DOCSLIB.ORG

Proposal to Extract, Process and Export Uranium from Jabiluka Orebody No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

fN fi muni H AU9917755 Environment Australia Environment Protection Group Environment Assessment Report PROPOSAL TO EXTRACT, PROCESS AND EXPORT URANIUM FROM JABILUKA OREBODY NO. 2: THE JABILUKA PROPOSAL Environment Assessment Branch August 1997 30-04 ABBREVIATIONS AEA Atomic Energy Act AE CGE model Access Economics computable general equilibrium model ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable APC Aboriginal Project Committee ARL Australian Radiation Laboratories ARR Alligator Rivers Region ATSIC Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission Board Kakadu Board of Management CAMBA China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement CRZ Catchment Runoff Zone CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Director Director of National Parks and Wildlife draft EIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement EIS Environmental Impact Statement EMP Environmental Management Plan EPIP Act Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974 ER Environment Requirement ERA Energy Resources of Australia Ltd ERISS Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist final EIS draft EIS plus the Supplement FML Flexible Membrane Liner HDPE High Density Polyethylene Headlease Town lease between the Director and the JTDA ICRP International Commission on Radiological Protection JAMBA Japan-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement JTDA Jabiru Town Development Authority KNP Kakadu National Park KRSIS Kakadu Region Social Impact Study NLC Northern Land Council NPWC Act National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1975 NT Northern Territory NTDLPE NT Department of Lands, Planning and Environment NTDME NT Department of Mines and Energy OSS Office of the Supervising Scientist PMP Probable Maximum Precipitation RUEI Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry RWMS Ranger Water Management System SAG Study Advisory Group SCZ Sediment Control Zone TCZ Total Containment Zone U3O8 uranium oxide UMEC Act Uranium Mining (Environment Control) Act USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency WMS Water Management System The Jabiluka Proposal—Environment Assessment Report Environment Assessment Branch, August 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 7 1.1 General , 7 1.2 Environmental Assessment 7 1.3 Jabiluka Assessment Process 8 1.4 Major Issues Raised from the Public Comment Period 10 2. BACKGROUND 11 2.1 History 11 2.2 Jabiru 12 2.3 The Role of the Supervising Scientist 14 2.4 The Kakadu Region Social Impact Study 15 3. NEED FOR THE PROJECT AND KEY ALTERNATIVES 1 6 3.1 Need for the Project 16 3.2 Key Alternatives 18 3.2.1 Project Alternatives 18 3.2.2 Transport Alternatives 22 3.2.3 Gold Extraction 23 4. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 2 4 4.1 Overview 24 4.2 Construction 2 4 4.2.1 Construction Access 26 4.2.2 Ja Ja Camp 27 4.2.3 Jabiluka Site Construction 29 4.2.4 Construction Facilities 30 4.2.5 Construction Material 30 4.3 Jabiluka Surface Facilities 30 4.3.1 Stockpiles 30 4.3.2 Backfill Plant 31 4.3.3 Ventilation 32 4.3.4 Administration/Workshop 32 4.3.5 Water Supply , 32 4.3.6 Sewage Treatment 33 4.3.7 Fuel Storage and Demand 33 4.3.8 Explosive Storage and Handling 34 4.3.9 Power Supply 34 4.3.10 Fencing 34 The Jabiluka Proposal—Environment Assessment Report Environment Assessment Branch, August 1997 4.4 Mine Operation 34 4.4.1 Underground Mining Method 34 4.5 Jabiluka Water Management 36 4.5.1 Total Containment Zone 40 4.6 Ore Haulage to Ranger 4 1 4.7 Ranger Operations 4 2 4.7.1 Processing of Jabiluka Ore at Ranger 42 4.7.2 Tailings Disposal 43 4.7.3 Ranger Water Management 46 4.8 Transport 46 5. DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT 4 8 5.1 Introduction 4 8 5.2 Regional Setting 4 8 5.3 Climate 48 5.4 Geology 50 5.5 Soils 5 0 5.6 Hydrology/Hydrogeology 51 5.7 Water Quality 5 2 5.8 Fauna/Flora/Ecology 5 3 5.9 Natural and Cultural Values 5 5 5.10 Park Management 5 7 5.11 Demography * 5 8 5.12 Social Background 5 8 5.12.1 Site Cultural Values 58 5.13 Traditional Owners and the Aboriginal Community 60 5.14 Jabiru Township - Broader Community 61 5.15 Baseline Studies 62 5.15.1 Introduction 62 5.15.2 Water quality and hydrology for the Swift Creek catchment and part of the Magela creek catchment 63 5.15.3 Air Quality 66 5.15.4 Flora and Fauna 66 5.15.5 Soils 66 5.15.6 Hydrogeology 67 5.15.7 Archaeology and European Heritage 67 5.15.8 Cultural Heritage 68 5.15.9 Social Baseline - Aboriginal Community 68 The Jabiluka Proposal—Environment Assessment Report Environment assessment Branch, August 1997 5.15.10 Baseline - Summary 68 6. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND SAFEGUARDS TO MINIMISE IMPACTS 70 6.1 Water Quality 7 0 6.1.1 Introduction 70 6.1.2 Sedimentation/Turbidity 72 6.1.3 Untreated Sewage Effluent 73 6.1.4 Toxic Water Storage and Discharge 75 6.1.5 Retention pond toxicity 77 6.1.6 Water Quality Monitoring 78 6.2 Water Quantity 7 9 6.2.1 Water Table Impacts 79 6.2.2 Water Supply 81 6.2.3 Failure of Total Containment Zone 81 6.3 Transport Issues 82 6.3.1 Construction Access Road 82 6.3.2 Haul Road Construction and Use 83 6.3.3 Product Transport and Acid Transport. 87 6.4 Radiation Impacts 88 6.4.1 General . 88 6.4.2 Occupational Radiation Exposure of Mine Workers 90 6.4.3 Environmental and Public Radiation Exposure 93 6.5 Impacts Upon the Ranger Mine Site 96 6.5.1 Extended Use of Ranger Site 96 6.5.2 Tailings Deposition Impacts - Ranger 97 6.6 Flora and Fauna 102 6.6.1 Flora 102 6.6.2 Fauna 104 6.6.3 Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance 106 6.6.4 Insect Disease Vectors 107 6.7 Social and Cultural Impacts 108 6.7.1 Impacts on Town of Jabiru 110 6.7.2 Impacts upon Cultural Heritage 111 6.7.3 Social Impacts 113 6.8 Ja Ja Camp 119 6.9 Dust/Noise/Vibration 120 6.10 Visual * 122 6.11 Rehabilitation 122 6.12 Heritage Impacts 124 6.13 Wilderness Values 125 7. CONCLUSION 128 The Jabiluka Proposal—Environment Assessment Report Environment Assessment Branch, August 1997 References Appendix A Mechanisms of the Supervising Scientist to ensure adequate protection at the Ranger mine Appendix B Proposed baseline environmental studies Appendix C World Heritage Criteria Appendix D Water quality monitoring in the Alligator Rivers Region TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1 Regional setting of the Jabiluka Project Figure 2 Surface facilities Figure 3 Site location showing Ja Ja Camp in relation to the mine Figure 4 Subsurface Geology Figure 5 Jabiluka underground mine—Longitudinal section looking south Figure 6 Jabiluka water management plan layout Figure 7 Tailings storage at Ranger (with and without Jabiluka tailings) Figure 8 The Alligator Rivers Region Figure 9 Jabiluka wilderness quality TABLES Table 1 Alternatives to the Jabiluka development The Jabiluka Proposal—Environment Assessment Report Environment Assessment Branch, August 1997 i. Introduction 1.1 General This report assesses the environmental impact of a proposal by Energy Resources of Australia Ltd (ERA) to establish an underground uranium mine with associated infrastructure at the Jabiluka Prospect, approximately 20 km north of Jabiru in the Northern Territory (NT)(Figure 1). In accordance with the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974 (EPEP Act) the Minister for Resources and Energy designated ERA as proponent in relation to prospective decisions to grant approvals for uranium exports from the Jabiluka mine under Regulation 11 of the Customs (Prohibited Exports) Regulations. The report reviews the draft Environmental Impact Statement (draft EIS), public comments on the draft EIS, and the proponent's responses to these comments in the Supplement to the draft EIS (the draft EIS plus the Supplement constitutes the final EIS). It also relies on information, comments and advice provided by areas within Environment Australia, other relevant Commonwealth agencies, Northern Territory Department of Lands, Planning and Environment (NTDLPE) (through the joint assessment process) and previous studies undertaken in the region. 1.2 Environmental Assessment Environmental impact assessment is predicated on defining adequately those elements of the environment that may be affected by a proposed development, and on identifying the significance, risks and consequences of the potential impacts of the proposal at a local, regional and national level. The final EIS provides a description of the existing environment in the area and the proposed operations and evaluates the environmental impacts and proposed mitigating measures to minimise the expected impacts. This report will assess the adequacy of the final EIS in achieving the above objectives, and will evaluate the undertakings and environmental safeguards proposed by the proponent to mitigate the potential impacts. Further safeguards may be recommended as appropriate. The contents of this report form the basis of advice to the Minister for the Environment on the environmental issues associated with the project. The Jabiluka Proposal—Environment Assessment Report Environment Assessment Branch, August 1997 8 V ARAFURA SEA Figure 1 1 TBNNANT CREEK REGIONAL SETTING j**^ ° 30 100 to* Figure 1: Regional setting of the Jabiluka project. 1.3 Jabiluka Assessment Process Environmental assessment was conducted under a formal joint assessment agreement between the NTDLPE and the Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories. The Jabiluka Proposal—Environment Assessment Report Environment Assessir.eiv i: ranch, August 1997 The Jabiluka proposal requires a decision under the Commonwealth Government's export licensing legislation. On this basis, and in view of the project's environmental significance, the proposal comes within the provisions of the Commonwealth's EPIP Act. The proposal is also subject to NT impact assessment under the Environmental Assessment Act 1982.
Recommended publications
  • Drilling Intersects Uranium Mineralisation Beneath the Historical Nabarlek Open Pit and at U40 Opening up New Discovery Opportunities

    Drilling Intersects Uranium Mineralisation Beneath the Historical Nabarlek Open Pit and at U40 Opening up New Discovery Opportunities

    9 September 2019 Exploration Update –West Arnhem-Nabarlek Project, Northern Territory Drilling intersects uranium mineralisation beneath the historical Nabarlek Open Pit and at U40 opening up new discovery opportunities Highlights • Diamond drilling beneath the historical high-grade Nabarlek Uranium Mine intersects anomalous uranium-gold bearing fault breccia beneath the Oenpelli Dolerite with a best intercept of 0.3m @ 525ppm U3O8. • Mineralisation at the base of the breccia bears a strong similarity to that seen within the historical Nabarlek ore zone, suggesting the potential for a Nabarlek- style deposit in the vicinity. • This anomalous breccia is poorly tested beneath the dolerite and open to the south. Several beds of south-east dipping graphitic sediments intersected in the vicinity provide a target for follow-up drilling. • Diamond drilling at U40 intersects open-ended uranium mineralisation on the western flank of the IP anomaly with a best intercept of 0.7m @ 1,059 ppm U3O8. • Next steps include a review of historical EM data to refine targets for possible further drilling. DevEx Resources Limited (ASX: DEV; “the Company”) is pleased to advise that assay results have been received from recent diamond drilling at the Company’s 100%-owned West Arnhem- Nabarlek Project in the Northern Territory, confirming the presence of anomalous uranium mineralisation beneath the historical Nabarlek Mine and on the western side of the U40 Prospect. In addition, the drilling has provided invaluable structural and geological information which
  • The Rock Art of Madjedbebe (Malakunanja II)

    The Rock Art of Madjedbebe (Malakunanja II)

    5 The rock art of Madjedbebe (Malakunanja II) Sally K. May, Paul S.C. Taçon, Duncan Wright, Melissa Marshall, Joakim Goldhahn and Inés Domingo Sanz Introduction The western Arnhem Land site of Madjedbebe – a site hitherto erroneously named Malakunanja II in scientific and popular literature but identified as Madjedbebe by senior Mirarr Traditional Owners – is widely recognised as one of Australia’s oldest dated human occupation sites (Roberts et al. 1990a:153, 1998; Allen and O’Connell 2014; Clarkson et al. 2017). Yet little is known of its extensive body of rock art. The comparative lack of interest in rock art by many archaeologists in Australia during the 1960s into the early 1990s meant that rock art was often overlooked or used simply to illustrate the ‘real’ archaeology of, for example, stone artefact studies. As Hays-Gilpen (2004:1) suggests, rock art was viewed as ‘intractable to scientific research, especially under the science-focused “new archaeology” and “processual archaeology” paradigms of the 1960s through the early 1980s’. Today, things have changed somewhat, and it is no longer essential to justify why rock art has relevance to wider archaeological studies. That said, archaeologists continued to struggle to connect the archaeological record above and below ground at sites such as Madjedbebe. For instance, at this site, Roberts et al. (1990a:153) recovered more than 1500 artefacts from the lowest occupation levels, including ‘silcrete flakes, pieces of dolerite and ground haematite, red and yellow ochres, a grindstone and a large number of amorphous artefacts made of quartzite and white quartz’. The presence of ground haematite and ochres in the lowest deposits certainly confirms the use of pigment by the early, Pleistocene inhabitants of this site.
  • Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation Speech

    Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation Speech

    Medical Association for Prevention of War www.mapw.org.au Archived Resource: Paper from IPPNW XIIIth World Congress 1998 Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation Speech Author: Jacqui Katona Date: 1998 I speak here today on behalf of the Mirrar people, my family and my countryman who oppose the development of Jabiluka. I'd like to acknowledge the Wurundjeri people, traditional owners of this area, for their liberation is linked to our own and although is takes place in other forums we know their experienced is intimately linked with Aboriginal people across Australia. My people come from Kakadu. One of the best known destinations for many international visitors because of the important and visible connection between my people and the land, Kakadu is our home. It is the place which nurtures our families, and provides us with obligations to protect and maintain our heritage, our future, and our past. For us the threat of Jabiluka is an issue of human rights. Kakadu's unique cultural and natural properties are not only recognised by our people but also by the rest of the world in its inscription on the world heritage list. Even the World Heritage committee recognises that human rights are connected with it's own Convention. It has said: that human rights of indigenous peoples must be taken into account in the protection of world heritage properties; that conservation of country must take place with direction from indigenous people, and; that the continuing violation of human rights places properties in danger because of our integral relationship with the land. The continuing dominance of government and industry organisation over the authority of our people erodes our rights on a daily basis.
  • The Mirarr: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

    The Mirarr: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

    The Mirarr: yesterday, today and tomorrow. A socioeconomic update. Prepared by the GUNDJEIHMI ABORIGINAL CORPORATION August, 2010 Published in Australia in 2010 by the Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation, 5 Gregory Place, Jabiru, Northern Territory. Text: Andrew Masterson Additional contributions: Justin O’Brien, Geoffrey Kyle Editing: Andrew Masterson Design and layout: Tristan Varga-Miller/The Mojo Box Photography: Dominic O’Brien Additional photography: Craig Golding, Graphics: Sahm Keily Printed by Sovereign Press, Ballarat, Victoria All rights reserved. Copyright 2010, Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation. Apart from fully credited brief excerpts used in the process of review or fair dealing, no part of this document may be reproduced in any form without the express written consent of the copyright holder. ISBN 978-0-9808312-0-7 Cover photo: Djabalukga Wetlands, Kakadu National Park 2 The Mirarr: yesterday, today and tomorrow Contents Executive Officer’s Report 8 Board of Directors 11 Acronyms 12 Closing the Gap 13 Our Past, Our Future 15 The Gudjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation, Past and Present 19 Staff Profiles 25 Cultural Development 29 Community Development 41 Healthy Lives 47 Economic Development 51 Land, Water, People 59 Looking to the Future 67 Financial statements 73 The Mirarr: yesterday, today and tomorrow 3 About this report The Mirarr: yesterday, today and tomorrow: a socioeconomic update sets out to summarise the activities of the Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation in its mission to meet the needs and aspirations of its owners and constituents, the Mirarr people. The report traces the history of the Corporation. It describes its current holdings and business model, and outlines the exciting opportunities present in the next period of its operations.
  • Supervising Scientist Annual Report 2005-2006

    Supervising Scientist Annual Report 2005-2006

    SUPERVISING SCIENTIST Annual Report 2005–2006 © Commonwealth of Australia 2006 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Supervising Scientist. This report should be cited as follows: Supervising Scientist 2006. Annual Report 2005–2006. Supervising Scientist, Darwin. ISSN 0 158-4030 ISBN-13: 978-0-642-24398-0 ISBN-10: 0-642-24398-0 The Supervising Scientist is part of the environmental programme of the Australian Government Department of the Environment and Heritage. Contact The contact officer for queries relating to this report is: Ann Webb Supervising Scientist Division Department of the Environment and Heritage Postal: GPO Box 461, Darwin NT 0801 Australia Street: DEH Building, Pederson Road/Fenton Court, Marrara NT 0812 Australia Telephone 61 8 8920 1100 Facsimile 61 8 8920 1199 E-mail [email protected] Supervising Scientist homepage address is www.deh.gov.au/ssd Annual Report address: www.deh.gov.au/about/publications/annual-report/ss05- 06/index.html For more information about Supervising Scientist publications contact: Publications Inquiries Supervising Scientist Division Department of the Environment and Heritage GPO Box 461, Darwin NT 0801 Australia Telephone 61 8 8920 1100 Facsimile 61 8 8920 1199 E-mail [email protected] Design and layout: Supervising Scientist Division Cover design: Carolyn Brooks, Canberra Printed in Canberra by Union Offset on Australian paper from sustainable plantation timber. Supervising Scientist Hon Greg Hunt MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 16 October 2006 Dear Parliamentary Secretary In accordance with subsection 36(1) of the Environment Protection (Alligator Rivers Region) Act 1978 (the Act), I submit to you the twenty-eighth Annual Report of the Supervising Scientist on the operation of the Act during the period of 1 July 2005 to 30 June 2006.
  • The Ranger Uranium Mine Agreement Revisited: Spacetimes of Indigenous

    The Ranger Uranium Mine Agreement Revisited: Spacetimes of Indigenous

    Transformations issue 33 (2020) The Ranger uranium mine agreement www.transformationsjournal.org revisited: spacetimes of Indigenous ISSN 1444-3775 agreement-making in Australia AUTHOR BIO Kirsty is a former lawyer, who Kirsty Howey worked for a decade at the Northern Land Council on various land rights and native title ABSTRACT matters. Her PhD research draws on this experience to investigate Native title agreement-making or “contractualism” has become one of the the relationship between the dominant legible frames by which to understand Indigenous-settler relations Northern Land Council and the in Australia, simultaneously providing benefits to Aboriginal groups yet state, including through constraining opportunities to configure these relations differently (Neale). In ethnographic research with current and former employees of this paper, I examine the very first mining agreement of its kind in Australia: the institution of practices of the Ranger uranium mine agreement negotiated in 1978. Borrowing Russian agreement-making. literary theorist Bakhtin’s analytic, I argue that the agreement is a “chronotope” with specific spatiotemporal dimensions. I focus on two key temporalities of the chronotope – the urgent temporality of development authorisation that conditions how, when and where agreements are produced, and the forward- looking “temporal inertia” that prospectively embeds these practices as precedents to be replicated in future mining negotiations. These two temporal logics shaped and were shaped by the spatial dynamics of the institutions tasked with negotiating the agreement, as events shifted back and forth between different venues. Exploring “how different legal times create or shape legal spaces and vice versa” (Valverde 17) reveals the productive and hegemonic conditions of the agreement chronotope in Indigenous-state relations in Australia as well as the compromised conditions for Indigenous institutional survival in the entropic north of Australia and beyond.
  • Margarula V Rose [1999] NTSC 22 PARTIES

    Margarula V Rose [1999] NTSC 22 PARTIES

    Margarula v Rose [1999] NTSC 22 PARTIES: YVONNE MARGARULA v SCOTT ROSE TITLE OF COURT: SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY JURISDICTION: SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY EXERCISING TERRITORY JURISDICTION FILE NO: JA79 of 1998 (9810168) DELIVERED: 12 March 1999 HEARING DATES: 15, 22 and 23 February 1999 JUDGMENT OF: RILEY J REPRESENTATION: Counsel: Appellant: D. Dalrymple Respondent: R. Webb; J. Whitbread Solicitors: Appellant: Dalrymple & Associates Respondent: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions Judgment category classification: B Judgment ID Number: ril99005 Number of pages: 36 ril99005 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AT DARWIN Margarula v Rose [1999] NTSC 22 No. JA79 of 1998 IN THE MATTER OF the Justices Act AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal against conviction and sentence handed down in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction at Darwin BETWEEN: YVONNE MARGARULA Appellant AND: SCOTT ROSE Respondent CORAM: RILEY J REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (Delivered 12 March 1999) [1] On 1 September 1998 the appellant was found guilty of having trespassed unlawfully on enclosed premises, namely a large storage container owned by Energy Resources of Australia (herein ‘ERA’), contrary to s5 of the Trespass Act. She was convicted and ordered to pay a $500 fine and $20 victim levy. She appeals against both conviction and sentence. The grounds of appeal, which were amended at the beginning of the hearing, appear in the document filed on 16 February 1999. 1 [2] At the hearing before the learned Magistrate many facts were agreed and the only witnesses called were Mr Holger Topp, an employee of ERA, and the appellant.
  • Australian Conservation Foundation

    Australian Conservation Foundation

    SUBMISSION NO. 8 TT on 12 March 2013 Australian Conservation Foundation submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the United Arab Emirates on Co- operation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy May 2013 Introduction: The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) is committed to inspiring people to achieve a healthy environment for all Australians. For nearly fifty years, we have worked with the community, business and government to protect, restore and sustain our environment. ACF welcomes this opportunity to comment on the Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the United Arab Emirates for Co-operation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy. ACF has a long and continuing interest and active engagement with the Australian uranium sector and contests the assumptions under-lying the proposed treaty. ACF would welcome the opportunity to address this submission before the Committee. Nuclear safeguards Uranium is the principal material required for nuclear weapons. Successive Australian governments have attempted to maintain a distinction between civil and military end uses of Australian uranium exports, however this distinction is more psychological than real. No amount of safeguards can absolutely guarantee Australian uranium is used solely for peaceful purposes. According the former US Vice-President Al Gore, “in the eight years I served in the White House, every weapons proliferation issue we faced was linked with a civilian reactor program.”1 Energy Agency, 1993 Despite successive federal government assurances that bilateral safeguard agreements ensure peaceful uses of Australian uranium in nuclear power reactors, the fact remains that by exporting uranium for use in nuclear power programs to nuclear weapons states, other uranium supplies are free to be used for nuclear weapons programs.
  • Environmental Activities in Uranium Mining and Milling

    Environmental Activities in Uranium Mining and Milling

    Nuclear Development Environmental Activities in Uranium Mining and Milling A Joint NEA/IAEAReport NUCLEAR•ENERGY•AGENCY OECD, 1999. Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of ADOBE. All rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use only. Unauthorised reproduction, lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software is prohibited. You must treat the Program and associated materials and any elements thereof like any other copyrighted material. All requests should be made to: Head of Publications Service, OECD Publications Service, 2, rue AndrÂe-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France. ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVITIES IN URANIUM MINING AND MILLING A JOINT REPORT BY THE OECD NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY AND THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: ± to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining ®nancial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; ± to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and ± to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States.
  • Uranium Mining in the Alligator Rivers Region Fact Sheet

    Uranium Mining in the Alligator Rivers Region Fact Sheet

    Uranium mining in the Alligator Rivers Region Kakadu National Park © Department of the Environment and Energy The Alligator Rivers Region (ARR) is located about 220 km east of Darwin in the Northern Territory of Australia. The ARR includes Kakadu National Park which is a World Heritage area and listed under the Ramsar convention on wetlands. It is also is internationally recognised for more than 60,000 years of continuous human habitation, prolific rock art, outstanding diversity of flora, fauna and landscape, and expansive areas of pristine wilderness. Uranium mining in the Alligator Rivers Region The ARR of northern Australia is a geologically unique and highly prospective area for minerals, particularly uranium. The uranium deposits of the South Alligator Valley were first discovered in 1953 when the Coronation Hill site was identified. In the seven years following, more than 20 potential uranium deposits were found, of which thirteen were exploited between 1959 and 1965. The total production for this field was Former uranium mill, South Alligator Valley © approximately 840 tonnes of U308. There Supervising Scientist were no formal environmental regulations throughout this period and mining legislation 1 was essentially concerned with the tenure of the leases and some aspects of mine safety. In addition, there was no requirement for complete rehabilitation of any of these sites and they were generally just abandoned. This included infrastructure ranging from a small mill and solvent extraction plant, to contaminated process ponds, roads and tracks as well as open cut mines and mineshafts. Mining in the ARR between 1956 and 1964 The 1960s brought a renewed demand for uranium for nuclear generated electricity and exploration activity rose sharply.
  • Environmental Impact of the Ranger Uranium Mine, Alligator Rivers Region, Northern Territory, Australia

    Environmental Impact of the Ranger Uranium Mine, Alligator Rivers Region, Northern Territory, Australia

    XA0201925 IAEA-SM-362/16 Environmental impact of the Ranger uranium mine, Alligator Rivers Region, Northern Territory, Australia A. Johnston Environment Australia, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia S. Needham Environmental Protection Agency, Queensland, Australia Abstract. Stringent environmental controls have been applied to the Ranger mine, in the Northern Territory of Australia, because of its location in an area of outstanding natural and cultural values. The adjacent Kakadu National Park contains a wild and extensive biodiversity, striking landscapes, ancient Aboriginal rock art and a living Aboriginal culture. A special regime of biological, radiological and chemical monitoring has been applied to protect the environment and detect even very low intensity impacts. The results from this regime demonstrate to the government and general public that the high conservation values of the national park around the mine are being properly protected. This paper describes the techniques used to measure environmental impact at Ranger, and summarizes the results of over 20 years of monitoring. The overwhelming conclusion is that a very high standard of environmental protection has been achieved. 1. INTRODUCTION For twenty years, uranium has been mined and milled at the Ranger mine within an area that is surrounded by Kakadu National Park (Fig. 1), around 12°S in the wet/dry tropics. The region includes deeply dissected sandstone plateau and escarpments, falling to gently undulating sandy lowlands, drained by rivers which are tidal for over 60 km inland and which have extensive floodplains inundated by several metres of brackish water during the wet season. Ranger mine, about 70 km from the coast, is about 20-25 m above sea level.
  • Use of Airborne Γ-Ray Spectrometry for Environmental Assessment of the Rehabilitated Nabarlek Uranium Mine, Australia

    Use of Airborne Γ-Ray Spectrometry for Environmental Assessment of the Rehabilitated Nabarlek Uranium Mine, Australia

    Environmental Monitoring and Assessment (2006) 115: 531–553 DOI: 10.1007/s10661-006-7244-y c Springer 2006 USE OF AIRBORNE γ-RAY SPECTROMETRY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE REHABILITATED NABARLEK URANIUM MINE, AUSTRALIA PAUL MARTIN1,2,∗, STEPHEN TIMS1,3, ANTHONY MCGILL4, BRUCE RYAN1 and KIRRILLY PFITZNER1 1Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist (eriss), Darwin, NT, Australia; 2Agency’s Laboratories Seibersdorf, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria; 3Department of Nuclear Physics, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia; 4Northern Territory Department of Business, Industry & Resource Development, Darwin, NT, Australia (∗author for correspondence, e-mail: [email protected]) (Received 16 May 2004; accepted 12 May 2005) Abstract. This article describes an airborne γ survey of a 7 × 5 km region around the rehabilitated Nabarlek uranium mine in northern Australia. An unusually tight line spacing (100 m) and low aircraft height (50 m) were used, enabling the survey to distinguish man-made structures such as ponds and accommodation areas, as well as creek lines. Positive correlations between airborne data and ground- based readings enabled an estimation of the average absorbed dose rate arising from terrestrial γ radiation over large areas of the site to be derived. For the fenced minesite area this estimate was 0.31 μGy hr−1. The airborne survey data were found to be invaluable in helping to plan further ground-level investigations and showed promise as an assessment tool for rehabilitated minesites. Keywords: airborne gamma survey, dose rate estimation, Nabarlek, radiological assessment, reha- bilitation, uranium mining 1. Introduction Airborne γ radiometric surveys have been used extensively over several decades for mineral exploration and geological mapping purposes (Galbraith and Saunders, 1983; Smith, 1985; Zhang et al., 1998).