❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding compliance with Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations at the Superpit and Mount Charlotte operations, specifically concerning employee health assessments. The response reveals a breach of regulations.
AnsweredQoN 2391Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Superpit and Mount Charlotte operations managed by Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd (KCGM) for Newmont and Barrick Gold and question on notice number 2195, 1 April 2010, and I ask -
(1) In relation to the answers for question on notice No. 2195 on 1 April 2010, is it correct that as of 31 March 2010, well over 100 employees at the above referred to operations, were without a mines health assessment required in regulation 3.25 of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
?
(2) If no to (1), what is the specific number of employees that were without an initial mines health assessment on 31 March 2010?
(3) Has KCGM or the registered mine manager breached any regulation of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations
in not ensuring a initial health assessment of any employee be undertaken within three months on which they commenced employment?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) What actions are available to the Minister for actions which breach regulation 3.25 or any other regulation of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
?
(6) What is the methodology and rationale as to how the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) determines compliance with regulation 3.25 of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
given the Minister has indicated in relation to the answer for question on notice No. 2195 (part 13) that this data (the number of new employees engaged in the last six months) is not a requirement under the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994
?
(7) In relation to the answer for question on notice No. 2195 (part seven), can the Minister state how an investigation was undertaken to make this statement?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(9) Was an investigation undertaken by the DMP to specifically determine whether as of 31 March 2010, well over 100 employees at the above referred to operation were without a mines health assessment, required in regulation 3.25 of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
?
(10) If no to (9), why not?
(11) If yes to (9), what were the results of that investigation?
(1) In relation to the answers for question on notice No. 2195 on 1 April 2010, is it correct that as of 31 March 2010, well over 100 employees at the above referred to operations, were without a mines health assessment required in regulation 3.25 of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
?
(2) If no to (1), what is the specific number of employees that were without an initial mines health assessment on 31 March 2010?
(3) Has KCGM or the registered mine manager breached any regulation of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations
in not ensuring a initial health assessment of any employee be undertaken within three months on which they commenced employment?
(4) If no to (3), why not?
(5) What actions are available to the Minister for actions which breach regulation 3.25 or any other regulation of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
?
(6) What is the methodology and rationale as to how the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) determines compliance with regulation 3.25 of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
given the Minister has indicated in relation to the answer for question on notice No. 2195 (part 13) that this data (the number of new employees engaged in the last six months) is not a requirement under the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994
?
(7) In relation to the answer for question on notice No. 2195 (part seven), can the Minister state how an investigation was undertaken to make this statement?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(9) Was an investigation undertaken by the DMP to specifically determine whether as of 31 March 2010, well over 100 employees at the above referred to operation were without a mines health assessment, required in regulation 3.25 of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995
?
(10) If no to (9), why not?
(11) If yes to (9), what were the results of that investigation?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
15 June 2010
Responded by
Minister for Mines and Petroleum
Response time
40 days
(1) No.
(2) KCGM advises that 11 people were over the three month limit noted in Mines Safety and Inspection Regulation 3.25.
(3) Yes.
(4) Not applicable
(5) It is the responsibility of the Department of Mines and Petroleum to take appropriate action. The possible actions are listed in the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the Resources Safety Division. These include:
- Verbal or written warnings
- Infringement Notices
- Directives
(6) Compliance with Mines Safety and Inspection Regulation 3.25 can be checked by comparing the employees at the mine with their mines health assessment record.
(7) The mine was requested by the Special Inspector (Occupational Health) to check its records and advise the Department of Mines and Petroleum of the number of employees on 31 March 2010 who were outside the requirements of Regulation 3.25.
(8) Not applicable
(9) Yes.
(10) Not applicable
(11) An investigation revealed that 11 employees were outside the requirement of Regulation 3.25 on 31 March 2010. The specific number for a given day is maintained by the company and was provided to the inspector on request.
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
(2) KCGM advises that 11 people were over the three month limit noted in Mines Safety and Inspection Regulation 3.25.
(3) Yes.
(4) Not applicable
(5) It is the responsibility of the Department of Mines and Petroleum to take appropriate action. The possible actions are listed in the Enforcement and Prosecution Policy of the Resources Safety Division. These include:
- Verbal or written warnings
- Infringement Notices
- Directives
(6) Compliance with Mines Safety and Inspection Regulation 3.25 can be checked by comparing the employees at the mine with their mines health assessment record.
(7) The mine was requested by the Special Inspector (Occupational Health) to check its records and advise the Department of Mines and Petroleum of the number of employees on 31 March 2010 who were outside the requirements of Regulation 3.25.
(8) Not applicable
(9) Yes.
(10) Not applicable
(11) An investigation revealed that 11 employees were outside the requirement of Regulation 3.25 on 31 March 2010. The specific number for a given day is maintained by the company and was provided to the inspector on request.
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.