Delivered-To: jabiluka@issaries.com.au
From: mcarthur@issaries.com.au
Subject: [GLW] SA's nuclear waste dump
To: jabiluka@issaries.com.au
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 00:04:48 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/360

http://www.peg.apc.org/~greenleft, #350, for week ending 1/3/99

=============================================================================
Government plans to dump nuclear waste in SA -- by Jim Green
=============================================================================

The federal government's plan to establish a nuclear dump in South Australia 
has reached a crucial juncture. The government plans to begin test drilling of 
18 sites in the coming weeks and to nominate a specific site by the middle 
of the year.

Successive governments have been attempting to establish a national dump 
for almost 20 years. In February 1998, the government announced that the 
67,000 sq km Billa Kalina region of SA was the preferred site. 
It includes the towns of Roxby Downs, Andamooka and Woomera.

The dump will consist of unlined trenches. In addition, an "interim" storage 
shed for long-lived intermediate level waste will be located next to the dump.

While the stated criteria are factors such as low rainfall and geological 
stability, the main game has been to find a way around the fundamental 
problem that a nuclear waste dump is a hard sell. The strategy has been to 
find a compliant state government and then use a crash-through-or-crash 
approach to force a dump on a community.

One hurdle has been overcome: the Liberal government in SA now supports 
the proposal, reversing its previous strong opposition.

Several years ago, SA Premier Dean Brown wrote to Prime Minister Paul 
Keating protesting against the proposed listing of Lake Eyre as a World 
Heritage site. Brown's letter, which was leaked to the press, suggested that 
the SA government would be more favourably disposed towards hosting a 
nuclear dump if the World Heritage proposal was dropped. It appears a deal 
was struck.

Aboriginal opposition
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There are four Aboriginal groups with native title claims pending in the Billa 
Kalina region -- the Antankirinja, Kokatha, Bangarla and Kuyani. The Arabunna 
and Nukunu also have an interest in the land.

According to Stewart Motha from the native title section of the Adelaide-based 
Aboriginal Legal Rights Movement (ALRM), Aboriginal groups in the region 
have "enormous concerns" about the dump.

In 1953, Rebecca Bear-Wingfield's mother was exposed to radiation from 
a British atomic test at Emu Junction. Bear-Wingfield now represents the Kupa 
Piti Kungka Tjuta women's group, which includes women from several Abori
ginal groups in the Billa Kalina region. Sixteen women from the group recently 
visited Melbourne for the annual Indigenous Solidarity Gathering and to build 
the campaign against the nuclear dump.

Bear-Wingfield says, "Our people have been directly affected by nuclear 
weapons testing, missile testing and uranium mining. The commonwealth 
government now intends to dump nuclear waste on our country. This is an 
abuse of human rights which we will stop.

"Governments can't keep dumping their poisons on us. We will make this a 
national and international issue."

The federal government has attempted several manoeuvres to override 
Aboriginal opposition. One ploy was to negotiate with some Aboriginal groups 
but not others. Widespread opposition from Aboriginal groups nullified 
that manoeuvre.

Late last year, the government told ALRM that sufficient consultation had 
taken place and that test drilling would proceed in mid-January. That was 
also unsuccessful; the government had not followed due process and was 
forced to back down.

Aboriginal groups do not have the legal power to veto test drilling or the 
establishment of a dump. They are between "a rock and a hard place", 
according to Stewart Motha:

"If Aboriginal groups do get involved in clearances [for test drilling] they 
face the possibility that the government will point to that involvement as 
an indication of consent. If they refuse to participate, who will protect 
Aboriginal heritage, dreaming and sacred sites?"

Consequently, ALRM has been involved in finalising work area clearances, 
while making it clear that this does not indicate support for a dump.

According to Parry Agius, manager of the ALRM's native title unit, 
"The nuclear waste repository issue highlights the inadequacy of native 
title rights as they are currently constituted under the Native Title Act and 
is a showcase for the consequences of the 10-point plan. While native title 
purports to recognise Aboriginal people's particular relationship to the 
land, and the negotiations we are currently undertaking are aimed at 
protecting Aboriginal heritage, the commonwealth government may extinguish 
these rights by compulsory acquisition."

Some of the 18 sites are on commonwealth land, 
including prohibited military zones at Nurrungar and Woomera. 
There are problems with both areas, 
including rumours of opposition from military personnel based there.

However, both sites must be very attractive to the government 
given that there would be no need to acquire land compulsorily. 
Prohibited military zones may be immune from native title claims, 
although that could be subject to legal challenge.

Whether the chosen site is commonwealth land, a pastoral lease or freehold land 
is of significance to the government, but such classifications have 
little meaning for traditional owners and native title claimants.

Kevin Buzzacott from the Arabunna people notes, 
"Our land was taken by massacre and displacement. No treaties were ever signed. 
We have never ceded our sovereignty ... 
Under international law we still own the land and will always 
oppose the radioactive waste dump."

ANSTO's role
~~~~~~~~~~~~
The government discusses Australia's radioactive waste inventory 
in terms of volume, not radioactivity. 
In terms of volume, the main stockpile of waste is 10,000 drums of 
lightly contaminated soil currently stored at Woomera.

In terms of radioactivity, the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney, 
operated by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), 
is responsible for an overwhelming majority of the waste to be dumped
at Billa Kalina -- well over 90% by some estimates.

A spokesperson from the Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR) 
scoffed at the suggestion that ANSTO is responsible for 
such a large percentage of the radioactive inventory, but then admitted that 
the department does not know what the figures are and is 
not even responsible for the inventory, 
despite being responsible for establishing the dump.

There is one simple agenda behind the dump: 
it is a clearing exercise for ANSTO, designed to reduce opposition to 
a new reactor at Lucas Heights.

ANSTO plans to move most or all of its nuclear waste to the remote dump, 
or to the USA and France in the case of spent fuel rods from the reactor. 
If reprocessing in France goes ahead, 
the residual waste will be returned for "interim" storage at Billa Kalina. 
The reprocessing contracts will be based on an arrangement in which 
France returns to Australia the same amount of radioactivity 
as in the original shipment.

ANSTO has already sent two shipments of spent fuel to Scotland for reprocessing,
and it is expected that the residual waste will eventually be returned 
to Australia.

If a new reactor is built at Lucas Heights, 
there is no guarantee that overseas reprocessing will be an option 
over its lifetime. 
The government and ANSTO have acknowledged that a fall-back option is to 
send spent fuel directly to the Billa Kalina dump for "interim" storage.

Another option is to reprocess spent fuel in Australia. 
The executive director of ANSTO has said that Lucas Heights would be 
a "reasonable" location for a nuclear reprocessing plant, 
but public opposition would probably preclude that option. 
A reprocessing plant in the Billa Kalina region is a more likely bet.

To head off the thin-end-of-the-wedge argument, the federal government says, 
"A limit on total radionuclide activity for the proposed disposal facility 
in Billa Kalina will be established".

DISR suggested I contact 
the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) 
to find out what the limit will be. ARPANSA suggested I contact DISR.

If a limit is established, 
a future government will have two options when it is reached: 
increase the limit and expand the dump, or build a new dump.

ANSTO has played a significant role both as 
Australia's biggest producer of radioactive waste (excluding uranium mines) and 
as a technical adviser to the government on radioactive waste management. 
There is a glaring conflict of interest in ANSTO's dual roles of 
producer and adviser.

International interest
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A longer term possibility is that 
a national nuclear dump could become an international one. 
Last year Jim Voss, head of the US-based company Pangea Resources, 
visited Australia, ostensibly to promote the idea that 
the Billa Kalina dump should be privately operated. 
Then in December, environment groups obtained a promotional video 
produced by Pangea Resources in which Australia is nominated as 
the "world's best" site for an international nuclear dump.

The government has gone quiet on the possibility of private operation. 
No doubt the plan is to overcome the immediate obstacles to a national dump, 
and then to reassess the issue of public or private operation and 
the longer term issue of whether Australia will host an international dump.

There is widespread opposition to the Billa Kalina nuclear dump. 
A car cavalcade from Lucas Heights to Billa Kalina is planned for April 
to highlight the links between the plan for a new reactor and the waste dump.

The Arabunna people are beginning an ongoing protest and blockade near 
Roxby Downs in March. 
This will be a focus for opposition to the Roxby Downs uranium mine and 
the Billa Kalina dump.

The campaign against the Lucas Heights reactor is crucial. 
The Billa Kalina dump plan could well be scrapped 
if the plan to build a new reactor is defeated. 
Likewise, if the Billa Kalina dump proposal is defeated, 
then it becomes much more difficult for ANSTO and the government to 
build a new reactor in Sydney.

glbrisbane@peg.apc.org

______________________________________________

Reproduced by the Undesirable Propagation Unit.