Page 981 - Week 03 - Thursday, 19 March 2015

Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


Environment—former petrol station sites
(Question No 374)

Mrs Jones asked the Minister for the Environment, upon notice, on 19 February 2015 (redirected to the Chief Minister):

(1) Has the human health and environmental risk assessment for the former petrol station site in Campbell (Block 1, Section 49) been completed; if so, when was this completed.

(2) Is groundwater remediation required; if so, when is remediation due to be completed.

(3) Has the Environment Protection Authority received the independent auditor’s statutory site audit statement that was expected to be finalised in the latter part of 2014, as indicated in your answer to Question No 302 on 30 June 2014; if so, when was this statement received.

(4) If remediation on the Campbell site is already complete (a) when will development commence and (b) what is the expected completion date.

(5) Was there any other contamination at this site which needed rectification.

Mr Barr: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

(1) Yes, the human health and environmental risk assessment for the site has been completed. It was finalised in January 2014 and found acceptable to the Auditor in August 2014. The Auditor considered that the risk to human health on and off-site to be low and acceptable.

(2) Groundwater remediation was not required at the site.

(3) No, the Environment Protection Authority has not received the site audit statement for the site. Viva Energy Australia (formerly Shell Australia) has advised that the Auditor for the site has sought additional information on the removal of fuel infrastructure at the site prior to finalising the audit documents.

(4) Remediation of the site is complete. There is no current development approval for the site. The development of the land will follow the lodgement and assessment of a Development Application for the site. The date for commencement and completion of development on the site is therefore not yet known.

(5) The identified impacts at the site were hydrocarbon impacts to soil associated with the former operation of the site as a service station. No other contamination was identified requiring rectification.


Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video