WASTE-TO-ENERGY
INCINERATOR — HAZELMERE
75. Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the
minister representing the Minister for Environment:
(1) What toxins would be produced at the proposed
waste-to-energy incinerator in Hazelmere?
(2) Why was a formal environmental
review bypassed?
(3) How is the waste wood for the
proposed plant currently being managed?
(4) What other options exist for
processing and/or managing this waste?
(5) Have
residents in suburbs surrounding Hazelmere received notification of the current
seven-day public comment period?
(6) If no to (5),
will the period be extended; and what efforts will be made to notify residents
and seek their input?
Hon
HELEN MORTON replied:
I thank the member for some notice of the question.
(1)–(4)
The proposal for the Hazelmere wood waste-to-energy plant has been referred to
the Environmental Protection Authority, in accordance with the requirements of
the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The EPA will now decide whether to
assess the proposal, and if it is the decision of the EPA to assess, the EPA
will also decide the level of environmental impact assessment. The EPA
advertises its decisions about assessment on its website.
(5)–(6)
No. The seven-day public comment period on referrals is required under the EPA's
administrative procedures; it is not a ministerial decision. The public comment
period informs the EPA's decision about whether a proposal requires
environmental impact assessment. The EPA is not requesting detailed submissions
on the referral. In providing this comment period, the EPA must remain consistent
with the statutory time frames for deciding whether to assess a proposal
specified in the EP act. The EP act provides for further consultation and
submissions if it is the decision of the EPA to assess a proposal and where the
level of assessment is set as a public environmental review.