Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2018 Week 3 Hansard (22 March) . .
Ms Fitzharris: The answer to the member's question is as follows:
(1) In accordance with established health and environmental protection requirements the asbestos-contaminated material from the old Canberra hospital that was interred within the Mugga 2 quarry was capped with soil and a retention dam installed to capture runoff within the quarry void. Since this time the site security fencing has been upgraded to secure the site from public access.
(2) Frequent monitoring of the Mugga 2 quarry occurs following rain events to inspect the quarry area and surrounding infrastructure. The cost of the monitoring is negligible- less than $1,000 per month.
(3) Refer to question 2 response.
(4) Funding is allocated for necessary site maintenance which includes monitoring and stormwater controls as required. Less than $1,000 per month is required for monitoring. Stormwater controls have recently been maintained at a cost of approximately $4,000.
Capital funding of $2.939m was allocated in 2014-15 for progressive rehabilitation of the quarry over the next 15-25 years.
(5) The Mugga 2 quarry in its current form requires minimal maintenance. The Mugga 2 quarry will be rehabilitated through the progressive landfilling of inert material, as approved by the NCA, including clean soil, non-friable asbestos impacted soil and other inert waste materials. Environment Protection Authority (EPA) approval will be required for the acceptance of these materials.
At the completion of the filling of the quarry void, the area encapsulating the quarry will be incorporated into the Mt Mugga Mugga Nature Reserve. By this time the asbestos material from the old Canberra hospital will be at least 30m below final surface levels.
(6) No, the dumped asbestos is currently covered with soil which protects the quarry area and surrounding regions.
(Question No 929)
Mr Coe asked the Minister for Transport and City Services, upon notice, on 16 February 2018:
(1) What were the total costs associated with wild grass cutting in the financial years (a) 2015-16, (b) 2016-17 and (c) 2017-18 to date.
(2) What action does the Government take to continuously keep wild grass levels at a minimum.
(3) Does the Government consult with Fire Services on what areas are given priority to be cut.
Next page . .
Previous page. . . .
Speeches . . . .
Contents . . . .
Sittings . . . .