Page 846 - Week 03 - Thursday, 14 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR LAMONT: I thank you for the question, Mr Stevenson. I think you have been informed previously in this house that residents of Queanbeyan do pay via a payment received by the ACT Administration from the city of Queanbeyan for the use of Mugga Lane tip. The Minister announced in last year's budget that, upon the implementation of a comprehensive kerbside recycling service in the ACT, modest tip fees would be introduced in the ACT. Residents of Queanbeyan, unlike residents of the Territory, will not have the complimentary vouchers which will be issued to ACT residents as far as use of the tip is concerned. Should you wish any further briefing on the matter, officers of my department will be only too pleased to provide it.
Petrol Station Site
MR WESTENDE: Madam Speaker, my question without notice is to the Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning, Mr Bill Wood. I refer to paragraph 18.3 of the agreement between the ACT Government and Burmah Fuels Australia, which was tabled in the Assembly yesterday. It provides that Burmah Fuels must take precautions so that no contaminated run-off from the site can escape into any stormwater drains. My question is: Can the Minister advise the Assembly what precautions have been taken so that no contaminated run-off from the site can escape? What work, if any, has been undertaken to date on the site? What monitoring has taken place to ensure that no contamination occurs, and has any contamination occurred?
MR WOOD: Madam Speaker, I take it that Mr Westende is accurate in his reference to a certain paragraph. It is certainly the case that we paid a great deal of attention to the environmental urgencies around the Burmah site, as we do around any site for a petrol station. It is reasonably well established that a lot of older sites for petrol delivery do have contamination. There always seems to be some leakage from the tanks. Where the operation has been in place for some considerable time there is a likelihood of leakage. The assessment report that Mr Connolly referred to yesterday ascertained the details of that. Burmah was required to undertake the specific construction to ensure that the new tanks that went in, as for all new sites, were of the highest design. As I understand it, there was a containment construction around those tanks, should leaks occur now or in the future.
In answer to the latter part of the question, I am not aware of what monitoring has been done since then. I will ascertain that for you. I understand that the work has been carefully done. The soil, where there was some contamination, was removed prior to the installation. It was placed in a safe area, contrary to an article in some newspaper or some report or other that was around the service stations. Contrary to that, it has been safely contained. As appropriate, some of that soil has been returned to a particular area. Great care was taken in putting in the new tanks, in developing the site, to see that every environmental requirement was followed. I am not aware that there has been any monitoring since. I do not think - in the case of a new station - that there would be regular monitoring, certainly within the first few months of operation; but I will ascertain that detail for Mr Westende.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .