Several federally-owned land parcels, including Woomera could be assessed as nuclear dump site
Documents released under the Freedom of Information Act reveal the Industry Department last year identified several federally-owned land parcels which met the suitability criteria to be assessed as possible waste dump sites
————-
Supreme Court orders temporary halt on vote to build nuclear waste facility near Kimba
Peter Jean, The Advertiser August 16, 2018
https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/supreme-court-orders-temporary-halt-on-vote-to-build-nuclear-waste-facility-near-imba/news-story/05df593fd70326c541f931b7f3225d04
A COMMUNITY vote on whether a radioactive waste storage centre should be built near Kimba has been stalled by a Supreme Court injunction.
The court action comes as The Advertiser can reveal the Turnbull Government looked at federally-owned land parcels as possible alternatives to the three South Australian sites short-listed for a national radioactive waste management facility.
Residents in the Kimba and Hawker districts had been due to begin voting next week in ballots to determine whether they would be willing to accept a low-level radioactive waste dump.
But the Barngarla indigenous people argued the Kimba ballot was discriminatory because native-title holders who lived outside the municipal boundaries would be denied voting rights. An injunction was granted ahead of a hearing before the full court next week.
Two sites near Kimba and one near Hawker have been short-listed for the waste centre. Meanwhile, documents released under the Freedom of Information Act reveal the Industry Department last year identified several land parcels which met the suitability criteria to be assessed as possible waste dump sites.
The documents also reveal the Defence Department was concerned that a site at the Woomera Defence Range could become the national radioactive waste management facility “by default’’.
Radioactive material from the CSIRO is held at the Woomera Defence Range.
Centre Alliance Senator Rex Patrick, pictured, said the Government should release full details of the Government sites which had been studied. “I find it highly disturbing that the Government has kept the Commonwealth-owned land options a secret,’’ Senator Patrick said. “It’s quite apparent that Defence didn’t want to touch the Nuclear Waste Facility with a barge pole — they’d rather it just went to Kimba or Hawker.’’
Speaking before the court injunction was granted, Industry Minister Matt Canavan said it was up to local communities to decide whether they were willing to accept a radioactive waste facility.
“We will not impose a facility on an unwilling community,’’ Senator Canavan said.
The centre proposed by the Federal Government would be used to store low and intermediate-level radioactive waste stored at sites around Australia. About 45 local jobs would be created in the district where the centre was located and the local community would receive a $31 million incentive package from the federal Government.
Resources Minister Matt Canavan is deceptive in his statements about “Low Level “nuclear waste
Greg Bannon, Quorn 16/08/2108
Senator Canavan introduces the concept of nuclear energy into the debate on radioactive waste storage, (The Advertiser, 15/08/2018) but refers only to low level waste.
He does not mention the long-lived intermediate level waste. In April, he announced that this would also be stored at the facility. His Department admits there are no plans for its disposal at this stage, only moving it from current temporary storage, to park it temporarily near Hawker or Kimba for several decades.
People in both communities, including the Traditional Owners have said “No”.
Nuclear power generation is another matter entirely. The Scarce Royal Commission into the nuclear fuel cycle rejected nuclear power generation two years ago. The Citizens Jury even rejected the Commission’s recommendation to investigate storing nuclear waste in South Australia. The Senator’s Department vehemently denied any connection between their waste facility and the Scarce Commission’s investigation. The Senator’s reference to nuclear energy seems strange timing.
Nuclear stooge Senator Matt Canavan deplores delay in decision on nuclear waste dump
Note the Advertiser makes the mistake of saying its only for low level waste.
Federal Industry Minister Matt Canavan says Australia can’t have a serious debate about nuclear energy until a radioactive waste dump is built, Peter Jean, Senior Federal Political Reporter, The Advertiser,
Senator Canavan made the comments after lawyers for the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation launched legal action to try to prevent a community vote on radioactive waste going ahead in the Kimba district next week.
Kimba and Hawker district residents are scheduled to vote on whether they’d be willing to accept a low-level radioactive waste facility in their local areas.
A hearing on the Barngarla application to stop the Kimba vote will be heard in the Supreme Court today.
The Barngarla group argues that members who are native title holders in the Kimba District but don’t live there should be permitted to vote on the waste dump proposal.
Senator Canavan said the Barngarla people were entitled to take their concerns to court.
He said discussion about the establishment of a nuclear power industry in Australia wouldn’t get off the ground unless the nation found a way to manage low-level radioactive waste, including by-products of the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney.
“If we can’t find a long-term repository for our low-level waste – which we produce from a reactor that produces nuclear medicines, not power – we have no hope of building a nuclear power station that would produce high-level waste,’’ Senator Canavan said.
“We are supporters of an open and mature debate around this issue but we recognise that any move to nuclear power in this country would take years and require bipartisan support, those are things that we don’t have now.’’
Two sites near Kimba and one near Hawker have been short-listed as possible locations for a radioactive waste storage facility. The community votes are being held before the Government proceeds with selecting a preferred site.
Kimba Mayor Dean Johnson said he was unable to comment on the Barngarla application because the matter was before the courts.
Inadequate report from Senate Committee on selection process for nuclear waste dump
The final report on the senate inquiry into the selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia was released on Tuesday but those who oppose the facility say it has failed to address their main concerns.
The recommendations included the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science (DIIS) working with local stakeholders to use part of the 60 hectare buffer zone to grow and test agricultural produce to reassure the community and agricultural markets the produce is safe for consumption.
However, while the No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA group is thankful for the time and effort put into the inquiry, member Kellie Hunt said it was “disappointed” with the recommendations.
“We are disappointed that the recommendations do not address any of our primary concerns,” she said. “In particular, our issues regarding the lack of definition of what constitutes broad community support, and the lack of genuine need to move the intermediate level waste from Lucas Heights to a second interim storage location.
“We continue to oppose the siting of this facility on agriculture land in the Kimba district.”
The Senate Economics References Committee wrote the report using submissions made by stakeholders in in the affected communities near the sites in Kimba and Hawker, as well as public hearings in Kimba, Hawker and Canberra.
A spokesperson from the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science said the department thanked the committee for the report and that it “looks forward to reviewing it.”
“We have the opportunity to take account of the findings ahead of the community ballot that is scheduled to begin on August 20.”
The full report is available on the senate inquiry website at aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Wastemanagementfacility
Why is the Australian government so secretive about Commonwealth land available for nuclear wastes?
Senator Rex Patrick No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia
LOOK AT CROWN SITES FOR RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY
Yesterday I received copies of minutes from the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF) Steering Committee under Freedom of Information laws.
What is clear from these minutes is that the Government has secretly considered a number of Commonwealth owned land parcels as potential NRWMF sites. Why has this fact not been made public? Why don’t we know what sites were considered? Why has the analysis and any decisions associated with potential Commonwealth sites not been made public?
It staggers me, in a process that the Minister claims to be open and transparent, that this important aspect of site selection process has not been made public, nor open to scrutiny.
I have written to Minister Canavan asking him to provide me with details of sites considered and the associated analysis. If he won’t I will seek a Senate Order for Production of Documents to get access to them.
Copies of the minutes are available here.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/g1nmw3nmgljp…/NRWMF%20Minutes.pdf… https://www.facebook.com/groups/1314655315214929/?multi_permalinks=2498364660177316%2C2498213100192472¬if_id=1534461842151654¬if_t=group_activity
Bangarla Aboriginal Corporation to go to Supreme Court to halt Kimba vote on nuclear waste dump
Barngarla People seeking Supreme Court injunction to halt Kimba vote on nuclear waste facility, 2018 https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/…/87afb1b5d47db75b415c402d97…Peter Jean, Jade Gailberger, The Advertiser, August 14, 2018
A VOTE by Kimba residents on whether they want a radioactive waste dump in the district is in jeopardy after an indigenous group sought an injunction to stop it.
The Barngarla People on Tuesday applied for an urgent Supreme Court injunction to halt the Kimba vote.
The Hawker district will also vote.
Two sites near Kimba, on the Eyre Peninsula, have been short-listed as possible locations for a low-level radioactive waste storage facility. A third short-listed site is near the Flinders Ranges community of Hawker.
The Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation will argue that native title-holders who live outside Kimba District Council boundaries should be entitled to vote.
The Barngarla have more than 200 members, most of whom live outside the council’s boundaries.
The group will argue that the ballot breaches the Racial Discrimination Act and that Kimba Council does not have the power to conduct the vote.
The corporation is seeking a court hearing this week. The ballots are to help the Federal Government determine a preferred site for the radioactive waste storage centre.
The legal challenge was launched as a Senate inquiry recommended that grain and produce be grown in the buffer zone of the national radioactive waste dump to “reassure the community” that it is safe.
A Senate inquiry into the selection process for three SA sites proposed by the Federal Government says that it “sees value” in the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science working with local stakeholders so that part of the remaining 60ha buffer zone can be used to “grow and test agricultural produce”.
It believes this would “reassure the community and agricultural markets” that food grown in the surrounding region does not contain “excessive amounts of radiation” and is “safe for consumption”, a report tabled in Parliament yesterday reveals.
Cameron Scott, in a submission to the inquiry, raised concerns about reputational impacts a waste facility could have on regional exports.
“All grain from Eyre Peninsula is delivered, blended and exported out of Lower Eyre Peninsula,” Mr Scott wrote.
“Therefore, Kimba’s grain is mixed with every other town’s grain on Eyre Peninsula — the effect that this could have on our exports hasn’t been taken into consideration at all.”
However, the experience of French farmers who live around a waste disposal facility in Aube was this month used to squash the “potential perception issues” from stakeholders.
The Australian Greens, in a dissenting report, called on the Federal Government to abandon its plans to build a nuclear waste dump in Outback SA.
Centre Alliance Senator Rex Patrick said the Hawker and Kimba communities were bitterly divided and the selection process had been unfair. The Federal Government has offered $31 million worth of incentives for the community where the radioactive waste centre is built.”
Senator Rex Patrick: Additional Comments on Senate Report re selection process for siting nuclear waste dump
Recommendation 1 The Minister must quantify how broad community support will be determined and do so before vote.
Recommendation 2 As a minimum, broad community support must mean a 65% vote in favour in the AEC vote, AND agreement from all adjoining neighbours AND the agreement from aboriginal communities.
Recommendation 3 The ANSTO Act should be changed to permit the storage of intermediate-level waste until such time as an appropriate facility site has been identified and a facility built and commissioned
Senator Rex Patrick Senator for South Australia, Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia, 14 August 2018
p. 67 Additional Comments by Senator Rex Patrick Kimba and Hawker, when you finally surrender, it must be of your own free will!
The Work of the Committee
1.1 I thank the committee for the work it has done in relation to this very important inquiry. I also thank the secretariat for their behind the scenes efforts.
1.2 I support the general findings in this report and the recommendations that flow from them, but I feel they do not address several substantive issues with enough force.
1.3 Out of responsibility to the communities of Hawker and Kimba, I address those issues now. Continue reading
Conflict of interest: Richard Yeeles, adviser to South Australian Premier on Olympic Dam Aboriginal Trust
Tim Bickmore shared a link.No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia, 15 Aug 18
The Olympic Dam Aboriginal Trust distributes funding to 3 aboriginal groups based upon income from the mine. Those groups are: Barngarla, Kuyani (Adnymathanha) & Kokotha.
Barngarla & Kuyani are currently the groups targeted by the radioactive waste site suppository process.
According to the ODAT website, currently Richard Yeeles, senior economic adviser to State Premier Steven Marshall is listed as a BHP representative on the council which determines who gets what monies…..
Conflict of interest? https://www.facebook.com/groups/1314655315214929/?multi_permalinks=2493650837315365%2C2493518107328638¬if_id=1534298281981165¬if_t=group_activity
Greens Dissenting Report on selection process for nuclear waste dump
The definition of broad community support has been inconsistent throughout the entire process
decision-making power of the Minister is wholly arbitrary. It is nonsensical to say that we must accept an arbitrary decision-making process as a means to avoid arbitrary decision-making processes.
The Adnyamathanha people have a demonstrable interest in the process of site selection.
it is condescending and inaccurate to suggest that community concerns around the impact of a radioactive waste dump on agriculture and tourism perceptions of safety and attractiveness are unfounded.
It is imperative that all stakeholders within transport corridors should be consulted.
Dissenting Report from the Australian Greens Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia, 14 August 2018
1.1 The Australian Greens believe the site selection process is fundamentally flawed. There has been a consistently stated commitment by the Minister to respect the views of the communities relevant to the process by not proceeding without “broad community support”, ensuring that the absence of such shall serve as an effective veto. However, the Minister has refused to explain what he would consider to be sufficiently “broad”, ensuring that any number can be considered sufficient, or insufficient, and ultimately disenfranchising affected communities in the name of ministerial ‘discretion’.
1.2 Jobs figures have been floated and inflated. Traditional owners have been cherry-picked or ignored altogether. Sites have been nominated by absentee landowners with no direct tie to the community on which the site selection process is being inflicted. And this process is simply unnecessary. It does nothing to address the need for long-term intermediate level storage, consistent with international best practice. It avoids amending the relevant Act by spending millions of dollars on a divisive and unnecessary process that is being pushed through to align with the electoral cycle instead of the science.
1.3 ARPANSA Chief Regulatory Officer Mr Jim Scott has told the Committee that Lucas Heights cannot offer long-term storage of low-level waste under the ANSTO Act. He argues that this requires the identification of a long-term disposal facility.
1.4 Low-level waste is set to be disposed at the NRWMF, consistent with international best practice regarding low-level waste management. However, intermediate level waste is also set for long-term storage at the NRWMF. This is not consistent with international best practice which supports medium to deep burial disposal of intermediate level waste. Continue reading
Senate Report on Selection Process for Nuclear Waste Facility in South Australia
The report is at https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Wastemanagementfacility/Report
It is 77 pages. I confess to have only skimmed through it at this stage. It appears to be a careful attempt to bless the process, while not having a real opinion about it, one way or the other. To be fair, it does contain a few questions, does not appear to be a “full go ahead” recommendation.
Coalition Senators Senator Jane Hume Senator Dean Smith put in Additional Comments. Short and not very interesting.
Greens, Senator Hanson-Young put in a longer Dissenting Report report, strongly criticising the process.
Senator Rex Patrick put in Additional Comments, also criticising the process
RECOMMENDATIONS in the Report
Chapter 2 Community sentiment
- 22. Recommendation 1 2.67 If a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility were to be sited in an agricultural region, the committee recommends that the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science work with local stakeholders, so that part of the remaining 60 hectare buffer zone can be used to grow and test agricultural produce, in order to reassure the community and agricultural markets that the produce from the surrounding region does not contain excessive amounts of radiation and is safe for consumption.
- 23 Chapter 3 Indigenous support
- 31 Recommendation 2 3.40 The committee recommends that the Minister intensify and expedite efforts to fully engage with the Indigenous stakeholders near Kimba and Hawker so that comprehensive heritage assessments for all nominated sites can be completed
- 33 Chapter 4 Financial compensation and incentives to communities
p.36. 4.22 The committee notes that it is unfortunate for a former politician, particularly one with significant exposure to the nuclear waste issues, to place the government in the invidious position of p. 37 deciding whether he should receive financial compensation for hosting a NRWMF on his property, thereby further politicising an already contentious process.
Recommendation 3 4.25 The committee recommends that the government undertake an independent valuation of the land to be acquired to ensure that the financial compensation is consistent with the original proposal to compensate the landholder at four times the land value.
- 43 Chapter 5 General comments about the site selection process
- 49 Recommendation 4 5.35 The committee recommends that the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science make submissions received during the consultation process publicly available in the circumstances where the authors originally intended for their submission to be made public. ((That requirement has apparently been fulfilled)
- 50 Recommendation 5 5.37 The committee recommends that the Office of the Chief Economist within the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science undertake a policy evaluation of the first two phases of the site selection process for a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility.
The committee made no other general recommendation)
Nuclear waste transport port; Port Lincoln? there will be no discussion – says Dept of Industry Innovation and Science
Port Lincoln a possible port for waste transport https://www.eyretribune.com.au/story/5584011/nuclear-port-talk-to-wait/
The Department of Innovation, Industry and Science says there will be no discussion on whether ports, including in Port Lincoln, will have nuclear waste material move through them until a storage site has been chosen.
For the site reports for Lyndhurst and Napandee, near Kimba, it discusses the potential for waste to be shipped from Port Kembla, New South Wales, to key ports including Port Lincoln, Port Pirie and Whyalla.
It also details the potential for a new commodities port in the upper Spencer Gulf to be used to transport waste to either Lyndhurst or Napandee.
The report details Port Lincoln’s potential to utilise rail to transport the waste from the port, but would be subject to third party restrictions due to the railway being privately owned.
Despite these report findings, department head of resources Bruce Wilson said no transport routes had been locked in and would not be discussed until the storage site itself was determined.
“Our initial focus will be on getting approval to build the site, then identify potential transport routes,” he said.
“We will consult the communities as required when we identify waste routes.”
Mr Wilson said there would also be a small number of waste shipments that would go through, with about four to five identified in the next 40 years.
He said the low to intermediate waste that would be transported would be safely secured and would meet the standards set by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Authority.
Regional Development Australia Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula economic development manager Peter Scott said the organisation would work closely with the department should a transport route through Eyre Peninsula be identified so a consultation plan could be developed for all affected communities.
Peter Malinauskas, South Australia’s Labor leader says the nuclear waste selection process is wrong
Katrina Bohr No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia, 12 Aug 18
I shared my concerns for the people in the communities, and the process that’s been imposed on them.
He agreed that the process is wrong, and gave me his word, that the issue will be brought up in Parliament as soon as it returns.
He was shocked to hear how people’s health and lives are being affected.
I’m holding him to his word! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1314655315214929/
Earthquakes: another good reason to not establish a nuclear waste dump in the Flinders Ranges
Lyn Blume Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA Here is another good reason to not dump nuclear waste in SA as this is a seismic region in Australia, here is the most recent record. Earthquake DetailsSummary
Origin (UTC): 06/08/2018 22:35:45 Epicentral Time: 07/08/2018 08:05:45
Longitude: 138.511 Latitude: -31.000
Magnitude: 2.4 (ML) Depth: 10 km
Event Id: ga2018pkbnhd https://earthquakes.ga.gov.au/ Blinman is a town deep in the Flinders Ranges, in the mid-north of South Australia. It is very small but has the claim of being the highest surveyed town in South Australia. It serves as a base for large acre pastoralists and tourism. The town is just north of the Flinders Ranges National Park, is 60 kilometres(km) north of Wilpena Pound and 485 km north of Adelaide. https://www.whereis.com/search-results?query=Blinman%20SA….
Ian Carpenter, Chelsea Haywood, John Hennessy and Janice McInnis’ submission, attacking Flinders Ranges Action Group
Ian Carpenter, Chelsea Haywood, John Hennessy and Janice McInnis sent in another submission to the Senate, on 19 July – Submission to Senate Inquiry on Selection Process for Nuclear Waste Facility They call themselves “Say Yes to 45 Jobs”. This submission consists entirely of criticism of, indeed an attack on, the Flinders Local Action Group (FLAG), (no mention of jobs, or any other aspect of the process) . They claim that FLAG used deceptive means to oppose the nuclear waste plan for Wallerberdina. They criticise the FLAG survey, FLAG’s distribution of petition forms, and FLAG’s submission to the Senate. They criticise Flag’s criticising of the Barndioota Consultative Committee (BCC) and od DIIS personnel. “FLAG have no regard for the truth or scientific fact”. They single out Dr Susan Anderson. They include FLAG’s brochure, with survey questions. (I have not, so far, been able to copy this submission)
Angelina Stuart wants the nuclear waste facility, to provide jobs for her children and grandchildren
ANGELINA STUART – Submission to Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia Submission 112
My name is Angelina Stuart, formally McKenzie, and I am the oldest sister of the McKenzie family. I was born in January 1943 on the land. My mother and father were living on the eastern side of the Flinders Ranges. That’s named Viliwarinha and it’s my birthplace – I was born out where the dingos were howling.
My late father was a strong Adnyamathanha man. As me and my siblings travelled through the Flinders Ranges, Dad would tell us Dreamtime stories about certain places. We were told the stories of the landscape that gave us a map of the area – the hills and creeks, these were the stories my dad told us. My dad made recordings and we still have his voice to listen to today.
My two older brothers and one sister who has now passed on, were born in the heart of the Flinders Ranges as well in 1938, 1940, and 1949, and I was born in 1943. Two siblings were then born in 1947 and 1950 in Beltana. There were 4 born in Hawker in 1944, 1952, 1956 and 1959. When we moved to Port Augusta, and that was the first time I saw Wallerberdina. After that, 3 siblings were born in Port Augusta, along with my five children.
I moved back to the land in 1998 to Yappala Station, next to Wallerberdina. In the mid-nineties I was one to put a claim for Station.
It is very upsetting to me that stories are being told that shouldn’t be told, and that stories are being said are ours, even though they are not our stories. The one that is distressing, is the story of the seven sisters because it isn’t our story – my father told me the Dreamtime story, and it was a different story. The story being told of the seven sisters isn’t right – it belongs to the other side of Lake Torrens, not near Wallerberdina.
On this land, this site at Wallerberdina, I’ve been out there with the heritage assessment with RPS. I know where they walked, and where the site is, and there are no visuals sites on the ground, I didn’t see anything. Any little cuttings would be from people passing through. It’s a lie to say the stories and lore of the land would disappear if a facility was built on Wallerberdina.
This process has given everyone a chance to sit down and meet. I really appreciate that we’ve been able to sit down and talk, and share our culture. If the facility did go ahead, I would want to see work done by Adnyamathanha to explain to non-Indigenous and other groups the value of our land, the spiritual side of it, so that the lore of the land and the tradition of the area around it is carried on. It is still there and it will always be there.
Thinking about my grandkids and great grandkids, I want to see development on the land, so that they can return to the land and surrounding areas, and so they can come back and get opportunities of employment. They need to be able to come back to the land.
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 