Submission from Azark, Leonora, Western Australia: wants the nuclear dump, scathing about the Kimba wastes plan
- The Department has completely stage managed the initial identification and nomination of the current sites at Kimba and all the accompanying procedures for the Kimba community before the nominations were made
- It has similarly staged managed all subsequent aspects of the nominations including such things as selecting and effectively running the various community advisory groups including preparing meeting agenda and minutes
AZARK SUBMISSION to SENATE COMMITTEE INQUIRY INTO THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR A NATIONAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Submission no. 110)
INTRODUCTION
This submission is made by Azark Project Pty Ltd (ACN 618 973 792) on behalf of itself and Shire of Leonora and Goldfields Carbon Group Pty Ltd as the joint participants in and proponents of what is known as the Azark Project.
The Azark Project relates to the nomination of a previously identified and examined area of land near Leonora in the Eastern Goldfields of Western Australia as the site for selection by the federal government for the national for a national radioactive waste management facility.
In addition the Azark Project includes the possible development at that site of an underground nuclear waste disposal facility as a commercial enterprise.
TENOR OF SUBMISSION
It is submitted that the selection process adopted by the federal Department of Industry Innovation and Science and its responsible minister for the selection of a site for a national radioactive waste management facility at Kimba and Hawker in South Australia is completely inappropriate and lacks any proper and thorough investigation and assessment.
It seems that the selection of a site at Kimba is a predetermined decision by the federal government irrespective of the site suitability and the strong objections of a large community group which makes a complete mockery of the selection process.
Moreover the federal government has seemingly no regard to the financial aspects involved as it is intent on unnecessarily wasting taxpayers’ money by literally buying the support of the community while failing to properly assess and consider the far cheaper and technically superior option and advantages of the Azark site at Leonora in Western Australia.
The events and reasons for that submission are more full explained in the following notes on the respective nominations.
The overall submission is that the process by which the federal government is determining the site is neither appropriate nor thorough and fails to properly deal with the referred terms relating to financial compensation and the definition and determination of broad community support including indigenous support and consequently it is submitted that the process relevant to the Kimba and Hawker nominations has become a farcical exercise. Continue reading
Azark compares Western Australian site with South Australian sites for nuclear waste dump
Submission AZARK PROJECT to Senate Inquiry (submission No 110) Attachment 1Leonora W.A. site geologically, environmentally better suited to waste dump than is Kimba S.A.
Technical assessment information for the Azark Project at Leonora compared to the AECOM Characterisation Project for Kimba – February 2018
Seismic Survey Continue reading
Extracts from today’s Webinar about Managing Australia’s Nuclear Wastes
transcribed by Noel Wauchope 10 August 18
Dr Margarert Beavis : –
“Less than 1% of the total wastes of the nuclear reactor comes from medical use… For Intermediate Level Waste, (ILW) ARPANSA says repeatedly that there is no urgency for a news interim waste facility. Internationally, ILW is stored near reactors….
ANSTO is expanding nuclear activities, which will mean massive increases in wastes.
Information about nuclear medicine has been over-blown. It’s very clear that nuclear medicine will continue regardless of the dump”
Cyclotrons are the fastest growing area of producing nuclear medicine. Canada and UK are phasing in cyclotrons. ANSTO’s massive reactor plans mean not only more ILW, but also massive costs. Selling nuclear medicine gets back only 10% of the costs of managing the wastes”
“for informed consent, people need excellent information. Tours offered to ANSTO, not to Woomera. People told by Bruce Wilson “this site will not leak”
Scott Ludlam –
“The argument “that ILW has to be moved – that is contestable. If it is perfectly safe,as claimed, why the push for moving it far away? We should not have the process for an interim site before having the process for permanent disposal. Is it a case of ‘out of sight out of mind’ “
“What’s the definition of ‘Broad Community Support’ ? What will you do if both communities (general and indigenous) are not broadly supportive?
The material will be dangerous for 10,000 years. On a politicaland electoral basis- we do have time. You are not letting medicine down if you think that this interim waste dump is not an appropriate thing to do.
Jim Green. –
Reminds about the “-overarching legislation- allows Federal government to override local communities and State governments. Overrides legislation on Aboriginal rights. There’s a need to remove undemocratic aspects of the National Radioactive Waste Management Act” (Bruce Wilson then criticises Jim Green’s ‘very emotive language’)
“About the operation of the facility. It will not be operating all of the time. There will be several dozen jobs over the first 3 or 4 years. .. Wates volume – one truckload every 10 weeks. For 90% of the time, workers would be doing nothing. The fcaility is likley to be opened once every 3-5 years. That was the government plan – it based its estimates on facilites overseas. But they are not comparable, (much greater). At most there’s be a handful of security jobs. (Dr Adi Paterson answered this with an expansive vision of the dump being the centre of a scientific mission, and “a really cool form of tourism”)
Many traditional owners would say that they have been treated disgracefully by the Department”
Dave Sweeney.
“it is incumbent on the proponent to demonstrate the need for an activity. There has been no pre-study of the net benefit. The regulator wants 2 separate licenses – for Low Level Wastes (LLW) and Intermediate Level Wastes (ILW) There should be 2 separate debates. There should be a detailed business case – We are told that this is an internal matter – a matter for cabinet.
You need to select the pathway (to final disposal) , including the transport route, before selecting the interim waste facility site. We have 10,000 years lasting wastes, yet the Minister wants a decision on 20 August. A purpose built national radioactive Waste Facility demands a higher level of scrutiny.”
“Nuclear medicine has been used as the argument, time and time again – that people who don’t support the nuclear waste dump are not supportive of nuclear medicine”
Sweeney spoke of the”power imbalance” “hard for Aborigines, for a farmer working 12 hours on a header – to go against detailed information from the State.”
Dave Sweeney urges Federal government to pause and consider, rather than rushing into nuclear waste dumping in Kimba
Slow down nuclear process: Sweeney, Whyalla News, Louis Mayfield 7 August 18 An environmentalist is urging the federal government to slow down their site selection process for the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility as a community vote looms for Kimba and Hawker.
Nuclear Free Campaigner Dave Sweeney has accused Federal Resources Minister Matt Canavan of being on a politically-influenced timeline to lock in a location for the nuclear facility.
“Last night it was heartening to hear that it’s not the regulator who is pushing this timeline it’s politics,” Mr Sweeney said.
“Instead of rushing this decision we need to seriously explore the long-term management options for long-lasting nuclear waste before moving it from a site with a high level of expertise and security to regional South Australia.
“We don’t need to make a decision by Christmas, we need to get it right.”…….. Mr Sweeney said there was increasing unrest in the Kimba community about the federal government’s plans to potentially use the ports in Whyalla, Port Pirie and Port Lincoln to transport nuclear waste.
“People are wanting detailed consultation, they want the government to outline what they’re going to do with the ports before they go ahead with it,” he said.
A decision on the location of the NRWMF could come as early as October. The five-week community ballot for Kimba begins on August 20. https://www.whyallanewsonline.com.au/story/5571749/slow-down-nuclear-process-sweeney/?cs=5814
The Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) Says No To Nuclear Ports In South Australia
MUA Says No To Nuclear Ports In South Australia https://www.miragenews.com/mua-says-no-to-nuclear-ports-in-south-australia/ 8 Aug 18
The Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) is continuing its long-running stance against the shipping of any nuclear material in or out of South Australia.
The Turnbull Government has shortlisted three sites in South Australia that could be used to permanently hold low-level nuclear waste and temporarily store intermediate-level waste.
Two of these sites are at Kimba, on the Eyre Peninsula, while a third is near Hawker, in the northern Flinders Ranges.
Whyalla, Port Lincoln and Port Pirie were named as potential nuclear waste ports in three “Site Characterisation, Technical Reports” released by the Federal Department of Industry in July.
MUA South Australian Branch Secretary Jamie Newlyn said MUA members are long time opponents of Nuclear Waste Storage in Australia and led the charge against the former SA Government’s International Waste Dump Royal Commission and consequent citizens’ jury.
“The Turnbull Government’s recent declaration that sites in Kimba and Flinders Ranges could be used to store intermediate-level nuclear waste is incredibly concerning,” Newlyn said.
“The MUA is further alarmed that the Federal Department of Industry has identified Whyalla and Port Pirie – where our members currently work – as potential ports to unload this toxic and unsafe material.
“The MUA, along with the mayors of Port Pirie and Whyalla, have been blindsided by this announcement yet the safety of port workers and the communities through which this hazardous material is transported is critical.
A postal ballot will begin in Kimba and Hawker on August 20 to determine public support.
Federal Minister for Resources Matt Canavan has said the facility would need “broad community support” to go ahead, noting that he will take into account the views of neighbouring landholders and the Adnyamathanha Traditional Lands Association (ATLA).
Before the ballot, a Senate inquiry into the site selection process, which includes the impact a community benefits program is having on support, will hand down its findings.
“The Turnbull Government is dividing communities, dividing families and dividing friendships over this decision and are trying to ruin the fabric of these country areas,” Newlyn said.
“The MUA will be discussing this with our members in the region to explain the dangers and we are confident that our decisions will again be on the right side of history.
“The MUA is well-known for taking a strong stand against South Africa’s apartheid regime, supporting Indonesian independence, demonstrating against the Vietnam War and refusing to load pig iron to Japan in the lead-up to World War II.”
Whyalla’s port could be used to receive and ship nuclear waste to and from a waste management facility
NUCLEAR TRANSPORT, Whyalla News (print edition, 9 Aug 18 ) Whyalla’s port could be used to receive and ship nuclear waste to and from a waste management facility, according to a report by the Federal Industry Department (DIIS).
But the federal government, who have plans to establish a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF) in Kimba or Hawker, have poured cold water on the idea.
A shipment of nuclear waste is due from Sellafield in UK and a shipment out of Port Kembla is planned from the ANSTO Lucas Heights reactor of nuclear waste received from France in 2015.
“There is potential to have waste shipped from Port Kembla, NSW to key port locations such as Whyalla, Port Pirie and Port Lincoln,” say DIIS in their site characterisation report for Lyndhurst.
“From here, waste would either be shipped via road or rail to the waste facility location. This may be necessary for the transportation of TN81 containers.”
But Member for Grey Rowan Ramsey there wouldn’t necessarily be enough waste to be shipped via sea.
“Any discussions about use of ports are only possible options,” he said.,
Friends of the Earth environmentalist David Noonan believes the federal government could face ‘serious obstacles’ to secure the use of a port to move nuclear waste.
“These targeted port communities are denied a say in Minister Canavan’s pending decision on siting a Federal dump in South Australia,” he said.
“They haven’t been consulted on use of their ports, and are excluded from ‘votes’ in the Hawker and Kimba districts between August and September on whether or not to locate a NRWMF in those areas.
Mr Noonan claimed that the federal government had been targeting ports to transport nuclear waste in South Australia for over two years.
Mr Ramsey said there had been no decision to locate the facility in South Australia so far.
“Two communities are to vote later this month as to whether they are willing to host the facility. If neither agrees there is no project,” he said.
Mayor Lyn Breuer said she would not commit to supporting the use of Whyalla’s port for transporting nuclear waste until the council received a guarantee it would be safe.
“While I don’t think it would have any significant environmental impact on our community barring an accident, this would require significant community consultation,” she said.
“In the past Whyalla has opposed any nuclear or radioactive shipping in this region.”
Kimba nuclear waste dump proposal is in breach of International Atomic Agency Safety Guide
Susan Craig Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 9 Aug 18 THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSAL IS IN BREACH OF THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC AGENCY GUIDE ON TWO COUNTS.
UNDER PARAGRAPH 2.22 AT PAGE 12 STATES:
2.22 In the classification scheme set out in this Safety Guide, low level waste is waste that is suitable for NEAR SURFACE DISPOSAL. This is a disposal option suitable for waste that contains such an amount of radioactive material that robust containment and isolation for limited periods of time up to a FEW HUNDRED YEARS are required.
This requirement is pretty much copied into the ARPANSA Guide under the heading of LOW LEVEL WASTE (LLW) at page 13 in Section 3.2
WITH RESPECT TO INTERMEDIATE LEVEL WASTE THE IAEA GUIDE UNDER PARAGRAPH 2.28 AT PAGE 14 STATES:
2.28 Intermediate level waste is defined as waste that contains long lived radionuclides in quantities that need a greater degree of containment and isolation from the biosphere than is provided by NEAR SURFACE DISPOSAL. Disposal in a facility at a depth of between a FEW TENS AND A FEW HUNDREDS OF METRES is indicated for ILW.
Again practically the same description is given on page 15 of ARPANSA Guide under the heading of INTERMEDIATE LEVEL WASTE.
As both IAEA and ARPANSA clearly say BOTH LLW and ILW has to be “near surface disposal” and certainly not above ground as proposed by the Department on behalf of the federal government.
The IAEA promotes adherence to and implementation of international legal instruments on nuclear safety adopted under its auspices. https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/
Highlights of Australian Government Nuclear Information Session in Kimba
Dave Sweeney, 8 Aug 18 an update of the highlights from last night’s federal agency forum in Kimba: https://www.eyretribune.com.au/story/5569566/nuclear-information-session-in-kimba/
Between 120-150 people put in three hours in a very cold hall listening to presentations from ARPANSA, ANSTO, DIIS and others then to responses to pre-submitted questions.
As usual there was considerable running down of the clock and unrelated/ off the mark responses – but still a fair bit of interest and use, including:
ARPANSA
- no urgency to move ILW from Lucas Heights – this was clear and repeated – proponent would need to prove need/ rationale and safety case
- new ARPANSA code has reaffirmed that siting on agricultural land is less preferred (nb: this is guidance, not a requirement)
- will require two separate license applications for LLW and ILW as they have different requirements
- 12-18 months further work required on Woomera waste characterisation
ANSTO
- lots of detailed nuclear medicine/ science application talk – scant explanation of need to move ILW
- CEO agreed with ARPANSA that current ILW storage at LH is ‘safe’
- including already returned reprocessed waste returns there is a maximum of five TH81 casks of ILW over the next forty years
DIIS
- ‘possible no current site will be selected’
- uncertainty re transport route and use of local ports
- intention is to amend the NRWM Act to make the community benefit fund larger and more directed by some form of community input – but only post site selection
- Minister is the sole decision maker and they are expecting some ADJR challenge
- ballot is ‘Kimba’s last chance’ – there will no further offers or re-visiting if not supported
- Minister wants to make a decision in October
Western Australia based Azark wants nuclear waste dump site to be Leonora, W.A.
Calls for a nuclear waste facility in WA. Business News Western Australia, 7 August 18 Western Australia based Azark projects is calling on the Federal government to review its preference for a nuclear waste storage facility in South Australia, with the George Gear led company proposing Leonora as a more suitable location……. https://www.businessnews.com.au/article/Calls-for-nuclear-waste-facility-in-WA
NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP – Senate Inquiry
The Federal Government selects prime agricultural wheat farmland and the most seismically active Flinders Ranges to become Australia’s Radioactive Nuclear Waste Central Depot. Questions have not been answered truthfully and the site selection process smacks of a fixed match.
NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP – Senate Committee of Inquiry
Uncontrolled nuclear top gun Adi Paterson to spin to Kimba, Hawker and Quorn
Dr Adi Paterson is the man behind the nuclear push by secretive taxpayer-funded agency Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO).
Australians are not privy to information on how much ANSTO spends, particularly on this latest frenzy to convince rural South Australians that they have a moral duty to public health to host radioactive trash, – further encouraged by generous bribes.
Adi Paterson seems to have not only an open cheque to spend on this, but also carte blanche to do whatever he likes regarding nuclear decisions.
In 2016, he signed Australia up, all on his own, to the Framework Agreement for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems, committing Australia to work towards the establishment of new nuclear reactors. The government was informed of this afterwards. A month later, a Senate Committee simply ratified Adi Paterson’s action. No Parliamentary discussion, no public discussion. How long will Australians let this man make nuclear decisions for us, and pull the wool over the eyes of poorly informed farmers?
6 August, 2018 ANSTO CEO, Dr Adi Paterson, is part of a delegation who are visiting the communities of Kimba, Hawker and Quorn on 6 and 7 August, for Community Information Sessions being led by the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science.
Three sites in South Australia, two in Kimba and one at Wallerberdina Station near Quorn and Hawker, are considering whether to host Australia’s National Radioactive Waste Management Facility.
The Community Information Sessions are an opportunity for those communities to ask any remaining questions ahead of a five-week community ballot that begins on 20 August.
Dr Paterson will join the CEO of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) Dr Carl-Magnus Larsson, and representatives from the Department.
“In particular, I will be focused on talking about the partnerships that are possible between nuclear organisations and their neighbouring communities.
Opinions on siting a nuclear waste dump at Kimba or Hawker, South Australia
https://cooberpedyregionaltimes.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/coober-pedy-regional-times-26-07-20181.pdf Resources Minister Matt Canavan announced ( THE AUSTRALIAN, 18/6/18) that on 20 August, there will be a ballot to gauge community support for a federal nuclear waste dump near one of the small towns of Kimba or Hawker, about 450km north of Adelaide. The vote will be confined to the residents in the immediate local area.“The decision will be made in the second half of this year” said Canavan ““We do not want this overlapping with a federal election”.
A Senate Inquiry will report on this on 14 August, possibly too late to make a difference. However, many people are taking this Inquiry very seriously, and have sent in 109 submissions, nearly all of which can be read at the Senate Committee’s website.
As I’ve been going through 98 published submissions to this Senate Inquiry on Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia, I’ve been able to learn some of the reasons why people support or oppose the idea of the nuclear waste dump.
The division of opinion was clear in the answers to the 5 main Terms of Reference, asking whether the following aspects were satisfactory: – financial compensation for land, community support, indigenous support, Community Benefit Program, and confining consultation to the local community. Answers were consistently “Yes” in submissions supporting the plan, and “No” in those opposing it.
More interesting were the comments in the 6th Term of Reference – ” Any related matters”
The 40 supporting submissions. Almost every one of the supporting submissions came from local residents, several explaining that they have been very thoroughly informed by the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, including tours of the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor. Four submissions spent time praising the Department of Industry Innovation and Science (DIIS) and Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO)
Their answers regarding “Any related matters” were strongly concerned with the local area and its future. Several were enthusiastic that the nuclear waste facility would ensure the survival of the town into the future. It would have no negative impact. It would be good for local business. It would be beneficial to Australia. Some complained of misleading information from anti nuclear activists. There was strong opposition to “outsiders” having a say in the decision. Kimba District Council needed detail on important financial benefits. Submissions from DIIS and ANSTO said that the facility was essential for nuclear medicine. Lobbyist Ben Heard said that it is needed for the expansion of the Lucas Heights nuclear centre.
The 58 opposing submissions come from a variety of organisations and individuals, and include residents of Eyre Peninsula. These were generally more comprehensive and wide-ranging. When it comes to “Any related matters”, they had a lot to say:
There were several comprehensive criticisms of the entire site selection process – no justification for the dump – why the assumption it has to be in South Australia? – the process is flawed. One was opposed to the process, not necessarily to the dump. One call to end the process. Concern on longterm negative effects.
Nuclear waste issues were discussed . Call for re-examination of waste plans- dangerous waste types – intermediate level wastes – probability of stranded nuclear wastes – Lucas Heights the most suitable site – this facility a prelude to commercial waste import?
Issues of dishonesty – lack of trust – dishonest process -hypocrisy of DIIS – biased committees biased and misleading information given – Conflicts of interest .
Aboriginal ssues well beyond the Term of Reference about this – strongly Aboriginal in depth on Aboriginal interaction – history of Aboriginal interaction.
Other issues discussed: – seismic danger – floods, groundwater – tourism -nuclear medicine not needing the dump – prediction of legal action – mental health issues – aim for a nuclear free world.
You can read more about these submissions, in the summaries at https://antinuclear.net/submissions-to-senate-inquiry-18–and also find links to each full submission.
Senate sites: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Wastemanagementfacility
DEPARTMENT FAILS TO DEFINE ‘BROAD COMMUNITY SUPPORT’ – AGAIN!
Senator Rex Patrick Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA,
Inquiry into the Site Selction Process of the Radioactive Waste Management Facility Canberra
DEPARTMENT FAILS TO DEFINE ‘BROAD COMMUNITY SUPPORT’ – AGAIN!
At today’s hearing into the Site Selection Process for the Radioactive Waste Management Facility, the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science were unable to explain what ‘broad community support’ is.
Instead, they’re going to leave that definition up to Minister Canavan who is on record saying he wants this issue done and dusted before the next federal election.
Noting the secrecy surronding all of this, the people in Kimba and Hawker are going to get to experience what it was like to vote in the Soviet Union -the State will tell you what’s best for you.
For a good ten minutes I tried to find out how the Minister will come to his decision, to no avail. Here’s a quick 50 second snapshot, but you can watch the full exchange here. https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/?multi_permalinks=791599437851535¬if_id=1533450785067354¬if_t=group_activity
Aboriginal landowners not allowed to vote on planned nuclear waste dump
Traditional owners “locked out” of nuclear waste vote, InDaily, 3 Aug 18 Stephanie Richards The head of the Adnyamathanha Traditional Lands Association says the majority of Adnyamathanha people have been denied a vote on a proposed radioactive waste management facility near the town of Hawker in the Flinders Rangers.
Wallerberdina Station, located approximately 30km northwest of Hawker on Adnyamathanha country, has been shortlisted by the Federal Government for a facility that will permanently hold low-level nuclear waste and temporarily hold intermediate level waste.
It is one of three sites, the other two situated close to Kimba, that were shortlisted by the Federal Government to store nuclear waste.
The selection process is entering its final stages, with a postal ballot beginning on August 20 to measure community support for the three nominated sites.
But ATLA CEO Vince Coulthard said the voting guidelines were disrespectful to traditional owners, as the majority of Adnyamathanha people do not live close enough to the proposed Wallerberdina site to be eligible to vote.
The voting range includes residents of the Flinders Ranges Council and those who live within a 50km radius of the Wallerberdina site.
According to Coulthard, there are approximately 2500 Adnyamathanha people in total but only about 300 Adnyamathanha people who live in the voting range.
Coulthard said about 50 Adnyamathanha people who lived outside the voting range had expressed interest in voting, but when ATLA asked Federal Resources Minister Matt Canavan during a consultation trip to Hawker last week if those people could be granted a vote, Coulthard said Canavan told him that only those living in the prescribed voting range could participate.
“It’s a crazy situation,” Coulthard said.
“This is Adnyamathanha country and it is a very important place to the Adnyamathanha nation.
“People have strong connections to land. There’s a large amount of people, many who don’t live on the land but they go back on a regular basis to travel around the land.”
……… Coulthard said he was disappointed that Canavan had not consulted with all ATLA members during his consultation visit.
He said Adnyamathanha people had been “locked out” from the vote, despite holding native title rights over the land.
“Canavan is saying this will strengthen our culture, that this will be good for us, but what it is actually doing is punishing the environment.
“This is a place where we have gone to get bush tucker, where we have come as traditional owners for thousands of years.
They’ve shown us disrespect and this is very hurtful.”
The proposed site holds sacred meaning for Adnyamathanha people, as it is located close to the Hookina Waterhole and ancient burial sites.
…….. Last month, the Federal Government tripled the incentive package for the community that hosts the nuclear waste repository.
The Government had promised to spend more than $10 million in the district where the facility is built, but under new incentives announced by Canavan, the Government increased funding to $31 million.
……. The Government has previously indicated it wants to choose a preferred site before the end of this year. https://indaily.com.au/news/2018/08/03/traditional-owners-locked-out-of-nuclear-waste-vote/
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 