URANIUM MINING AND MILLING IN AUSTRALIA

URANIUM MINING AND MILLING IN AUSTRALIA

Major Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations

This report is about ensuring that if and when uranium is mined in Australia, it should be on the basis of promoting vigorous research-based management of the industry aimed at:

  • minimising the impact of mining on the environment;
  • ensuring the health and safety of employees in the industry and of communities located close to mines, adjacent to transport routes or otherwise affected by mining and milling of uranium;
  • fostering a constructive relationship between mining companies and Aboriginal communities affected by uranium mining; and
  • maintaining and enhancing international and Australian safeguards to ensure that uranium mined in Australia, and nuclear products derived from it, is used only for civil purposes by approved instrumentalities in approved countries which are signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and with whom Australia has safeguards agreements.

This report is not about whether uranium should be mined and milled in Australia, either at existing or expanded levels.

The Committee has concluded that the principal finding of the Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry [the Fox Report] has been vindicated by two decades' experience. Fox stated that:

The hazards of mining and milling uranium, if those activities are properly regulated and controlled, are not such as to justify a decision not to develop Australian uranium mines.

This major finding of the Fox Report remains valid as the foundation for policy on the mining and milling of uranium in Australia.

Australia requires a government and administrative framework for promoting world best practice standards in the uranium mining and milling industry, based on extensive, continuing research on environmental matters, health and safety of employees and affected communities, and international safeguards.

Major conclusions and recommendations are:

  • on the basis of available evidence, the uranium mining and milling industry will be sufficiently viable financially to be able to meet its environmental, health and safety, and security responsibilities fully.
  • the Committee supports the cautious approach which was favoured by the Fox Report and the need for continuing, dedicated research into all aspects of uranium mining and utilisation.
  • athough there is little evidence of unnecessary overlap or duplication between Commonwealth and relevant state/territory authorities, it believes that there is scope for improvement in handling of proposals to mine uranium, and in subsequent evaluation of achievement of environmental goals.
  • uranium mining, where it is permitted, should only occur under the strictest conditions for the protection of the environment.
  • the concept of the social impact study could offer a viable framework within which a number of the issues arising in the context of major development projects (such as mining) can be identified, analysed and discussed.
  • there should be a full public evaluation of rehabilitation and remedial work at Radium Hill and the former tailings dam at Port Pirie, with periodical reappraisal.
  • tailings management is among the most serious challenges facing the uranium mining industry, industry regulators and their scientific advisers.
  • research is integral to constructive regulation of mining and to minimising the impact of mining activity upon the environment.
  • the high level of scrutiny which the uranium industry receives is warranted in that it responds to the sensitivity associated with uranium mining and has contributed materially to minimising adverse effects on the environment.
  • the regulatory structure should ensure that the results of research are promptly reflected in enhanced standards.
  • new administrative arrangements are necessary to ensure high levels of performance, full utilisation of Australia's experience in uranium mining since the 1970s, rapid adoption of world best practice and vigorous public accountability nationally and locally.
  • a new Commonwealth Uranium Authority (CUA) should be established without delay with responsibility for -
    • approvals to mine;
    • direction of environmental impact studies;
    • supervision of plans and programs to ensure impact of mines on the environment is minimised;
    • triennial audits of environmental performance at mines (or at such shorter intervals as may be necessary);
    • review, audit and evaluation of health and safety measures at the mines and other locations where nuclear materials are stored.
  • the CUA, providing its high standards are met, may delegate tasks to State and Territory government authorities.
  • national coordination provided by the CUA should be complemented at each mine by a consultative committee composed of representatives of proprietors, governments, unions, conservation and local interests.
  • Government Senators, on the basis that the Committee's inquiry found that present federal arrangements have proven to be satisfactory and suitable, are unconvinced that a new national authority is either a necessary or effective mechanism for achievement of the goals for whose accomplishment it is being created. They believe, however, that the proposed consultative committees have merit in their own right and will furnish the additional scrutiny of uranium mining which in part motivates the proposal for the new Authority. In terms of consequential recommendations about collaboration between the proposed CUA and the Supervising Scientist, they do not see any reason for an enlarged role for the Supervising Scientist but they agree that the expertise of the organisation should be more generally available on a fee-for-service basis.
  • the Supervising Scientist for the Alligator Rivers Region is an essential component of the framework which has materially contributed to minimising the effects of mining on an environmentally important part of Australia. The value of its research role is indisputable.
  • The Supervising Scientist should be encouraged to develop, in response to demand, a broad expertise in environmental aspects of uranium mining and milling. It is of positive value for Australia to have a scientific body with a comprehensive expertise in the environmental impacts of uranium mining and milling, and a body where such skills and expertise may be acquired, fostered and developed.
  • the proposed CUA and the Supervising Scientist should collaborate constructively in ensuring that the good practice which now prevails is maintained and improved; that world best practice standards are, as a matter of course, promptly applied in all uranium mines in Australia; and that through public accountability mechanisms the Australian public are informed about the quality of the environmental performance at uranium mines.
  • the results of verified research on health and safety of employees must be applied without delay. The Select Committee is especially critical of the long, drawn-out delay in adoption of the latest international standards concerning radiation exposure. Present practices whilst satisfactory must be seen as minimum standards.
  • as a basis for ensuring employee health and safety, data collection and analysis needs to be standardised on a national basis in the development of the National Radiation Dose Register.
  • determination of appropriate career dose limits should be a research priority for government health authorities and mining companies.
  • employees in uranium mines and mills should be fully briefed personally on radiation and related hazards. Mining companies should meet the costs of briefings.
  • current health and safety standards (especially as exemplified at Ranger) should be regarded as minimum standards.
  • mining companies and regulatory authorities should actively pursue the "as low as reasonably achievable" principle in radiation matters and report on the extent that they succeed in operating well below prescribed levels.
  • a uniform method of measuring, calculating and recording dose limits should be adopted and applied.
  • the matter of career dosage has not been examined sufficiently thoroughly by scientific and medical authorities. The Australian Radiation Laboratory should take the lead in consultation with mining companies and unions.
  • Health authorities should examine a means of compensation for employees who exceed a career dose limit (when determined) prior to retirement age.
  • all mines should consult the Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist on methodologies and technologies for identifying and monitoring background radiation at mine sites and in the region where the mine is located.
  • governments, mining companies and Aboriginal organisations should consider negotiation of comprehensive statements of agreement within which partnerships can develop to consolidate economic and social benefits within a context of respect for indigenous culture, customs and ways of life.
  • the Committee is concerned that resources assigned for safeguards programs and developments are not keeping pace with developments in the nuclear industry.
  • the safeguards system needs constant attention to work. Australia has a long record of contributing to the vitality of safeguards, international and national. It is a record which should be maintained.
  • the Senate Procedure Committee should examine the implications of globalisation for parliamentary scrutiny of government, administration and public policy.
  • safeguards practices must continue to develop, such development should continue in a calm and rational manner. The risks which nuclear power involves are less likely to engender unjustified apprehension or insecurity if addressed calmly, cautiously, deliberately and expeditiously.