NEIGHBOURING COMMUNITIES

The preponderant interest of submissions lodged with the Committee which addressed the topic of the health and safety of neighbouring communities was the impact of uranium mining and milling on Aborigines. The effects of uranium mining and milling on Aborigines are the theme of chapter 5.

Both the mining companies and the respective government authorities provided the Committee with information about radiation in the vicinity of the mines.

 

ERA reported that since 1989 dust monitoring has focussed on Jabiru and Jabiru East. ERA explained:

These two locations are monitored every month continuously for one week. This monitoring frequency will continue while the monitoring results indicate acceptable variations. Radon daughter concentrations are also monitored at the same locations and at the same frequency. The results and wind data are the inputs to the Ranger model for the assessment of radiation doses to the critical group.

Results from radiation monitoring at Jabiru has [sic] shown that for the last four successive years, radiation doses have been 0.03 mSv, 0.10 mSv, 0.03 mSv and 0.04 mSv. (S 63, 45)

These are well within the new international levels.

According to ERA, background radiation in the area is in the range of 2-3 mSv (ERA, S 63, 45).

ERA's report is confirmed by the Northern Territory Government (S 100, 29).

The Supervising Scientist sheds the following light on this matter:

[E]RISS has developed a method of separately identifying the mine-related and background components by measuring radon and radon progeny concentrations arising from wind sectors containing only the natural background sources, and those from wind sectors containing both background sources and mine-related sources. Following the completion of this research, ERA has used a simplified version of the method, but one that is adequate for routine monitoring at Ranger, to make public dose estimates. The results obtained in this program . . . show that radiation exposure of members of the public living in the vicinity of the Ranger mine due to the dispersion of radon and its progeny from the mine site has always been less than 10% of the recommended dose limit.

Similar methods have been used to determine the dose due to dispersion of radionuclides in dust from the mine. The estimated dose for members of the public is about 5% of the recommended dose limit. (S 85, Attachment B, Section 2.2)

The Committee recommends that these methods should be employed in relation to all mines at which radioactive material is extracted.

Indeed, the Committee recommends that all mines should consult with 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.

The Committee's interest here lies not only in the technical adequacy of monitoring but in the independence and transparency of the process. This is a matter on which reports should be made to the consultative committees whose establishment at each mine is recommended in chapter 2.

The Supervising Scientist also conducts research on surface water transport of the long-lived radionuclides of the uranium series contained in waters discharged from the mine. Drinking water is not affected as the local potable supply is derived from groundwater bores that are unaffected by mining ( S 85, Attachment B, section 2.2).

Estimated doses of radiation exposure are so low that the use of whole body monitoring to detect them is not justified. Similarly radiation exposure of members of the public is so low that it is calculated, not measured, (S 85, Attachment B, Section 2.1).

ERISS research results show that the estimated radiation dose to members of the public from discharge of waters from RP1 and RP4 at Ranger is less than the dose limit by more than a factor of 20 ( S 85, Attachment B, section 2.1).

The Northern Land Council informed the Committee that it "considers that the mine related public dose at Jabiru is currently satisfactory" (S 42, 21).

The NLC did advance two matters of concern to it. The first was whether Aboriginal people can live closer to the mine. Their second concern is that groups are defined as larger than 30 people. This approach, according to the NLC, means that small camps living near the mine may be overlooked.

Another matter of concern to the Northern Land Council is the dose level at rehabilitated sites. The NLC recommends that the final dose rate on a rehabilitated site should be no greater than that existing before mining started. They continue: "[O]ur reasoning is based on the risk from radiation exposure and the need to ensure this risk is not increased following the cessation of mining" (S 42, 21). They also propose that "[n]o mining should be allowed until there is a good understanding of the radiological conditions at the mine site and in the surrounding country. If the NLC's recommendation is adopted, it should allay radiological concerns about mining and subsequent rehabilitation" (S 42, 22).

The Supervising Scientist told the Committee in respect of Nabarlek:

One of the major aims of the Nabarlek mine rehabilitation was the long term control of doses to adjacent communities. Nabarlek is relatively unique in uranium mines in that all the ore was mined prior to processing, which allowed the tailings to be placed in the excavated pit. This enabled the mining company to dispose of all the waste, including items from the mill which were not decontaminated or could not be sold, by placing it into the pit from which the ore was mined. This has greatly reduced the impact on the environment and will also reduce the long term contribution to the radiation exposure of any adjacent communities. Studies on the radiological characteristics of the rehabilitated landform are underway; it is anticipated that there will be no restriction from a radiological viewpoint on the desire of traditional owners to undertake periodic camping and foraging on the site. (S 85, 31)

The Supervising Scientist's activities in relation to radiation dangers at decommissioned mines illustrate the expertise which it holds which is available and valuuable to the entire uranium mining industry.

A program designed to allow assessment of radiation doses to members of the public living near the Olympic Dam Operation, resulting from the operations, is part of the approved Environment Management and Monitoring Plan. Potential pathways of exposure to nearby residents are airborne transport of radon and radon decay products and of radioactive dusts. According to the South Australian Government, "[o]ther potential exposure pathways which are important in mining projects in some environments are not relevant at Olympic Dam. For example, the ingestion of potentially contaminated food or water is not relevant, as virtually all food and water consumed in the area is sourced from distant areas" (S 109, 19).

According to the South Australian Government:

Doses to members of the public living at Olympic Dam Village and Roxby Downs are currently estimated from the results of continuous radon decay product monitors, and high volume dust samplers. The dose due to the project operations is difficult to derive from the monitoring results, as it is only a small fraction of that from natural background. The relatively small doses arising from radon decay products (which contribute the majority of the dose), are particularly difficult to estimate accurately, as the background concentrations show large natural variations resulting from changes in atmospheric conditions. These results are thus expected to be less accurate than those estimated for workers. However, different methods of dose estimation (two different modelling methods, and a monitoring method) have shown similar results. Estimated doses for full time residents at the two residential areas, Olympic Dam Village and Roxby Downs town, from 1988/9 to 1994/5 are shown in Figure 3 [on p 20 of S 109], together with the recommended annual dose limit for members of the public (1,000 microSieverts or 1 mSv). It should be noted that estimated doses to members of the local community are of the order of 2% of the dose limit.

It has been alleged that rainwater tanks are prohibited at Roxby Downs, because radioactive dust falling on the roof would contaminate the water. Rainwater tanks are not prohibited, but comparatively few have been installed because of the low rainfall. The results of dust fallout monitoring show that any contamination would be insignificant. (S 109, 19, 21)

Concerning the Olympic Dam Operation, the Conservation Council of South Australia/Friends of the Earth Nouveau observed:

. . . tailings if allowed to dry out can be a dangerous source of radon gas and contaminated dust. This gas and dust could be carried by prevailing winds across to communities in the region including Aboriginal communities, pastoral homesteads and residents of the Roxby Downs township. It is possible, given certain weather conditions, that contaminants could reach other regional population centres such as Woomera, Port Augusta, Whyalla and Port Pirie and possibly as far as Adelaide. (S 92, 29)

Planning for the proposed Kintyre mine fully includes occupational health and safety of employees. Canning Resources states that it will be using "the latest ICRP and IAEA recommendations, particularly with regard to dose conversion factors" (S 65, 4-5).

Aboriginal communities in the Rudall River region have particular concerns about health and safety dimensions of the proposed mine. Their concerns include water contamination of rivers and underground water sources; dust; tailings and waste disposal; radioactivity dangers associated with transportation of the mine's product; and an equitable financial return by way of compensation and land rental (S 52, G).

According to WDPAC, Canning Resources responses to these concerns state, inter alia, that water run off will not enter the Rudall River system but will flow into the desert sands and "disappear", and that winds blow away from the communities (S52, G).

Canning Resources has informed the Committee that the environmental impact assessment will concentrate on these matters (S 65, 8).