 |
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.
|
 |
