended up in a sump?
(2) Has it been reported to the DMP, and is it correct that, the Minegem system has, on several occasions since its introduction in this operation, caused the bogger that was being remotely controlled on an automatic mode to collide with the walls unexpectedly causing damage to the machine?
(3) Was it reported, either on the company’s internal reporting system or to the DMP, that on one occasion the collision was so violent that it caused extensive damage to the rear of the machine when it hit the wall at high speed?
(4) If yes to (3), can the Minister report what were the specifics of the incident reported and the outcome of the investigation?
(5) Will the Minister state how many incidents were reported, either on the company’s internal reporting system or to the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP), involving loss of control of a bogger at the mine that was being operated automatically under remote control using the Minegem system in the last 36 months?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) Does the DMP inspectorate recognise the hazardous potential for serious injury or death when control is lost of a bogger that is operating on remotes in any underground mine within Western Australia?
(8) If yes to (7), what has the DMP inspectorate done to eliminate serious injury or death during these operations?
(9) Have any sections of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1995 and Regulations 1994,
been breached in relation to the incident referred to in (1)?
(10) If yes to (9), will the Minister state what sections have been breached?
(11) If no to (9), why not?
(12) What is the maximum penalty for these breaches referred to in (9)?
(1) Has it been reported to the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP), and is it correct that, when the Minegem system was first introduced at the Kanowna Belle Mine for remotely controlling boggers on an automated system, there was a failure of this system and the bogger ended up in a sump?
(2) Has it been reported to the DMP, and is it correct that, the Minegem system has, on several occasions since its introduction in this operation, caused the bogger that was being remotely controlled on an automatic mode to collide with the walls unexpectedly causing damage to the machine?
(3) Was it reported, either on the company’s internal reporting system or to the DMP, that on one occasion the collision was so violent that it caused extensive damage to the rear of the machine when it hit the wall at high speed?
(4) If yes to (3), can the Minister report what were the specifics of the incident reported and the outcome of the investigation?
(5) Will the Minister state how many incidents were reported, either on the company’s internal reporting system or to the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP), involving loss of control of a bogger at the mine that was being operated automatically under remote control using the Minegem system in the last 36 months?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) Does the DMP inspectorate recognise the hazardous potential for serious injury or death when control is lost of a bogger that is operating on remotes in any underground mine within Western Australia?
(8) If yes to (7), what has the DMP inspectorate done to eliminate serious injury or death during these operations?
(9) Have any sections of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1995 and Regulations 1994,
been breached in relation to the incident referred to in (1)?
(10) If yes to (9), will the Minister state what sections have been breached?
(11) If no to (9), why not?
(12) What is the maximum penalty for these breaches referred to in (9)?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
17 June 2010
Responded by
Minister for Mines and Petroleum
Response time
29 days
There have been no such reports made to the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) and the company has indicated that no such incident occurred.
There have been no such reports made to DMP and the company has indicated that no such incidents have occurred.
No
Not applicable
None
Not applicable
Yes
Where tele-remote operations are conducted a total exclusion zone is established when the machine is being used. This is guarded by an electronic barrier system that shuts the operation down if the exclusion zone is violated in any way. The separation of the operator from the exclusion zone ensures that the potential for injury is eliminated. This system is encouraged by the Department over the older line of sight remote operation systems as these have resulted in fatalities during the 1990's when operators brought machines too close to themselves.
DMP has been informed that no such incident occurred.
Not applicable
Not applicable
No breach has been identified.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
There have been no such reports made to DMP and the company has indicated that no such incidents have occurred.
No
Not applicable
None
Not applicable
Yes
Where tele-remote operations are conducted a total exclusion zone is established when the machine is being used. This is guarded by an electronic barrier system that shuts the operation down if the exclusion zone is violated in any way. The separation of the operator from the exclusion zone ensures that the potential for injury is eliminated. This system is encouraged by the Department over the older line of sight remote operation systems as these have resulted in fatalities during the 1990's when operators brought machines too close to themselves.
DMP has been informed that no such incident occurred.
Not applicable
Not applicable
No breach has been identified.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.