Curiouser and curiouser – the dishonest acrobatics of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO)
it does not matter what are the capabilities of the expert eventually selected by the tender offer as this will not overcame either the inherently unsuitable nature of Napandee for the government’s facility or the gross lack of regulatory compliance by the government of the internationally prescribed safety codes and regulatory requirements for the Napandee facility
the disgraceful and insincere performance by the ANSTO management
28 Dec 20, It is amazing how much information you are given by various sources once you have begun to expose situations of improper or unfair conduct at a public level
I have just found out that ANSTO has approached two overseas experts in the field of nuclear waste to submit tenders in response to the tender offer published on 11 December 2021
In both instances the experts were told that their prime tasks would be the corporatisation of the nuclear medicine facility at Lucas Heights as a separate entity to ANSTO and to establish the nuclear waste management facility at Napandee as planned by the federal government
It was suggested that the route to corporatise the nuclear medicine facility is now quite clear due to recent management changes at ANSTO
This probably relates to the resignation in rather unusual circumstances of Adrian Paterson as the chief executive officer of ANSTO since he was apparently against the corporate plans for the production of nuclear medicine
It was explained to the experts as to the other task that the Napandee facility has to reach operational status as quickly as possible and at the same time to discredit or prohibit the Azark Project underground repository at Leonora as this was proving a major embarrassment to the government
The words apparently used with regard to Azark were to “torpedo it” or “sink it”
It was suggested that the Leonora facility would cut across the efforts of the government to find a suitable location for the final disposal of the intermediate level waste which can only be stored at Napandee on a temporary basis
As neither of these experts has any presence in Australia which is a requirement of the tender ANSTO actually mentioned a couple of local groups who would be prepared to collaborate with those experts
While I am presently unable to verify this fact it seems that one of the overseas experts is linked with another expert group which is already a consultant for the Azark Project and it was also suggested that this consultancy be terminated as part of the tender process
If this can be established surely it is an attempt to lessen completion which becomes misleading and unconscionable conduct in trade or commerce under the Australian Consumer Law or is ANSTO exempt from any liability by Crown privilege?
However it does not matter what are the capabilities of the expert eventually selected by the tender offer as this will not overcame either the inherently unsuitable nature of Napandee for the government’s facility or the gross lack of regulatory compliance by the government of the internationally prescribed safety codes and regulatory requirements for the Napandee facility
You only need to watch the disgraceful and insincere performance by the ANSTO management at the Senate estimates committee hearing on 29 October 2020 including the inability to answer various questions which stemmed mainly from information I had given to the committee members
ANSTO has over 1,000 employees yet still suffers from gross errors in its operations and planning with seemingly little overview of its activities – moreover it remains a mystery what all these employees do because little realistic research and development has come from ANSTO.
Australia’s lying Minister for Resources gets an “F” in assessment of govt ministers
Peter Remta 26 Dec 20, How long can Keith Pitt remain with ministerial responsibility for such nationally important portfolios as water and mining and effectively the nuclear industry
He continues to make statements that are in many instances plainly wrong and show his ignorance and in some cases his complete disingenuity without attracting any parliamentary sanctions or chastising
His comments seem to be aimed purely at gaining public credibility and attempting to sway the senators opposing his ill advised proposals
He cannot rely on his advisers and ministerial staff for his comments as the ultimate authority and control lies solely with him as the responsible minister
No wonder The West Australian newspaper and its allied media sources gave Pitt an F for his ministerial efforts with the highest grading of course being A +
Silent Steven Marshall – cowardly silence from South Australia’s Premier on nuclear waste dump plan
|
SILENT STEVEN
Last week I posted about Minister Dan van Holst Pellekaan threatening me with legal costs in response to a Freedom of information (FOI) request for all correspondence between the Federal and SA State Government on the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility since Steven Marshall had become Premier of SA.
********
In 2016, when in opposition, Marshall stated he would not support the facility. After the SA ‘Citizens Jury’ handed down their verdict on a waste facility to Premier Weatherill, Marshall proclaimed, “Jay Weatherill’s dream of turning South Australia into a nuclear waste dump is now dead”.
********
What I got back under FOI was heavily redacted but shows Marshall, like a good lapdog to the Prime Minister, has remained silent on the issue.
********
It’s the same with keeping Submarine Full Cycle Docking work in SA, as the PM considers sending that work to WA – silence. Its the same with the Federal Government’s appointment of a irrigation supporting former NSW National to the position of Inspector-General of (Murray-Darling) Water Compliance – silence.
********
The Premier is free to determine his political position on these issues which affect South Australia’s interests. But he is obliged as Premier to share his position with South Australians and he should be prepared to defend whatever his view is. That’s what leaders do. Instead, on so many important issues, he’s just Silent Steven.
|
|
A reminder of the danger of ionising radiation, after theft of a nuclear device
|
The machine, a Troxler 3430P plus enhanced nuclear moisture density gauge, went missing from a building site at Eastwood over the weekend. Police said anyone attempting to dismantle the gauge “could expose themselves to radioactive material”. On its website, equipment company Troxler said the devices are commonly used by “contractors, engineers, and highway departments”. They are used to measure the density of substances and “for compaction control of soil aggregate, concrete and full-depth asphalt”. he instruments, which emit neutrons, can contain radioactive elements californium as well as americium, which is commonly found in smoke detectors in much smaller doses but can be more radioactive than plutonium. Police have urged anyone with information about the robbery to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000. Radiation expert Kent Gregory, from Radiation SA, said while the devices were “reasonably intrinsically safe”, they could be potentially lethal if dismantled, and were much more radioactive than household smoke detectors. “By the order of 1,000 times or even more,” Dr Gregory said.
“There have been occasions these things have ended up going through recycling facilities and turned into doorknobs and metal toilet roll holders incorporating the radioactive material.” Dr Gregory said the density gauges were commonly used by road builders to effectively x-ray the ground, and check whether “the right level of compaction has occurred, and the right level of moisture is in the ground before asphalt is applied”. “When I worked for the EPA (Environment Protection Authority) for 10 years, I think two or three got stolen in that time,” he said. “You’ve got to be very, very careful about making sure these [radiation] sources remain sealed.” |
|
Senator Rex Patrick calls on South Australian govt to come clean about nuclear waste dumping
Patrick has Kimba nuclear question, https://www.whyallanewsonline.com.au/story/7058277/patrick-has-kimba-nuclear-question/?fbclid=IwAR3o2cKC_SU9yV-Q-d_xa470gmY0xG5CXkYRiA-LOJuXRDV76e8ls0v1n04, Luca Cetta, 17 Dec 20, The state government has remained silent on its stance relating to the planned Kimba nuclear waste site and South Australian Independent Senator Rex Patrick has called on the government to make known its position on the proposal.The federal government has talked with the Kimba community about creating the site near the town with a majority of residents favouring the facility.
Senator Patrick said he had lodged a freedom-of-information (FOI) request seeking access to correspondence from the time of the last state election in 2018 to today and was “surprised” there had been only a few pieces of correspondence between Minister for Energy and Mining Dan van Holst Pellekaan and the federal government.
“I was very interested as there was a lot taking place between the federal government and the community in Kimba, and I was interested in what the state government has been doing through the process,” he said.
“The state has a role to play … and I was surprised there was only one letter to the Premier and a letter from former federal Resources Minister Matt Canavan and response. That is all we have seen. That is the only part the state government has had to play.”
While acknowledging it was a federal facility and issue, Senator Patrick said the state government should be involved by way of communication with federal leaders and community engagement.
“While I respect it is a national facility, there is no question the state government has skin in the game and I question why there is silence publicly,” he said.
“They should come out and support or oppose it so their position is known.
“They do need to be engaging the community as well to make sure all state-related issues that will flow from the facility are addressed.”
He said parts of the correspondence included redactions relating to the proposed site.
In a letter from Mr van Holst Pellekaan to Senator Patrick, which has been obtained by the Whyalla News, Mr van Holst Pellekaan said “the FOI Act provides that an agency may refuse access to a document if it is an exempt document” and that there was cause to provide “partial access” to three documents.
The letter outlines why parts should be redacted, including that a document can be exempt if “it contains information from an intergovernmental communication to the Government of South Australia”, while he also pointed to how the Act notes a document could be exempt if it “would, or could reasonably be expected to, cause damage to relations between the Commonwealth and a State”.
Senator Patrick said Mr van Holst Pellekaan made a “fundamental error” in thinking the correspondence was exempt under federal law as he was “not entitled to make that decision”.
He said he would take the matter to the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (SACAT) to “uncover what is underneath this”.
“There should be transparency about what has been communicated between the government of South Australia and the federal government,” he said.
“The Minister has made a decision. He relies on the fact he thinks it would be exempt under federal law and he is not entitled to make that decision. You can’t say ‘I think it is exempt’, you have to say ‘I think it is exempt because it would harm release in a particular way…’.”
Mr Patrick said the state FOI Act granted people and parliamentarians a positive right to documents and was only subject to restrictions consistent with the public interest and preservation of personal privacy.
He said the Act burdened the agency with establishing their case if they wanted to restrict access.
Both Commonwealth and state constitutions establish a democracy underpinned by a responsible system of government. Democracy and responsible government both require participation by people and, just because this is communication between the state and federal government, it doesn’t mean it automatically gets to be confidential. The Minister does not meet his burden by simply stating that the communications are confidential,” he said.
“This is now a fight between myself and Mr van Holst Pellekaan. This is Senator against Minister in SACAT. The Minister needs to be transparent with me, but more important with the people of SA.
“Governments work for the people, everything they do is paid for by the people. The people have a right to know what it is they are up to and how they are going about what they are up to.”
Mr van Holst Pellekaan did not respond to questions for this article.
Australia’s Industry Department is bluffing in employing staff for non existent nuclear waste project
|
Kazzi Jai, Fight to stop nuclear waste in South Australia, 19 Dec 20,
Have I missed something? Or two things actually?
Unless Minister Pitt has DECLARED the Napandee site right now as per current legislation….NOPE…or Senate passed the Amendments at last sitting ….NOPE….then is this a case of DIIS bluffing it yet again? If you ain’t got it bluff it?
And AWRA has employed ANSTO – who by the way is the MAIN CUSTOMER OF THIS DUMP – to tender for it for them! In their own words…
“ANSTO has been engaged by ARWA to provide a broad range of services to develop the NRWMF engineering design, and associated safety, security and operational framework. This tender is for the appointment of a lead engineering consultant (Consultant) to support ANSTO in progressing the project from the current concept design through to preliminary design”
BIZARRE!
Oh…and by the way Ms Chard –
THERE WAS NO BROAD COMMUNITY SUPPORT ACHIEVED!
Just because you say it and want it …. doesn’t actually make it so!
The FACTS speak for themselve
New engineering partner to assist with design on radioactive waste facility https://www.industry.gov.au/news/new-engineering-partner-to-assist-with-design-on-radioactive-waste-facility?fbclid=IwAR0RnDaKhcv6r07tmyQvhBRzRNDuyn4VfpLhf6KLyWb9bE7T8IFJ09EeCWI |
|
Minister Dan van Holst Pellekaan resorts to threas when asked to be transparent
Federal govt accepted Queensland’s “NO” to nuclear dump. Why not South Australia’s?
Kazzi Jair No nuclear waste dump anywhere in South Australia, 19 Dec 20, https://www.facebook.com/groups/1314655315214929Senator Rex Patrick contests Freedom of Information refusal about nuclear waste plan
Rex Patrick to ask SA Civil and Administrative Tribunal to reverse nuclear FoI refusal
An SA Senator will ask a court to decide whether his call for information on a nuclear waste facility should have been granted. Advertiser –Matt Smith, December 16, 2020 –
South Australian senator Rex Patrick will tackle State Government lawyers after a Freedom of Information request concerning a nuclear waste facility was refused.
He will fight to overturn the decision in the SA Civil and Administrative Tribunal over what he describes as “a lack of transparency”.
Senator Patrick, pictured, said his FOI request was met with a “highly unusual” reminder from the Crown Solicitor’s office that if he were to fight the decision and lose he would be liable for costs.
He had asked for correspondence between Energy and Mining Minister Dan van Holst Pellekaan and the Federal Government concerning the establishment of a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility in SA.
“FOI in SA is a farce. Late responses, cavalier exemption claims, delayed review processes and now threats if you push a request beyond the control of the very government department seeking to hide information,” he said.
A government spokesman said: “While it would not be appropriate to comment on matters currently before SACAT, it’s worth noting that the tribunal and only the tribunal makes a determination on whether costs are awarded, and can do so if satisfied that there are statutory grounds to do so.
No decision has been made in this matter and, as such, no application for costs has been, or can be, made at this time.”
It was revealed this week that reviews of FOI requests are taking more than six months to
complete. SA Senator Rex Patrick takes nuclear FOI ‘farce’ to court | The Advertiser (adelaidenow.com.au)
See Senator Rex Patrick’s Face Book page post:
https://www.facebook.com/193047494589008/posts/836162363610848/
MINISTER DAN van HOLST PELLEKAAN RESORTS TO THREATS WHEN ASKED TO BE TRANSPARENT
In response to a request for transparency, Minister Dan van Holst Pellekaan has outrageously instructed the Crown Solicitor to threaten me with costs.
Everything the SA Government does it does for public purpose and using SA taxpayer’s money. As such, South Australians are entitled to see all that the State Government does, admittedly with some exceptions.
I asked Minister van Holst Pellekaan’s office to provide me with correspondance between the State and Federal Government on the proposed National Radioactive Waste Management Facility at Kimba, using SA Freedom of information laws. At first he failed to respond to the request in the timeframe required by the law, then he made a decision that hid (presumably embarrassing) information from me.
I have asked SACAT, the State’s independent umpire, to review the Minister’s decision. Minister van Holst Pellekaan has now threatened me with “costs” if I proceed. That prompts two questions: 1) what’s he trying to hide and 2) if he’s prepared to threaten a senator seeking transparency, how would he treat a regular South Australian that reasonably requested information from him?
Ranger Danger: Rio Tinto Faces Its Nuclear Test in Kakadu Uranium
|
Ranger Danger: Rio Tinto Faces Its Nuclear Test in Kakadu Uranium Mine, https://sei.sydney.edu.au/opinion/ranger-danger-rio-tinto-faces-its-nuclear-test-in-kakadu-uranium-mine/ Rebecca Lawrence and Dave Sweeney report on growing concerns over the potential failures of the rehabilitation plan for the Ranger mine in Kakadu National Park. By Rebecca Lawrence, Senior Research Fellow, Sydney Environment Institute and Dave Sweeney, Australian Conservation Foundation, 16 December 2020 In the 1950’s uranium mining began in the Alligator Rivers and Kakadu regions in the Top End of the Northern Territory. Since then, the Kakadu uranium story has generated heartache and headlines but it is set to soon come to an end with the closure of the Ranger uranium mine in early January 2021. The story is now moving from one of contest over the impacts of mining to one of concern around the adequacy of rehabilitation. Australia has a notorious record when it comes to mine rehabilitation. Many mines are simply abandoned, and those that are rehabilitated often fail, which means complex and on-going monitoring and management is usually required. In many cases, mining companies and their shareholders are long-gone and it is usually Indigenous communities who are forced to live with toxic legacies and left to fight for governments to finance the clean-up with tax-payer money.
Yet, there are alarming signs we may be headed that way. Significant and crucial knowledge gaps remain around the closure and rehabilitation of the Ranger mine. Despite the looming closure date, mine operator Energy Resources Australia (ERA) is still unable to answer many key questions. For example, ERA has still not completed modelling of the pathways and volumes Another key omission in the mine closure plan is the absence of any substantive social impact research. There is no attention paid to how Aboriginal people have been impacted by uranium mining in Kakadu, or any assessment of how they may be impacted the mine closure. This omission constitutes a profound social injustice and is demonstrably inconsistent with both international best practise and contemporary community expectation. ERA is part of the global Rio Tinto group. Rio, who own 86% of ERA, has been called out for its destruction of ancient Aboriginal heritage and sites at Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of West Australia. As the main shareholder in ERA at Ranger, there is a real risk that Rio will also fail at Ranger if they don’t get the rehabilitation right and put in place secure financing for perpetual care and maintenance of the Ranger site post-closure. There is a requirement that the company must isolate large volumes of radioactive mining tailings for 10,000 years, but how can that be done without any funds earmarked for monitoring or post-closure management? The Commonwealth government was the key driver behind opening the Ranger Uranium mine in the early 1980s and yet as closure approaches, they are virtually absent. There is no clear regulatory process for how rehabilitation and post-closure monitoring will be financed or enforced. A successful rehabilitation is dependent upon the Commonwealth Government keeping ERA and Rio Tinto accountable and honest. Despite reassuring rhetoric no mining company will do that on their own – for too many the triple bottom line remains measured in pounds, dollars and euros. The Commonwealth Government needs to step up and ensure that the Kakadu environment and its people are protected and that a dual World heritage listed region is given the attention and focus it deserves and needs. A further key constraint on the likely success of the clean up and closure of Ranger is the unrealistic timeframe that has been mandated for rehabilitation. Ranger is the longest running uranium mine in Australia. It was imposed against the explicit opposition of the region’s Mirarr Traditional Owners and for forty years has conducted deeply contested operations in a monsoonal tropical environment. And not just any tropical environment – the mine is an industrial zone surrounded by Australia’s largest national park – Kakadu. Kakadu National Park is a dual World heritage listed area that is recognised for both its cultural and natural values and properties. The Ranger site is required to be rehabilitated to a standard where it could be incorporated into this unique environment. This is a very high bar to clear and Rio Tinto currently have a very short run-up. The rehabilitation period extends only from January 2021 to January 2026. Five years is simply not enough time to make meaningful and lasting repair to a heavily impacted landscape. As a result, the rehabilitation approach is being increasingly driven by short-cuts and bad decisions, rather than taking the time needed to get it right. The Mirarr people and an increasing number of civil society and wider stakeholders and commentators are urging both the Commonwealth and the company to extend this set period of works to better reflect the complexity of the rehabilitation challenge and to increase the likelihood of a successful result. The closure and clean up of Ranger is a critical test of the commitment, competence and credibility of Rio Tinto and the Commonwealth. Both parties have a responsibility to address decades of environmental damage and community disruption. Without more clarity, funding, time and transparency the future of Kakadu cannot be assured. And this is too high a price to pay. There are many eyes from across Australia and around the world that are focussed on the Ranger rehabilitation and near enough is not good enough. The challenge is clear and considerable – and now it needs to be met. Rebecca Lawrence and Dave Sweeney are part of an expert group who have authored the report, Closing Ranger, protecting Kakadu, released by the Sydney Environment Institute, the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Mineral Policy Institute and the Environment Centre NT. Access the report here. |
|
Unfinished Business: Rehabilitating the Ranger Uranium Mine
Unfinished Business: Rehabilitating the Ranger Uranium Mine https://sei.sydney.edu.au/publications/ranger-uranium-mine-report/ May 2019 Four decades of imposed uranium mining and milling by Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) and Rio Tinto is about to end at the Ranger uranium mine in Kakadu, leaving a heavily impacted site that requires extensive rehabilitation. Long contested by the area’s Traditional Aboriginal Owners, the Mirarr people, the mine site is completely surrounded by the dual World Heritage listed Kakadu National Park.This report is an independent assessment of the rehabilitation and mine closure process to date. It explores some of the concerns and constraints surrounding the rehabilitation and makes recommendations that seek to address these in order to improve the chances of the successful closure and rehabilitation of the Ranger Project Area.
The background research to this report was funded by FORMAS, the Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development. Authors: Rebecca Lawrence and Dave Sweeney, Australian Conservation Foundation. |
|
The Usual Suspects: oil and gas majors star in Australian tax heist
The Usual Suspects: oil and gas majors star in Australian tax heist, Michael West 16 Dec 20,
Angus Taylor’s rescue package for the oil industry is a testament to governments getting gamed by large corporations. The latest Tax Office transparency data shows oil and gas juggernauts are Australia’s biggest tax cheats, again, yet now they are crying for public subsidies – and getting them – to prop up their oil refineries. Michael West reports on the good and the bad in multinational tax dodging land.
2020 in Australia – a successful year for resistance to nuclear pollution
DAVE SWEENEY | Nuclear Free Campaigner, Australian Conservation Foundation | www.acf.org.aua 15 Dec 20,
A year ago today the then federal resources/radioactive waste Minister Matt Canavan read the room in the Flinders Ranges and stated: “I will no longer consider this site an option for the facility”. https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/canavan/media-releases/national-radioactive-waste-management-facility-wallerberdina
Viva!! This decision was a great tribute to Adnyamathanha, the FLAG crew and wider community resistance.
In the year since
- Canberra has turned to Kimba where they are facing a stiff fight and have failed in an attempt to rewrite the laws to remove people’s right to legally challenge the waste plan
- SA Labor, Unions SA and many more civil society groups and state and national voices have come on board against the waste plan
- The Australian Human Rights Commission acknowledged the three sisters – Vivianne and Regina McKenzie and Heather Stuart as Human Rights Heroes for their radwaste efforts
- ARPANSA – the federal nuclear regulator – has confirmed that Australia’s worst waste can securely remain at Lucas Heights ‘for decades”
- Matt Canavan is gone and we have a new Minister – the sixth in as many years – if radioactive waste had the same longevity as federal ministers it wouldn’t be an issue.
- Collectively we are stalling the deeply flawed federal plan and shifting the story from the search for a postcode to the need for a credible process
Congratulations to all those who successfully defended the Flinders – and strength to those now actively contesting the dodgy Kimba plan.
Law and Disorder: The case of Julian Assange
In the case of Julian Assange, what is on trial is nothing less than our right to know what is done by governments in our name, and our capacity to hold power to account.
What kind of law allows pursuit of charges under the 1917 United States Espionage Act — for which there is no public interest defence — against a journalist who is a foreign national?
The closing argument of the defence in the extradition hearing of WikiLeaks founder and publisher Julian Assange has been filed. For this and other reasons it is apposite to consider the authority invested in the law before which, in democratic societies, we are ostensibly all equal.
In fact, notwithstanding the familiar claims of objectivity (and as `everybody knows’ in Leonard Cohen’s famous lyric) the reality is somewhat different. Jokes about the law attest to this:
‘One law for the rich…’
‘Everyone has the right to their day in court — if they can pay for it’
‘What’s the difference between a good lawyer and a great one? A good lawyer knows the law. A great lawyer knows the judge’
The term ‘legal fiction’ calls into question the relationship between law, objectivity, and truth. On the one hand, law is the essential pillar of a functioning society. On the other, it is replete with anomalies both in conception and execution. To what extent can these perspectives be reconciled? High stakes are attached to this question.
Questioning claims of objectivity in the context of law.
The end of the uranium mining era leaves Jabiru with some social and housing problems
NT mine closure has Jabiru community anxious about an uncertain future, and some are already leaving, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-13/nt-jabiru-housing-uncertainty-as-uranium-mine-end-nears/12975950, By Matt GarrickPacking her life away into boxes and preparing to shift out of her small Northern Territory town has had an emotional impact on Denise House — but it’s not the feeling she expected.
Key points:
- The Ranger uranium mine will cease operations on January 9
- Dozens of mining families are expected to leave town in coming months
- Future rental prices and the standard of the town’s housing remains “unknown”
“It’s funny because I don’t feel like I’m leaving yet, although we know we are. There’s a date, we’ve already got our flights booked and everything,” Ms House said.
“But I’m sure there will be tears.”
The House family is among an exodus of families preparing to up stumps and leave Jabiru — a mining town on the edge of Kakadu National Park with a population of just over 1,000 people — as mining operations officially cease on January 9, 2021.
The vision is for Jabiru to eventually be turned into an Indigenous-run tourism town and service hub.
The entity set up to help handle the transition, Jabiru Kabolkmakmen Limited (JKL), is among those conceding the town faces a huge challenge in the coming year. Continue reading













