Today's report into lead contamination in the WA port township of Esperance has delivered a scathing assessment of the mining company that transported lead carbonate to the town, the port that loaded for it export and the WA Department of Environment and Conservation.
The report by a WA parliamentary committee, tabled in state parliament today, recommends authorities consider whether Magellan Metals Pty Ltd, Esperance Port Authority and transport company BIS Industrial Logistics breached their legal obligations. It also describes the DEC’s regulation of industry as "grossly inadequate".
WA Premier Alan Carpenter today apologised to the people of Esperance in parliament and acknowledged "severe failings across government".
"The recommendations of the report point the way forward," he said. "Those recommendations will be pursued."
The lead contamination problems in Esperance came to light when DEC investigated the cause of death of an estimated 9,500 birds in the township in late 2006 and early 2007. But the problems were "foreseeable and in fact were foreseen", the committee says.
Transporting lead concentrate through the town and loading it at the port for export "substantially caused" the lead pollution, the committee says.
Follow-up blood lead level tests found 81 of about 600 children in Esperance had levels equal to or above five micrograms per decilitre. The levels suggest exposure to continuing lead pollution, rather than to a single exposure or to a small number of short-term exposures, the committee says.
Lead carbonate had been transported from the mine to the port almost every second day over about 23 months and had been shipped out of the port on 22 occasions.
The committee says the Esperance community has been "seriously let down" by DEC. Efforts by DEC to implement a more robust regulatory approach should be given "critical priority", it recommends (see related article).
"It amazes me that, in this day and age of modern methods of mining, transport, monitoring and assessment, it takes the death of native birds, like the canaries of old, to alert the people of the town of Esperance to the poisoning of their community," committee chair Kim Hames says in the report's foreword.
Findings on Esperance Port Authority
The committee says the port authority focused on trade facilitation to the detriment of its legislative obligation to protect the environment.
"The Esperance Port Authority Board did not exercise due care in ensuring that the infrastructure required for the safe handling of the lead concentrate was, or would be, in place before entering into a contract to handle Magellan’s lead carbonate," it says.
The board did not consistently pay proper regard to environment status reports, the committee says. And it had information available to it before and during the time the port was handling lead carbonate that indicated heavy metals were polluting the environment beyond the port's boundaries.
The committee says the port's dust monitoring was intermittent and measured only against standards associated with nuisance dust, not hazardous dust. It notes the port did not install a dirty? water treatment plant to treat contaminated rain and cleaning water until about two years after the first shipment. It also says the heavy metal berth was occasionally cleaned by being washed down, which would result in any lead carbonate on the berth entering the harbour. Until the recent installation of bunding along the edge of the berth, rain would also cause any lead carbonate on the berth to wash into the harbour, it says.
The port did not report to DEC a spill of between 60 and 100 kilograms of lead concentrate into the harbour in January 2006. Nor was there any evidence it formally investigated another significant spill in December of that year.
The port also allowed a vessel it had identified as unsuitable for loading with lead carbonate because of dust problems to return to the harbour and reload. This constituted a failure to properly exercise its responsibilities, the committee says. In all, there were three major dust incidents during the outloading of the lead concentrate, it says.
The committee says DEC imposed "only minimal environmental monitoring requirements" on the port and did not effectively scrutinise dust monitoring results submitted by it.
Findings on Magellan Metals
The committee says Magellan Metals was more focused on ensuring the lead carbonate was not too wet for shipment than on ensuring the product was not so dry that it caused dust problems during transport and loading.
The company’s "very poor control" of its product's moisture content constituted a failure to properly exercise its responsibilities in relation to potential lead pollution. There was also "a lack of clarity" between Magellan Metals and the port over who was responsible for managing the moisture content of the lead carbonate while it was in the sheds at the port. On one occasion a Magellan Metals representative refused to let the port wet down the lead concentrate in a shed.
The committee says Magellan Metals had supplied incorrect information to the WA EPA about handling facilities at Esperance port. And, although the company said it would undertake annual roadside monitoring surveys and sampling of nearby rainwater tanks, it did not do so.
Inquiry Into The Cause And Extent Of Lead Pollution In The Esperance Area: Report No. 8 (06/09/2007, Education and Health Committee, Legislative Assembly)
Inquiry Into The Cause And Extent Of Lead Pollution In The Esperance Area: Report No. 8: Appendices (06/09/2007, Education and Health Committee, Legislative Assembly
