❓ Hon Giz Watson questions the Minister for Environment regarding the Dalyellup waste residue disposal facility, focusing on reporting timelines, classification delays, and potential contamination. The Minister provides answers, tables documents, and outlines ongoing actions.
AnsweredQoN 958Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Dalyellup waste RESIDUE DISPOSAL FACILITY
I refer to the answer to question without notice 787 and to an article on page 16 of The Sunday Times of 20 September 2009 in which a Department of Environment and Conservation spokeswoman stated that the Dalyellup waste site was recorded on the Department of Environment and Conservation’s reported sites register. (1) When was the site reported to DEC under section 112 of the Contaminated Sites Act? (2) Who reported the site to DEC? (3) Was the site reported to DEC under section 11(3) of the act? (4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER
I refer to the answer to question without notice 787 and to an article on page 16 of The Sunday Times of 20 September 2009 in which a Department of Environment and Conservation spokeswoman stated that the Dalyellup waste site was recorded on the Department of Environment and Conservation’s reported sites register. (1) When was the site reported to DEC under section 112 of the Contaminated Sites Act? (2) Who reported the site to DEC? (3) Was the site reported to DEC under section 11(3) of the act? (4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(1) When was the site reported to DEC under section 112 of the Contaminated Sites Act? (2) Who reported the site to DEC? (3) Was the site reported to DEC under section 11(3) of the act? (4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(2) Who reported the site to DEC? (3) Was the site reported to DEC under section 11(3) of the act? (4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(3) Was the site reported to DEC under section 11(3) of the act? (4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council.
(1) When was the site reported to DEC under section 112 of the Contaminated Sites Act? (2) Who reported the site to DEC? (3) Was the site reported to DEC under section 11(3) of the act? (4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(2) Who reported the site to DEC? (3) Was the site reported to DEC under section 11(3) of the act? (4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(3) Was the site reported to DEC under section 11(3) of the act? (4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(4) Will the minister table a detailed summary of records for the site from the reported sites register, as described on the DEC website? (5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(5) If no to (4), why not? (6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(6) Given the duty of the department outlined in section 14(1) of the act to classify a reported site within 45 days of receiving the report, why has the site not yet been classified? (7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(7) Given Millennium Inorganic Chemicals’ admission that dioxins and furans are evident at the site, will the minister issue an investigation notice under section 49(2)(a) of the act? (8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(8) If no to (7), why not? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(1) The site was reported on 31 May 2007. (2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(2) The site was reported in accordance with section 11(4) of the Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Under section 96 of the act, the identity of a person who reports a site is confidential. (3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(3) No. However, the site was reported within the period of grace that followed the commencement of the act, as outlined in section 11(6) of the act. (4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(4) Yes. I table the attached document. (5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(5) Not applicable. (6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
(6) Section 11(6) of act provides for a six-month period of grace for the reporting of sites that were already known or suspected to be contaminated. This period of grace expired on 31 May 2007. A total of 1 656 reports—74 per cent of the total number of sites reported since the act commenced—were received between March and June 2007, with 56 per cent received during May 2007 alone. For sites reported during this one-off peak period, the Department of Environment and Conservation was not able to adhere to the requirements of section 14 due to the number of sites reported and the volume and complexity of supporting information. DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council. (7)-(8) I have discussed matters surrounding the Dalyellup waste disposal facility with the department; however, the chief executive officer, or his or her delegate, is the person empowered under section 49 of the act to issue an investigation notice. Nevertheless, Millennium Inorganic Chemicals is currently required to undertake groundwater monitoring as a requirement of the conditions of its Environmental Protection Act 1986 licence. DEC is currently reviewing the groundwater monitoring results to determine what further action, if any, is required to address any groundwater contamination issues. In addition, I am aware that there are health concerns being raised by the community, and I have asked the department to seek the advice of the Department of Health on this issue as part of the licence application assessment process. [See paper 1344.]
DEC is in the process of classifying the Dalyellup site and sought expert advice from the Radiological Council on the appropriate classification of this site in July 2008. DEC sought this advice because the site contains radiological materials, and the Radiological Council has the appropriate expertise in relation to the level of risk of these contaminants. DEC anticipates completing classification of the site within two weeks of receiving the Radiological Council’s advice. Whilst this is not included in my written answer, on seeing that it was asked for back in July 2008, I have asked the department to follow it up immediately with the Radiological Council.
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.