Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Resources Minister Keith Pitt to declare Napandee farm, South Australia, as nuclear waste dump site

Pitt to declare nuclear site, Louis Mayfield, 12 Aug 21,

Federal Resources Minister Keith Pitt intends to declare the Napandee area at Kimba the proposed site for the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF).

More consultation will be undertaken before the decision is made official, but it’s an important milestone in a long and arduous site selection process which began six years ago…….

“I have reviewed the relevant information, which has informed my decision to proceed in accordance with the Act. I am issuing a notice to declare Napandee, and will seek the views of those with rights or interest in the site.”

The intention to declare Napandee as the NRWMF site will kick-start the legislative process of the federal government acquiring the site for the purpose of hosting the facility.

………… A period of further consultation will now occur, with the Minister considering relevant comments ahead of deciding whether to proceed with declaring the Napandee site.

Next the Australian Radioactive Waste Agency (ARWA) will develop various detailed applications to relevant regulators. This process is expected to take a number of years to complete.

These applications will also include further consultations with community and Traditional Owner groups.

However the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) see the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANTSO) Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility at Lucas Heights as a long-term solution for storing nuclear waste.

It comes as the federal government invest $60 million to extend the interim storage capacity for Intermediate Level Waste at the ANSTO site in southern Sydney

In a submission made to the Public Works Committee inquiry, the ACF argue that extended interim storage at existing federal facilities at ANSTO would be a “possible and prudent” option to explore.

“ACF maintains that Intermediate Level Waste (ILW) should remain securely stored at ANSTO until an agreed and evidence based long term management site and strategy is developed,” the submission read.  https://www.whyallanewsonline.com.au/story/7382644/pitt-to-declare-nuclear-site/

August 14, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Radioactive Dump ~ call for submissions ~ open until October 22nd 2021

Radioactive Dump ~ call for submissions ~ open until October 22nd 2021

“As part of the process of declaring a site for the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility, our department is collecting comment(s) from nominators of land and persons with a right or interest in the nominated land at Napandee, near Kimba in South Australia, as the preferred site for the proposed

facility.”

https://consult.industry.gov.au/arwa/nrwmf-site-declaration/

ENuFF[SA]
Office Admin
https://www.facebook.com/sanuclearfree/

August 12, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Resource Minister Pitt’s intention to declare site for the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility

 Samantha Chard, General Manager, Australian Radioactive Waste Agency at Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resource, 12 Aug 21, The Hon Keith Pitt MP, has given notice that he intends to make a declaration under the National Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012 (the Act). This declaration would confirm part of the land at Napandee as the site for the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF).

Under the Act, this consultation is a prescribed process with set timelines.

The intention is announced under section 18 of the Act. Persons with rights or interests are invited to comment on the proposed declaration by Friday 22 October 2021.

Comments can be made online at https://consult.industry.gov.au/arwa/nrwmf-site-declaration, and a comments form will also be available for download from the website. Comments can be posted to the address on the form.

Following the comments period, the Minister will consider any relevant comments in regard to his intended declaration. He may then ‘declare’ Napandee as site for the facility. Acquisition of the site to host the NRWMF by the Australian Government will occur at the time specified in that declaration.

August 12, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Submission: Conservation Council of South Australia supports ANSTO’s proposal for a new Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility at Lucas Heights

ANSTO has highlighted the low technical risk, low comparative cost, achievable schedule, and low
organisational impact of adopting this option
.

the Conservation Council SA recommends that the Committee support the ANSTO proposal for a new and modern facility within the waste precinct of ANSTO’s 70-hectare Lucas Heights site whilst the Federal Government undertakes a comprehensive examination of more appropriate long-term management options that generate genuine broad community consent

Craig Wilkins, Conservation Council of South Australia  Dear Standing Committee
RE: Submission – ANSTO Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility Lucas Heights, NSW Inquiry
30 July 21,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission to the Committee’s consideration of an
extension to the intermediate level solid waste (ILSW) storage facility at the Australian Nuclear Science
and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) Lucas Heights site.


The Conservation Council SA is an independent, non-profit and strictly non-party political organisation
representing around 60 of South Australia’s environment and conservation organisations and their
90,000 members.

The Conservation Council SA recognises that a durable solution to the storage of Australia’s expanding
ILSW is necessary to allow programs such as Australia’s nuclear medicine production to continue.
Australia has a clear responsibility to safely and securely manage radioactive waste.

As indicated in their submission to the inquiry, ANSTO possesses expertise and experience in storing
ISLW, as “ANSTO currently stores over 496 cubic metres of ILW from legacy activities, and generates
an additional five cubic metres per annum… [which] will increase to approximately fourteen cubic
metres per annum upon the commencement of operations of the new ‘Synroc’ waste treatment
facility.”


Federal Government attempts at securing community consent for a larger, more permanent ILSW site
in South Australia near either Hawker and Kimba have led to widespread community concern across
South Australia, and clear public opposition from Barngarla Traditional Owners. It has created deeply
divided and polarised communities in Kimba where consideration of an ISLW site has progressed much
further than at Hawker.

The Federal Government has promised not to impose a facility on an unwilling community.

Whilst a Government may be entitled to change their mind, imposing a ILSW facility upon a divided
community is a recipe for ongoing problems and community grievance. The well-documented longterm
environmental risks of the Kimba or Hawker proposals, including the double-handling required
for transport of the ILSW to such sites, are also of particular concern to the Conservation Council SA
and its membership.

It is for these reasons that the Conservation Council SA strongly supports ANSTO’s preferred option of
a new and modern facility within the waste precinct of ANSTO’s 70-hectare Lucas Heights site. ANSTO
has highlighted the low technical risk, low comparative cost, achievable schedule, and low
organisational impact of adopting this option.

Aside from extending Australia’s ILSW storage solution “by at least 10 years to 2037”1, adopting this
option will create a critically useful circuit breaker to the current tensions created during the Federal
Government’s recent pursuit of the ‘Kimba solution’ – a ‘solution’ that would need to be imposed by
the Government upon a divided and insufficiently supportive rural South Australian community, as
well as the broader, and widely unsupportive South Australian community.

In conclusion, the Conservation Council SA recommends that the Committee support the ANSTO
proposal for a new and modern facility within the waste precinct of ANSTO’s 70-hectare Lucas Heights
site whilst the Federal Government undertakes a comprehensive examination of more appropriate
long-term management options that generate genuine broad community consent  .

August 3, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Submission: Medical Association for the Prevention of War (MAPW) supports a new Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility at Lucas Heights

MAPW supports the construction of a new Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility at Lucas Heights.
MAPW strongly recommends:
• an open and independent review of nuclear waste production and disposal in Australia, and
• progressing a shift to cyclotron rather that reactor-based production of isotopes for nuclear medicine as rapidly as feasible.

Arguments that radioactive waste should all be at one site overlook the ongoing need for hospitals to store clinical waste. After nuclear medicine is used in a patient, the vast majority of the residual material and radioactively-contaminated equipment is stored on site while the radioactivity decays away. Within a few days, it has lost so much radioactivity that the material can go to a normal rubbish tip. There will always need to be multiple waste storage locations at sites which utilise radiopharmaceuticals.

Clean cyclotron production of Tc99m has recently been approved and is being implemented in
Canada. This should rapidly become the future of isotope production

Medical Association for the Prevention of War (MAPW) 30 July21, Submission to the Public Works Committee regarding Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility Lucas Heights, NSW.

SUMMARY
MAPW supports the construction of a new Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility at Lucas Heights. As noted in the ANSTO submission, there will be minimal expected impact on the community and ANSTO has excellent existing security.

This contrasts with the massive distress and community division in regional and remote communities that has been created by a succession of nuclear waste storage proposals.

This facility will be useful over a much greater timeframe if ANSTO’s rapidly expanding production of isotopes for nuclear medicine is reined in. This very heavily subsided export business has only a small minority of the radiopharmaceuticals produced being utilised in the care of Australians. There is no evidence whatsoever of more than minimal cost recovery. The burgeoning amounts of ILW produced will be a liability for Australians or many generations.


More reliable, safer, cheaper and much cleaner cyclotron production of technetium99m (Tc99m) has been shown to work and is being implemented in Canada. Japan, the USA, the UK and several European countries are all looking to implement cyclotron.

The proposed new ILW facility provides an opportunity to identify and implement world’s best practice ILW disposal options and update and reset nuclear medicine production tocleaner, cheaper and more reliable methods.

MAPW strongly recommends:
• an open and independent review of nuclear waste production and disposal in
Australia, and
• progressing a shift to cyclotron rather that reactor-based production of isotopes for nuclear medicine as rapidly as feasible.

Individual criteria will now be addressed.

Continue reading

July 31, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics | Leave a comment

Submission: Sisters of St Joseph South Australia Reconciliation Circle on “ANSTO Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility Lucas Heights, NSW”

We have noted in the federal budget the allocation of $59.8 million to ANSTO. The PWC Inquiry should consider that proposed indefinite storage of ANSTO nuclear fuel waste and ILW in SA is untenable and compromises safety and security in SA. We respectfully remind the Committee that ANSTO’s premise to transfer ILW into indefinite storage in regional SA is contrary to International Best Practice (IBP) and does not comply with ARPANSA Committee advice.

Submission No. 5: Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works. Michele Madigan, Josephite SA Reconciliation Circle 27th July 2021 Inquiry: “ANSTO Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility Lucas Heights,NSW” Public Submission by the Josephite SA Reconciliation Circle. The Sisters of St Joseph South Australia (SA) Reconciliation Circle and their AssociateMembers welcome the opportunity to make a Public Submission to the Inquiry: “ANSTO Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility Lucas Heights, NSW”


In summary: Our members see as key the need for the Public Works Committee to actively encourage ANSTO to modify their storage facility for Intermediate Level Waste to keep the nation’s highest level of radioactive waste – intermediate long lived waste – on site until the final deep geological storage site is ready to receive it.

Our members include those who have been involved since 1998 with the vexed question of the federal government’s determination to store the nation’s highest level radioactive waste – intermediate long lived radioactive waste- in above ground temporary storage, with no planned final site.


Since 2015, these and other more recent members have been concerned and have taken action about the federal government’s latest plan to transport such waste to either the Flinders Ranges SA or the Kimba region SA. In this we have had good cause to stand with boththe Traditional Owners: the Adnyamathanha in the Flinders Ranges and the Barngarla in the
Kimba region.

Of course as South Australians we are also speaking for ourselves and many other South Australians concerned with various worrying aspects of the present federal government’s plans, including the inherent safety issues of such dangerous waste for communities along thetransport routes (yet to be determined or at least yet to be publicly released.)

We have noted in the federal budget the allocation of $59.8 million to ANSTO. The PWC Inquiry should consider that proposed indefinite storage of ANSTO nuclear fuel waste and ILW in SA is untenable and compromises safety and security in SA. We respectfully remind the Committee that ANSTO’s premise to transfer ILW into indefinite storage in regional SA is contrary to International Best Practice (IBP) and does not comply with ARPANSA Committee advice.


It is well known that the Dr Carl-Magnus Larsson former head of the regulator body ARPANSA has stated publicly on June 20th 2020 that ‘there is ample room at ANSTO for decades to come.’

Duty of Care As members of government the Public Works Committee will be well acquainted with the principle of ‘duty of care.’ Department officials seemingly have chosen an arbitrary number of 100 years for the proposed transported highly dangerous material to be left above ground with no definite contingencies to safeguard such.

Burden on Future Generations: Our members put it to the Committee that the present plans are simply ‘kicking the can down the road’ leaving a task for future generations that our present federal government is simply not willing to take on itself. And further that once transported and ‘stored’ there is no guarantee at all that the highly toxic material will not simply remain where it is.


Time frame. Clearly there are few Australians alive today who were born in 1921. One hundred years is beyond the knowledge of most of us. The fact that the ILW and other Lucas Heights material are by ANTSO’S own admission, toxic for an unimaginable 10,000 years, means that it is extremely irresponsible policy to be complicit or even advocating for such material to leave the direct care of ANSTO’s expertise and high security to be simply stored above ground on farming land, half way across the country from the nation’s nuclear experts.

ANSTO’S highly dangerous nuclear fuel wastes as well as their Intermediate Level Nuclear Waste need radiation shielding, safe expert handling and high security – and of course isolation from adults, children, animals and the environment lands and ground waters. This will not happen in the proposed above ground facility – even for 100 years.


Recommendation: We put to members of the Public Works Committee: that the present allocation of funding to ANSTO for safe and secure storage include the capacity to modify their storage facility to enable on site continuous storage of ANSTO’s own nuclear fuel waste and long lived intermediate level radioactive waste until such time as a permanent best practice underground final suitable storage site is found and
completed.
We thank you for receiving and noting oursubmission.  https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Public_Works/ANSTOLucasHeights/Submissions

July 29, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Submission Noel Wauchope: to Federal Inquiry into nuclear waste storage.

Noel Wauchope 27 July 21, To: Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works Inquiry: “ANSTO Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility Lucas Heights, NSW” Public Submission.   I do not write as someone who is opposed to Australia having a plan for the permanent disposal of the nuclear wastes that are generated at Lucas Heights. Quite the reverse. Australia must face up to the necessity for such a plan.

However, ANSTO’s proposal for a temporary storage of these long lasting toxic wastes, at Napandee, South Australia, is NOT such  a plan. As the licensing body, ARPANSA, has acknowledged, these highly hazardous nuclear fuel wastes  can be safely and securely stored at Lucas Heights. Indeed ARPANSA has licensed this storage for at least 40 years to come. There is absolutely no need to trek this highly dangerous stuff for 1700 km to a small rural community, in a richly agricultural area –   for so-called ”temporary” storage . At Napandee, they may well become ”stranded wastes”, while the necessity for permanent disposal remains ”a can kicked down the road”.

ARPANSA is still to consider the licensing application for the Napandee nuclear waste facility plan. ANSTO should not be able to continue with its process for the Napandee plan before this; ARPANSA Approval for proposed indefinite duration above ground nuclear fuel waste and Intermediate Level Waste  storage in SA may not be granted.
Therefore, it is up to the Public Works Committee to require and confirm ANSTO public works that will comply with the Contingency  to keep
Intermediate Level Wastes   at Lucas Heights until a final disposal option is available.
It has not been made clear that there are really two separate proposals by the National Radioactive Waste Management for radioactive waste storage in South Australia

  • for Low-Level Waste disposal facility in SA for an indefinite period.
  • above ground nuclear fuel waste and ILW storage

 ARPANSA will expect separate License Applications for these two proposals.

On transparency. ANSTO has been secretive about its plans regarding Intermediate Level Wastes. At least two significant reports to ARPANSA,  required as part of
ARPANSA Licensing Conditions and due to the regulator by 30 June 2020, and ARPANSA’s reply, should be made available to the PWC, and publicly available.

On safety and security. As ARPANSA has noted, the double handling of Intermediate Level Waste in transporting it from one temporary storage to another temporary storage, is not consistent with international best practice.   The safety and security problems of course also involve the communities en route, over such a long distance. Yet the NRWM taskforce has not engaged with these communities, surely that engagement must be a requirement for such a plan

On the undemocratic process. The National Radioactive Waste Management plan for this facility at Napandee rides roughshod over the rights of South Australians, who have had no say in this decision. It is an affront to South Australia, with its clear law prohibiting nuclear activitis.  THe Eyre Peninsula region ‘s communities have had no say. Importantly, the traditional owners of the area.the Barngarla people, were eluded from the local vote, and are clearly against the dump plan.

On the hypocritical claim of ”medical necessity”. The publicity from ANSTO and from MInister Pitt has portrayed this facility as a ”medical necessity”, which it very obviously is not. As this submission primarily concerns the public works at ANSTO, I won’t go into that issue now.  But it is pretty obvious to all but the somewhat brainwashed Kimba supporters of the plan, that the mostly short-lived medical radioactive wastes are dealt with at the local level, with no need for the elaborate centralised plan for Napandee. https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Public_Works/ANSTOLucasHeights/Submissions

July 27, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics | Leave a comment

Submission: AZARK PROJECT says that Kimba nuclear waste plan is completely unnecessary, and irrelevant to nuclear medicine.

national nuclear waste facility at Kimba the existence or otherwise of which will have no effect whatsoever on the production of nuclear medicine by ANSTO

the importance and use of nuclear medicine locally is significantly
decreasing as there is a general reluctance and reduction by modern medicinein using nuclear isotopes for medical purposes in preference to much safer means to diagnose and treat medical conditions which were previously the
subject of nuclear medicine.

Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works Inquiry into the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility at Lucas Heights
SUBMISSIONS BY AND ON BEHALF OF AZARK PROJECT PTY LTD, Peter Remta 26 July 21

INTRODUCTORY SUMMARY OF SUBMISSIONS

A. The proposed increase in the nuclear waste storage capacity at Lucas Heights by constructing a new storage facility is a completely unnecessary and expensive exercise which is only perpetuating the government’s inappropriate plans for a waste management facility at Kimba.

B, Serious and urgent consideration should be given to the establishment of the underground nuclear waste facility at Leonora by Azark Project due to its international recognition and acceptance for its unsurpassed suitability and safety.

C. Several members of the Committee should be excluded from any participation in deciding the merits of establishing or funding of the facility for the additional storage since they have previously made ill-founded and unjustified statements praising the proposals for Kimba…….

Continue reading

July 26, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics | Leave a comment

Submission: Barry Wakelin – ”interim” storage of nuclear waste at Kimba is a poor plan, with no commitment to planning for a permanent solution

Despite assurances from responsible Ministers, that a permanent ILW site selection process decision is in train, there is no evidence that the Parliament is making any endeavour to fulfil that promise, particularly when it is recalled that the construction (in 2007) of the OPAL nuclear reactor was conditional upon that promise being kept ,which it is too apparent never happened.

Sumission No. 4 Public Works Submission – Barry Wakelin OAM, Kimba, S A, 23 Juy 21,
I present this submission as someone with 15 years of Federal Parliamentary Service: and as a former Public Works Committee member and citizen of Kimba observing the machinations of a proposed “temporary” site for ILW (Intermediate Level Waste at KImba.) Mainly, promoted as a Low Level Waste site by government representatives .

I was closely involved with the Woomera attempt at a nuclear waste site. The great thing about being free of party politics is the time to become better informed and to develop my own clearer, fairer and individual opinions.

Despite assurances from responsible Ministers, that a permanent ILW site selection process decision is in train, there is no evidence that the Parliament is making any endeavour to fulfil that promise, particularly when it is recalled that the construction (in 2007) of the OPAL nuclear reactor was conditional upon that promise being kept ,which it is too apparent never happened.

Small communities like Kimba and its 95% agricultural dependence, have no government guarantee against health and economic damage from a ILW nuclear waste facility.

The defacto international nuclear waste via the suggested sixfold increase in the ANSTO export of nuclear medicine is in conflict with South Australian government policy and should not be inflicted upon a small rural community which is ignored by policy enforcers.

The question must be asked: why should a community of 0.00004% of Australians be bribed or emotionally blackmailed by the government using taxpayers’ funds to bludgeon 400 people at $200,000 each, in to accepting a nuclear Dump on behalf of 25million Australians who predominantly say NO . Not least of all are
government organisations like the Department of Defence who say the nuclear waste is too dangerous to be placed on their land ,the size of Tasmania.

If it takes this much money from government to convince a small community to accept the government’s argument which only gives the country a”temporary” nuclear waste facility of very limited value it is a a sad waste of taxpayer’s funds.

A commitment to the search for a permanent disposal site for ILW has not occurred and considering
2037 is the timeline; it is reasonable to accept that a “temporary” storage will not be required due to the new facilities at Lucas Heights The nuclear reactor will always have some temporary ILW storage.


It is clear to me that there is a reasonable prospect over the next fifteen years to find a suitable site
for permanent disposal of ILW suitably geologically and seismologically.


It is a privilege to be able to offer from my long term involvement in this difficult issue a view on the
justice or otherwise, which has been inflicted upon my magnificent community for the past six years.
I offer my best wishes to the Committee for your considerations.

 https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Public_Works/ANSTOLucasHeights/Submissions

.

July 26, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics | Leave a comment

Resources Minister Keith Pitt and his bald-faced lies about the Leonora nuclear waste proposal

26 July Kazzi Jai on Whyalla Pitt lies

Federal Resources Minister Keith Pitt said the government did not receive detailed information to independently assess a site at Leonora, and couldn’t accept “unverified information” which could “cut short” the consultation and assessment process.”

This is the BIGGEST BALD FACED LIE Minister Keith Pitt has said yet!!

The current Leonora site proposal HAS been actively giving the Feds detailed information since 2017 I believe…..at EXACTLY the SAME TIME as Kimba was allowed to SUBMIT AGAIN into the mix after being taken COMPLETELY OFF the list in April 2016, after being deemed unsuitable!
Can’t have it both ways!

In fact ANOTHER site in Leonora Western Australia WAS in the mix back in 2015, as one of the SEVEN short listed sites deemed suitable by the Feds – by the then Josh Frydenberg as Minister at the time!
It was a different site in Leonora – but nevertheless, echoes the SAME SITUATION as Kimba in many ways!

July 26, 2021 Posted by | Federal nuclear waste dump, politics, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

A strong convention on radioactive waste safety means that nuclear’s toxic by-products should be kept as close as possible to the point of production

Paul Waldon  Fight to Stop a Nuclear Waste Dump in South Australia   · 

Remember “Claytons Beer.A beer that’s not a beer.

Well, we have reached the 20 year anniversary of when “The Joint Convention,” came into force. The Joint Convention has been described as the first legal instrument to address used fuel rods and radioactive waste management safety across this earth.”So is it fair to say this a Claytons Convention?” Remember the beer didn’t have the alcohol content, only the taste.


This maybe nothing but a watered down “Basel Convention.” The Basel Convention was overlooking the safety of the populous by addressing the control of any transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal, which came into force in 1992, with over 170 members, and Australia becoming a member in 1992.

The Basel Convention’s charter makes mention that hazardous byproducts should be kept, managed and disposed of as close as possible to the point of production. However, radioactive products are exempt from the Basel Convention’s charter. I put it to you, to maintain the integrity of any legal instrument for handling radioactive products or by-products we should adopt the Basel Convention’s charter. That would install faith in the populous and any community that’s willing to embrace nuclear production will have to accept the product that’s produced there.

July 26, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Submission: Leon Ashton opposes ANSTO’s flawed plan to set up a stranded nuclear waste dump at Kimba, South Australia

it is only a temporary measure until the other temporary measure of storing I.L.W. Is built. How many more temporary storage facilities will need to be constructed before a permanent disposal plan is found?   

Submisson No. 2.  Leon Ashton, 23 Jul 21, TO PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS CURRENT ENQUIRY: AUSTRALIAN NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ORGANIZATION INTERMEDIATE LEVEL SOLID WASTE STORAGE FACILITY LUCAS HEIGHTS NSW I   I wish to make a submission to the public works committee in regards to the above matter. The biggest concern that I have with this application by ANSTO is that it appears as if it will still be built with a view that it is only a temporary measure until the other temporary measure of storing I.L.W. Is built. How many more temporary storage facilities will need to be constructed before a permanent disposal plan is found.   

  Dr. Allison McFarlane, a leading proponent from the Obama administration on Worlds Best Practice, (WBP) for the permanent disposal of nuclear waste has said high and intermediate level waste must be buried below the ground at a depth of 500 and 250 metres in deep stable granite. Why is this so hard to find in Australia. There must be several hundred sites in the Woomera Prohibited Area alone that would fit the bill. The millions and millions of tax payers dollars spent by this department in kicking the can down the road is disgraceful. It could have been put to good use to bring all vested parties together to follow W.B.P. For a permanent home for all our own nuclear waste.

We have heard this government department DISER argue that we do not have enough I.L.W. To warrant the cost of a deep permanent disposal site however, the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent at present do nothing to address the inevitable. Further more, the people of Kimba and Quorn and Hawker who have tried to seek answers to so many unanswered questions by this department, have realised long ago that there will never be a amicable outcome for any community if the I.L.W. Is moved from one temporary storage to another purely for political purposes. The trust that must be sought from any community has been destroyed forever. If an application is granted to temporarily store I.L.W. For more years at Lucas Heights, then how will this effect the Low Level Waste dump at Nappandee if it is approved and not the I.L.W. Storage approved? 


Dr. Adi Patterson, the CEO of ANSTO has already stated that if any community does not get the I.L.W storage, there will be no economic benefits to the community. ANSTO has stated that this application if granted will be the cheapest option as it will be in their existing premises. How ever, as there are no increase in personnel numbers to put the I.L.W. in a new shed, why then are DISER falsely claiming a number of 45 jobs to guard the I.L.W at any other temporary storage site? This was stated by the federal minister for the environment Matt Canavan. Stating the only reason the massive job structure changed when trying to find a site for the Low Level Dump went from 8 to 45 was purely because he had decided the I.L.W would go to the site as well. 

 https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Public_Works/ANSTOLucasHeights/Submissions

July 25, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Submission: Flinders Local Action Group points out the flaws in ANSTO’s nuclear waste plan.

Intermediate Level Waste is the key element of greatest concern in the current NRWMF proposal.
ANSTO has informed to us that Intermediate Level is the most dangerous and long-lived nuclear waste in Australia, with a toxic life in excess of 10,000 years. Our research tells us that in Europe little distinction is made between Intermediate and High Level waste – both remain potentially extremely dangerous over enormous time periods.

Subission No 5. Submission to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, Greg Bannon, (On behalf of the Flinders Local Action Group 23 July 21,

SUBJECT: Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) Intermediate Level Solid Waste (ILSW) Storage Facility Lucas Heights, NSW


INTRODUCTION: The Flinders Local Action Group (FLAG) welcomes the opportunity to make a submission to this Public Works Standing Committee.

FLAG was formed to challenge the 2015 nomination of Wallerberdina Station in the Flinders Ranges district, and its inclusion on the shortlist of three potential South Australian sites for the proposed National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF). The Group is made up of indigenous and non-indigenous members of the community.

We have become very well informed on the NRWMF proposal, seeking out and researching information from independent sources to weigh up against what has been provided to the community by the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science (DIIS – now the Department of Industry, Science, Energy & Resources, DISER). As both the proposer and promoter of the NRWMF, the Department cannot claim any sort of neutral position.

SUMMARY:
• ANSTO’s preferred Option 2 must be considered on the basis that interim storage will be until a permanent disposal site has been established. This would provide the licensing pathway to disposal required by the independent regulator, ARPANSA.
• There is no logic or economic sense in double-handling ILW from temporary storage at Lucas Heights to further temporary storage somewhere else, in preparation for yet another transfer to a third location for final disposal at some time in the future.
• There is no economic sense in establishing a facility for low level waste alone when a disposal site, critical for ILSW and more than suitable for LLW, is still to be established.

SUBMISSION POINTS:
Temporary Intermediate Level Solid Waste (ILSW) Storage:

The Department has guaranteed that all waste to be received at the NRWMF will be in a dry, compacted or compactable form. ANSTO defines ILSW as the result of conditioning Intermediate Level Liquid Waste under the Synroc process. In solid or liquid form, it is still Intermediate Level Radioactive Waste (ILRW). We do not accept any difference between what we have been opposing and refer to as ILRW, and ILSW.

Intermediate Level Waste is the key element of greatest concern in the current NRWMF proposal.
• ANSTO has informed to us that Intermediate Level is the most dangerous and long-lived nuclear waste in Australia, with a toxic life in excess of 10,000 years. Our research tells us that in Europe little distinction is made between Intermediate and High Level waste – both remain potentially extremely dangerous over enormous time periods.

Until now, the only plan for ILSW has been to remove it from temporary storage at Lucas Heights and transport it halfway across the country to a proposed NRWMF – still to be established. There it will remain in further temporary storage, for an undefined period, colocated
with Low Level Radioactive Waste.


• Temporary storage does not solve the national problem, which is the permanent, safe disposal for all of Australia’s nuclear waste, including the most dangerous and long-lived category, ILSW.


• ANSTO’s submission to the Standing Committee outlines five options “to assess the most efficient and effective approach to the design and construction of new storage capacity”.

We note that Option 2 (4.1.2. – ANSTO submission) “provides a direct continuation of existing operations for storing waste…(with the)…benefits of low capital outlay…minimalorganisational change…at low business risk make this the preferred option”.
• This would be of great encouragement to our Group if it means that ANSTO intends to continue interim storage of ILSW at Lucas Heights until the promised “single, state-of-the-art, world’s best practice radioactive waste management facility” (quotes from DIIS information) for the permanent disposal of both waste categories, ILW and LLW, is established.
• After more than 60 years of producing nuclear waste and 40 years of failed attempts to establish a national nuclear waste facility it is hard to accept that the only plan for the country’s most dangerous radioactive material continues to be temporary storage for an indefinite period of time. This would be a classic example of that over-used metaphor “kicking the can down the road”

National Radioactive Waste Management Facility:
If ILSW remains at Lucas Heights until a permanent disposal site is established, there is no necessity
for a facility to separately manage Low Level waste.
• The flaw in the NRWMF proposal has always been that, despite the Department’s assertion to the contrary, there was never to be a single national facility. Low level waste would be disposed of there, with Intermediate Level co-located alongside on a temporary basis, for an indefinite period, until a disposal facility was established somewhere else.
• The economic benefits promoted to the community from a nearby NRWMF were promised because the decision was announced to co-locate Intermediate Level Waste at the same site.
This was the reason given to both communities, Flinders and Kimba, for the Ministerial announcement that the 15 full-time equivalent jobs initially promised were suddenly increased to 45 along with a number of other economic incentives.
•Any site that is suitable for the permanent disposal of ILSW is suitable for the disposal of Low
Level waste.

CONCLUSION:
Our Group readily accepts the benefits that result from Australian atomic research and the production
of medical isotopes. We accept the need for a NRWMF to consolidate and dispose of all the
country’s nuclear waste in one location.


What is hard to accept, and still being experienced, are the disruptive and divisive effects this
process has had on our communities. Inflated promises of economic benefits have raised overly
optimistic expectations in some people. Cold, hard logic shows that these expectations will not be
met by the model that is currently being proposed.  https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Public_Works/ANSTOLucasHeights/Submissions


July 24, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Federal Inquiry into ANSTO nuclear waste storage, submissions due by 30 July 2021

David J Noonan B.Sc., M.Env.St.,Independent Environment Campaigner and Sole Trader Consultant, A ‘Voice’ of the No Dump Alliance 24 July 21

There is a federal Inquiry into ANSTO nuclear waste storage,
Open for submissions to Friday 30 July, at: pwc@aph.gov.au

see more info on the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works Inquiry webpage: 
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation Intermediate Level Solid Waste Storage Facility Lucas Heights, NSW – Parliament of Australia (aph.gov.au)
FOE has prepared a short letter of submission option, at: 
Nuclear Waste Submission – Friends of the Earth Melbourne (melbournefoe.org.au)for longer submission info suggestions – see input by David Noonan available at:
Noonan-PWC-Inquiry-submission-ANSTO-ILW-July2021.pdf (foe.org.au)

my Recommendations are below (if you make any usage its best in your own words)

RE: Extended storage of ANSTO’s ILW on-site at Lucas Heights is warranted until availability of a final disposal option. The indefinite Store for ANSTO nuclear fuel waste & ILW in SA is untenable.

Dear SecretaryPlease consider this Submission (22 page pdf) with five Recommendations (see p.4) and the request for public release of key ANSTO ILW Reports and further information sought from ANSTO (see p.5-6).

Recommendations to the Public Works Committee Inquiry:

Recommendation 1: ANSTO’s proposed public works on Intermediate Level Waste (ILW) storage must be altered to provide for the necessary and proper Contingency to retain ILW on-site in safe and secure extended storage at Lucas Heights “until the availability of a final disposal option”.

Recommendation 2: ANSTO must not pre-empt ARPANSA Licensing decisions. ANSTO must plan for the valid Contingency that an ARPANSA Approval for proposed indefinite duration above ground nuclear fuel waste and ILW storage in SA may not be granted.

Recommendation 3: The PWC must require and confirm the suitability of any assented ANSTO public works to provide for – and comply with – the necessary Contingency to retain ILW on-site at Lucas Heights until a final disposal option is available.

Recommendation 4: Transparency requiresANSTO must release key ILW Reports and further information to provide an adequate basis for informed decision making in consideration by the PWC and to facilitate informed public interest input to this Inquiry. Including: Two ANSTO Intermediate Level nuclear waste Reports required as part of ARPANSA Licensing Conditions and due to the regulator by 30 June 2020, AND the formal response(s) by ARPANSA.

Recommendation 5: The PWC Inquiry should consider that proposed indefinite storage of ANSTO nuclear fuel waste and ILW in SA is untenable and compromises safety and security in SA. ANSTO’s premise to transfer ILW into indefinite storage in regional SA is contrary to International Best Practice (IBP) and does not comply with ARPANSA Committee advice.

In ConclusionExtended storage of ANSTO’s ILW on-site at Lucas Heights is a warranted public interest measure and a necessary Contingency until availability of a final disposal option.

ANSTO’s public works are premised on an il-considered, unassured and arguably untenable transfer of ILW into indefinite storage of ANSTO nuclear fuel waste and ILW in regional SA.

I have provided a range of public Briefing materials, for instance: “Nuclear Waste Store siting at Napandee also targets the Port of Whyalla” (see p.21-22).

July 24, 2021 Posted by | ACTION, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Barngarla native title owners were excluded from decision-making on Kimba nuclear waste plan.

Barngarla people say their votes weren’t counted in Kimba nuclear dump census, The Advertiser 22 July 21

As SA awaits confirmation on a location of a national nuclear waste dump near Kimba, traditional owners say they weren’t included in a vote on the contentious project.

A First Nations people say their voice wasn’t heard in the proposal to create a permanent, national nuclear waste storage facility, despite a census of the nearest township.

The plan cleared a major hurdle in June, with a shortlist of sites passing the Senate on June 21.

Federal Resources Minister Keith Pitt expected to name Napandee farm, near Kimba on the Eyre Peninsula as the likely choice in the coming weeks.

The debate about the facility centres on a 2019 census by the Australian Electoral Commission, which found more than 60 per cent of Kimba residents were in favour of the facility.

However, the body for the local Indigenous community, the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation said their voices on the proposal were not heard.

Group chair Jason Bilney said the Kimba ballot did not account for the First Nations people, who have a significant stake in the land, and in the Dreaming stories associated with it.

“The simple fact remains that even though the Barngarla hold native title land closer to the proposed facility than the town of Kimba, the First Peoples’ for the area were not allowed to vote,” he said.

“It’s a cop out to say we weren’t on the electoral roll, we had to do a separate vote, but how do we guarantee our votes are combined,” he said.

The bill allowing construction of the facility only passed the senate last month, after a clause was introduced which allows judicial review for those opposed to any decision.

“They tried to take the umpire out in the fourth quarter, so we’re glad to have had that amendment included, it‘s a win for democracy,” Mr Bilney said………….

Mr Bilney said if a proper heritage assessment and consultation with the Barngarla people had occurred, the dialogue could have been less combative.

“It’s about being open and transparent, it should have been put to us and all South Australians affected, what about all the towns who will now have nuclear waste trucked through, where was their say,” he said.

If we’d been consulted and a part of the process from the beginning, it could have been a different story.
“A lot of our people remember the impacts up in Maralinga, my grandfather was from up there and we remember some of the impacts and cancers that came about in the years after.

“They didn’t have a right back then, so we’re fighting for our say now.”

South Australia has a chequered nuclear history, with long term effects of radiation at the Maralinga bomb site and dumping at the Arkaroola mine in the Flinders Ranges marring public confidence in anything nuclear.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenger/port-lincoln/barngarla-people-say-their-votes-werent-counted-in-kimba-nuclear-dump-census/news-story/1bfeeac4e42e268b0f9e6729b82d8e7f

July 22, 2021 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment