alligator rivers region advisory committee meeting 37 › system › files › pages ›...

Alligator Rivers Region Advisory Committee

Meeting 37

Meeting Summary

4 April 2012

ARRAC36 Meeting Summary of 15

Alligator Rivers Region Advisory Committee Agenda – 37th Meeting

Agenda Item

Meeting Start 0930 1 Welcome 2 Apologies and Observers 3 Draft Minutes – ARRAC36 4 Actions Arising – ARRAC36 5 Energy Resources of Australia Ltd Report 6 Supervising Scientist Report 7 NT Department of Resources Report 8 Member Reports

8.1 Australian Government - Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism 8.2 Environment Centre NT 8.3 Afmeco Mining and Exploration Pty Ltd / Areva Group

8.4 Northern Land Council 8.5 Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation

8.6 Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency 8.7 NT Department of Health 8.8 Parks Australia 8.9 Cameco Australia Pty Ltd 8.10 NT Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport 8.11 West Arnhem Shire Council 8.12 Uranium Equities Ltd

9 Other Business 10 Next Meeting

Meeting Close 1500


1 Welcome The Chair (Prof Webb) welcomed members and observers to the 37th meeting of the Alligator Rivers Region Advisory Committee. Mr McAllister provided a visitor safety briefing.

2 Apologies and Attendance Prof Webb noted apologies received from the following members.

Apologies Joe Potter Afmeco Mining and Exploration Pty Ltd (AREVA Group) Alan Hughes Supervising Scientist Peter Cochrane Parks Australia Matt Darcey Northern Territory Government - Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport Michael Sheldrick Australian Government - Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism Xavier Schobben Northern Territory Government - Department of Health Howard Smith Northern Land Council Alister Trier Representing Office of the Administrator of the Northern Territory Prof Webb noted Ms Taylor would be arriving late to the meeting and proposed that the UEL update report item be moved to the end of the agenda. The following resignations and ministerial appointments since last meeting were noted.

Resignations Sharon Paulka Uranium Equities Ltd Philippe Portella Afmeco Mining and Exploration Pty Ltd (AREVA Group) Daryl Entriken Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Michael Welch NT Department of Resources Stephen Baldwin West Arnhem Shire Council

Appointments pending Ministerial approval Melissa Taylor Uranium Equities Ltd Joe Potter Afmeco Mining and Exploration Pty Ltd (AREVA Group) Peter Waggitt NT Department of Resources The attendance of the following members and observers was noted.

Attendance Prof Charles Webb Chairperson Mr Dan Janney Energy Resources of Australia Ltd Prof Peter Johnston Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency Mr Damien Ewington Cameco Australia Pty Ltd Ms Nicole Hinton Australian Government - Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism Mr Russell Ball NT Government - Department of Resources Mr Ewan Gunn Northern Territory Government - Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport Mr Russell Robinson NT Government – Department of Health Mr Geoff Kyle Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation Ms Cat Beaton Environment Centre of the Northern Territory Mr Adam Thompson Northern Land Council Mr Peter Waggitt NT Government - Department of Resources Ms Anna Morgan Australian Government – Parks Australia Mr Richard McAllister Supervising Scientist Division Dr Stuart Blanch Environment Centre NT Mr Todd Simms Energy Resources of Australia Ltd Mr Jody Clark Energy Resources of Australia Ltd Ms Michelle Iles Energy Resources of Australia Ltd Ms Melissa Taylor Uranium Equities Ltd Dr Rick van Dam Supervising Scientist Division Ms Alison Frostick Supervising Scientist Division Mr Keith Tayler Supervising Scientist Division Mr Scott Parker Supervising Scientist Division (Secretary)


3 Draft minutes – ARRAC36 The draft ARRAC36 minutes were approved as tabled with the following change on Page 11:

RN23556 – is a 5m deep bore about 350m NW of the TSF wall and no changes in water quality have been observed to date. Generally good conformance between data sets, except for DoR EC measurements are about 25% higher and uranium substantially higher than ERA’s, although concentrations are still relatively low.

4 Actions arising – ARRAC36 There were no actions arising from ARRAC36.

5 ERA Reports

BUSINESS PERFORMANCE AND DEVELOPMENTS – RANGER (MR SIMMS) Mr Simms provided an update on business performance and developments at Ranger during the reporting period. Key points are summarised below.

Safety performance

• During the reporting period, ERA has continued to achieve world class safety performance with two million hours without a Lost Time Injury (LTI) and an All Injury Frequency rate (AIFR) of 57. There were one LTI and five medical treatment injuries in 2011 which were all relatively minor and all personnel made a full recovery. ERA was the best performer in the Rio Tinto Energy Group in terms of safety performance and finished in the top quartile for AIFR for 2011. ERA safety performance for 2012 to date is in the middle of the range compared to the rest of the Rio Tinto Group.

Operations

• ERA operations and mining activities in 2011 were significantly impacted by extreme weather in the Northern Territory. Processing operations were proactively suspended from the end of January to mid June 2011. A total of 2,641 tonnes of uranium oxide were produced. All sales commitments were met through inventory management, loans and purchase of material on the spot market. The shut down provided opportunity to carry out extensive plant maintenance. Water management also continued with 3.5 GL of pond water being pumped and treated from Pit 3.

Financial performance

• ERA announced a net after tax loss of $154 million. This included a $99 million inventory value adjustment (reported during half year). The underlying loss of $54 million was impacted by a $53 million increase in non-cash costs (depreciation, unwinding of discount on rehabilitation provision). A total of 2,126 tonnes of material were purchased on the spot market including 1,636 tonnes for 2011 sales. An Entitlement Offer was completed raising approximately $500 million to fund key strategic initiatives. The rehabilitation provision was also increased from $315 million (31 December 2010) to $565 million (31 December 2011).

Critical business activities

• Key business issues include the decision to not proceed with the Heap Leach Facility Project, commencement of the Ranger 3 Deeps exploration decline and the brine concentrator projects, and the need for successful completion of RP5 and RP6. Other items include expanded exploration activities in the Ranger Project Area and the completion of a Business Review.

People

• ERA is a major employer in east Arnhem region and a leading employer of indigenous people in the NT. As at 31 January 2012, ERA has 108 indigenous employees and has an Indigenous Employment Strategy which encompasses mentoring, flexible work arrangements, the NT Mine Training Programme, literacy


skills development and school based apprenticeships for students in Jabiru and Gunbalanya. ERA has a companywide female employee rate of 22 percent.

Projects

• Ranger 3 Deeps Exploration decline – detailed engineering has been completed and the box cut/decline contract is expected to be awarded mid February 2012. Excavation of the box cut and installation of a portal access tunnel is scheduled for completion in October 2012. Development of the decline will commence from November 2012 and exploration drilling is targeted for commencement in April 2013.

• Ranger Project Area Exploration – A total of 14,887 metres was drilled in 2011. Identification and prioritisation of specific targets for 2012 and 2013 drilling program has been completed. Exploration activities will significantly ramp up in the 2012 dry season.

• Brine concentrator – Project approved by ERA Board in February 2012. Detailed engineering and equipment procurement underway, and demolition of acid plant completed. Facility expected to be commissioned and fully operation in second half of 2013 and will significantly enhance onsite water treatment capacity.

• Integrated Tailings, Water & Progressive Rehabilitation Pre-feasibility study – still in definition stage until May 2012, then engineering design will commence focusing on closure issues and progressive rehabilitation. Discussions are ongoing with stakeholders and regulators. Key focus on salt management options, Pit#3 backfill strategy optimisation, TSF reclamation and decommissioning, demolition and infrastructure scheduling, risk mitigation work and water treatment strategies. Currently installing wicks to stabilise tails in Pit#1 and will then be looking at capping.

WATER MANAGEMENT (MR CLARK) Mr Clark provided an update on water management and water quality trends at Ranger during the reporting period. Key points are summarised below. Magela Creek –Filterable U values in Magela Creek from late Nov to Dec 2011 were under the focus level. Filterable Mn values were elevated in early Dec 2011 due to low flows. Record rainfall in December 2011, combined with WTP permeate, being used to flush seepage water out of the Djalkmarra Land Application Area, resulted in a period of elevated EC. Turbidity and pH were also elevated. Continuous monitoring data for EC at 009 (E, W and C), and upstream at MCUS, showed EC was elevated early in the wet season but then trended down. Gulungul Creek – both EC and Filterable U remained low and below focus limit during the sampling period. Progress against targets – in 2009-10, interception works were implemented to prevent rainfall run-off water getting into Pit#1. A total of 296ML was captured as a result of the interception works, some of which was of suitable quality to release. Following an audit, additional water going into Pit#1 and the TSF was identified and redirected into RP2. An annual target of 500ML was set and a total of 797ML was actually captured. The volume of water prevented from entering the process circuit equates approximately to a reduction in the water level of the TSF of one metre. The seepage interception trench around the western stockpile, constructed in 2010, captured over 2GL of water and resulted in a significant reduction in EC in RP1. This also allowed over 3GL of water to be released from site during 2011. Current status – rainfall during the 2011-12 wet season was lower than last year although still slightly above average at 1499 mm – last year was the third largest wet season on record. Despite record rainfall in December 2011, water inventory is in good shape with the TSF water level at 1 April 2012 being RL55.03m. Water has recently been transferred to the TSF from Pit#1 (RL12.86m at 1 April 2012) in preparation for rehabilitation which has increased the water level in the TSF.


RP1 status – YTD to 1 April 2012 managed release of 954 ML- water quality has been good with low EC levels. Water level of RP1 is low for this time of year and transfer of permeate to RP1 will commence in late April 2012. No further active releases are planned this dry season. Pit#3 status – the water level in Pit#3 was RL-154m as at 4 April 2012 (storage volume of 1457ML). Mining will commence in Pit#3 later this week. Pond WTP performance – WTP3 was commissioned in June 2011 and uses micro/ultra filtration and RO. Currently managing brine disposal to RP2 and/or TSF. ERA will switch off pond water treatment later this year once the inventory reduction targets have been met, with treatment likely to resume prior to the commencement of the 2012/13 wet season. Projects – ERA is aiming to install additional pond water storage with the proposed construction of RP5 and RP6. ERA is currently in discussions with the MTC and will continue to progress. RP6 will be located in the footprint of previous covered evaporators. Preliminary earthworks are underway and construction will commence soon. RP5 will be located in the clay borrow area excavated for the previous TSF lift. Each pond will be lined and hold approx 1GL. ERA is currently looking at double lining with leak detection. ERA is looking to remove the three existing groundwater bores in the RP5 footprint subject to ongoing discussion with the MTC. TSF groundwater bore program – 78 new bores have been installed around the TSF. These arose out of the TSF review. All bores are being fitted with micro-purging equipment. A further 21 existing bores have been added into the program. Some of the bores are not able to be accessed during the wet season so ERA has worked on improving access. Results will be reported on quarterly basis through the MTC. U and SO4 maps – a number of areas of elevated U and SO4 adjacent to TSF have been identified and are continuing to be monitored. ERA has mobilised the contractor to commence installing wicks in Pit#1 with wick installation to commence by the end of April 2012. All wicks should be installed by early to mid November 2012. Discussion Mr Robinson asked if any baseline monitoring is proposed to look at Radon background levels associated with the proposed underground operation, which will have a ventilation rise which will vent Radon and dust. He also asked if it was time to rethink the critical group. Mr Simms advised that Radon management was being addressed under the existing Ranger Radiation Management Plan and that, based on previous experience from the Jabiluka decline, ERA is aware of what needs to be addressed. He noted that all monitoring will be conducted underground and that a vent rise was not proposed for the initial development. Mr Robinson noted that currently air monitoring is conducted at Jabiru East and asked if ERA has looked at establishing a baseline for dust. Mr Simms advised he would come back to Mr Robinson on this. Prof Johnston noted the U and SO4 groundwater maps presented were useful in identifying where potential contamination may exist. He asked if the U hotspot on the western side of the TSF was associated with mineralisation in the TSF wall. Mr Clark noted the mineralisation observed a few years ago had occurred somewhat further north. Mr Kyle noted there used to be a large sump in the western wall interception trench which collected all of the runoff from the western wall. He suggested the hotspot could be a legacy of this but identifying the actual source of the hotspot would require further data from the groundwater monitoring. Dr Blanch noted that HDP liners are not impermeable and asked if ERA was looking at the risks associated with this. Mr Simms advised ERA wasn’t looking at this issue specifically. He added that the liner being considered by ERA is 2mm thick and has very low permeability. Dr Blanch stated that the liner was still permeable. Mr Simms advised that ultimately the decision comes down to an assessment of risk. He noted that risk assessment QA/QC shows the highest risk is associated with the areas where the liners are joined. He advised


that as the liners would be underlain by compacted lateritic base material, ERA is confident that little if any seepage would occur. Dr Blanch noted this and suggested that any risks could be avoided by using a 4mm liner. Mr Janney advised that some seepage over time would be expected with any liner, but it depends primarily on how the liner is installed. He noted, however, that as the structures will only be used for storing pond water, the associated risks were considered low. Mr McAllister advised that SSD would like to see better than a single 2mm thick liner used if the ponds were ever to be used for process water storage, but as these are pond water storages the proposed liner was appropriate. Prof Webb queried the relationship between SO4 than U and asked if SO4 is a lead indicator for U. Mr Simms noted that ERA is interested in the cause and effect relationship primarily. Mr Kyle noted that SO4 is a conservative ion and could be a lead indicator. He advised that it is well known that SO4 precedes U – theoretically – but noted that further data are required to work out what’s happening. Mr Tayler noted that fresh waste rock (which contains SO4) has recently been placed on the TSF wall so this could be a source and indicated he has seen this previously. Prof Webb noted this was a reasonable explanation for the data collected in close proximity to the TSF wall, but noted there is also an outlier some distance from the TSF wall. Mr Tayler advised that SSD has been looking at this bore and ERA has now installed an interception sump upstream. He noted the bore is about 4m deep and located in a drainage line so there are probably some residual salts in the soil. He added that it is expected that the level of SO4 in this bore will decrease over time if the elevated SO4 observed is indeed due to the wash-off of salts from the TSF walls. Mr Waggitt noted there is a history in relation to this bore linked to the stage 2 or 3 lift of the TSF 20 years ago. Mr Kyle suggested that assigning a colour to a range of values is useful for presentation purposes, but the individual values should also be shown to assist analysis.

6 Supervising Scientist Division Report

SUPERVISION AND ASSESSMENT (MR TAYLER) Mr Tayler provided an update on supervision and assessment activities during the reporting period. Key points are summarised below. Audit and inspection work carried out during the period September 2011 to March 2012 included 7 Routine Periodic Inspections (RPI) at Ranger, 2 RPIs at Jabiluka, and audits of Nabarlek, Myra Camp (Alligator Energy), King River Camp (Cameco Australia) and UXA. A pre-wet season inspection of South Alligator valley was also conducted. The purpose of RPIs is to follow up on incidents, inspect areas under development at the site, inspect site infrastructure and follow up outstanding audit findings. Ranger – 2 outstanding findings remain from the Ranger Environmental Audit in May 2011; a category 1 non-conformance (upgraded from a cat 2 finding in 2010 audit) and a category 2 non-conformance. Both these relate to controlled area vehicle movements. ERA is currently installing electronic tag system which should be operational by mid-April 2012. Jabiluka – 2 RPIs were held in November 2011 and February 2012. Not a lot happening on the site. New telemetry installed on the IWMP with EC and water level data now transmitted in real time to Ranger. There is discussion about rehabilitating the pond in the next few years. The site is currently stable and the pond is collecting rainwater. West Arnhem exploration audits • Alligator Energy (20 September 2011) - Audit tested compliance with selected components of the MMP.

Two conditional findings related to rig inspections and potential erosion risks at Caramel. • Cameco Exploration – King River Camp (21 September 2011) – audited compliance with selected

components of EMP. Nothing of concern identified. Reasonably good grade being found so operations may ramp up and radiation safety will become more of an issue.


• Uranium Equities Nabarlek (5 October 2011) – Audit focused on compliance with MMP and rehabilitation of drilling works. Four conditional findings related to records in the vehicle wash log, storage of chemicals and fuels, condition of bore casings and changes to activities described in the approved MMP.

• UXA audit (6 October 2011) Nabarlek camp – six category 2 non-conformances, 8 conditional and 9 not verified findings so quite a few opportunities for improvement – will work with company to fix

• SAV inspection (27 Sept 2011) – the site has settled down and the erosion from previous wet season has been repaired, the pp-gradient drain is functioning well and the revegetation is progressing. Parks are coordinating management of the sites and SSD providing technical advice as required.

Mr Waggitt noted that an inspection of the TSF at Ranger had also been conducted.

SUPERVISING SCIENTIST DIVISION MONITORING (MS FROSTICK) Ms Frostick provided an update report on the results of monitoring during the reporting period. Key points are summarised below. Current monitoring activities in the ARR include: • Surface water quality continuous data collection

o Magela Creek - EC (SSD & ERA), turbidity (SSD), flow (NRETAs) o Gulungul Creek - EC (SSD & ERA), turbidity, water level (SSD) o Ngarradj – EC, water level (SSD).

• Event auto-sampling and fortnightly QC • Field toxicity measurements using in-situ monitoring of snail egg production in Magela and Gulungul

Creeks. • Community studies using macroinvertebrates and fish. • Bioaccumulation studies using mussels. • Atmospheric radiological monitoring. Water quality results Magela Creek – results are very similar to previous years although there was a generally reduced EC signature. There was good conformance between ERA and SSD data. The EC peak detected in Dec 2011 – as mentioned by ERA – was due to the release of permeate into a drainage line adjacent to the Djalkmarra LAA which flushed out some high EC seepage water. There is generally good conformance with DoR grab sampling results. The high EC level recorded by DoR was measured on a falling hydrograph and was likely due to outflow from Coonjimba Billabong hugging the western bank of Magela. U concentrations were low. Mn concentrations were higher during early part of wet season when flow in creek was low. As expected, Mg concentrations followed EC. The highest concentration was associated with the Djalkmarra peak and Coonjimba outflow samples. SO4 and EC demonstrate a similar relationship. In relation to Radium, so far only one result has returned from the lab from a composite sample. While overall results for both sites are slightly higher, the difference is close to zero. In-situ monitoring of snail egg production showed no trend of higher snail production upstream or downstream compared to 2010 data, and the same was true for Gulungul Creek. Levels of U in mussel flesh were low. Gulungul Creek – levels of EC were lower compared to previous seasons. Grab sample results from other stakeholders are in conformity with the continuous dataset. U levels have been consistently lower than 10% of limit apart from one instance of being higher at the upstream site. Levels of Mn were again consistently higher in the early wet season when low flows are present. As expected, Mg levels followed the EC trace. Levels of SO4 were generally low with higher concentrations aligning with EC peaks. Ngarradj – typically good water quality. Atmospheric Radiological monitoring


Radon Decay Product (RDP) monitoring - while there is some noise in the data, as expected there was lower concentrations measured during wet season than dry season. Long Lived Alpha Activity (LLAA) monitoring –effective dose to public from LLAA estimated at 0.007 mSv at Jabiru and 0.005 mSv at Mudginberri (including natural background). Discussion Prof Webb commended SSD on the quality of the graphs presented which are appropriately informative.

7 NT Department of Resources (Mr Waggitt) Mr Waggitt provided an update on NT DoR regulatory decisions, incidents and groundwater monitoring results during the reporting period. Key points raised are summarised below. Regulatory decisions Jabiluka – there were no changes to the Authorisation. There was one proposal considered by the MTC dealing with installation of telemetry at the IWMP which was approved on 21 September 2011. There were no incidents reported. Nabarlek – there were no changes to the Authorisation. There was one proposal to amend the Mining Management Plan to increase the number of exploration drill holes which was approved. There were no incidents reported. U exploration programs – There are currently three companies undertaking exploration within the Alligator Rivers Region, all in the Western Arnhem region (Alligator Energy; Cameco Australia and UXA Resources). There were no new authorisations issued during the reporting period. Ranger – There were 2 changes to the Authorisation – (i) optimisation of the ERA radiation and atmospheric monitoring programme (14 April 2011) and (ii) setting a Maximum Operating level for the Ranger Tailings Storage facility (23 September 2011). Both amendments were approved on 29 November 2011 and Authorisation 0108-13 was issued 30 November 2011. There were 7 regulatory decisions during the period: • Application to optimise ERA’s radiation and atmospheric monitoring program (approved 29/11/11) • Phase 3 crest raise to RL58 at Ranger TSF (approved 12/8/11) • Additional pond water treatment capacity (approved 12/8/11) • Raising of TSF Wet Season MOL to 56m (approved 29/11/11) • Construction of exploration decline at Ranger 3 Deeps (approved 25/8/11) • Demolition of old acid plant (approved 21/9/11) • 2011 exploration drilling program (approved 25/10/11) The MOL for TSF, the 2012 exploration program and the RP6 application are still under ongoing consideration by the MTC. Incidents (Ranger Uranium Mine) There were 39 incidents reported by ERA during the period and are listed in the DoR ARRAC report. One incident involving the spill of 100L of diesel from a service truck at the TSF ramp was deemed to have moderate environmental significance. Two incidents deemed to be of medium level significance were also reported involving 200L of hydraulic fluid spilled from a ruptured hose on a drill rig and a small sulphur fire in the area of the dumping face at Pit# 1. All other incidents were rated as minor. Details of OHS incidents were not reported to NT DoR as responsibility for this now rests with NT Worksafe. Groundwater Monitoring (Ranger Uranium Mine) There are now over 200 bores on site and NT DoR undertakes check monitoring at 21 bores throughout the year. DoR uses a similar methodology and sampling regime to ERA to optimise comparability of results; however, sometimes sampling times vary which can lead to different results. There is generally good conformity between DoR and ERA results. Certain TSF bores show an increasing trend in EC which is most


likely due to weathering of fresh rock and seepage down the bore casing. Bore RN23566 also shows effects of the TSF construction. Other monitoring bores show good agreement with ERA data and are considered stable. Discussion Prof Webb noted the inconsistency between DoR and ERA bore sampling results has been an ongoing issue for a long time and has been discussed by ARRAC previously. He noted there are still 5 or 6 bores where there is up to 30% difference between the results and was unclear why this is till the case given the efforts to harmonise the sampling methodologies and timing of sampling. Mr Waggitt advised it can be quite difficult to get exactly the same sampling conditions due to various factors including the impacts of flooding on access and subtle differences in sampling methodology between ERA and DoR. Prof Webb noted that ARRAC’s previous recommendation regarding filtering of samples had been rejected by ERA on the grounds that this was impracticable. He noted also the situation in relation to surface water check monitoring where sampling was undertaken simultaneously but ERA and DoR can still end up with different results. He asked if the fact that sampling at the same place and time by DoR and ERA still provided different results was a cause for concern. Mr Waggitt advised that DoR is proud that the DoR monitoring unit has high quality protocols with field and laboratory QA/QC systems in place. He noted similar issues with different results from the same monitoring has been observed in another site outside the ARR. Prof Webb advised he is concerned there continues to be significant difference in accuracy in water quality results. He asked why ERA considered field filtering as being impracticable. Mr Simms advised that ERA wants to do more work before implementing filtering for all bore sampling. He noted a report has been completed and submitted to MTC and is up for discussion at the next MTC. He advised that ERA would take into account the views of all stakeholders in determining its approach, but agreed that standardising sampling across all bores would improve comparability. Prof Johnston noted that if all of the results are indicating the water quality is fine there probably isn’t an issue if the results are different. Prof Webb agreed if all results are well below the limits there isn’t really a problem. Mr Kyle noted that sampling errors can also be affected by factors such as sample contamination and the quality of sampling. He added that for these reasons there will always be some degree of difference but this can be minimised. Mr Ball advised that any sustained level of contamination or large excursion would certainly be detected by the various monitoring programs. Mr Kyle noted the levels being discussed are very low and close to detection limits. Prof Webb advised he was comforted by this but noted the fact that results from sampling undertaken simultaneously at the same location are so different suggests a problem with equipment. Mr Robinson asked if the quality control has been cross checked and Mr Waggitt advised that this had been done. Mr McAllister noted the issue related to samples being undertaken at the same time but different location so there could be a bank effect involved. Mr Thompson noted that ERA is moving to use of micro-purging technique and asked if DoR was looking at adopting this. Mr Waggitt indicated he would find this out and provide that advice at the next meeting. ARRAC37 Action 1: Mr Waggitt to advise whether DoR is looking at using micro-purging techniques as part of ground water quality check monitoring. Mr Robinson asked what criteria are used for cleanup of radioactive material spills and are the same criteria used for spills of tailings and process water. Mr Simms advised that ERA radiation safety staff will undertake soil tests and any contamination detected is removed and disposed of appropriately. He noted that the key criterion used is against background levels. Mr Robinson asked if and where the background levels used is stated. Mr Simms noted that background varies across the site and that ERA has background data for different soil types. He advised this information is stated in the radiation monitoring plans and offered to provide a copy.


ARRAC37 Action 2: Mr Simms to provide Mr Robinson with copies of the Ranger Radiation Monitoring Plan. Prof Webb advised he was impressed with the quality of the reports and presentations provided to the meeting by relevant agencies.

8 Stakeholder Reports

8.1 DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCES, ENERGY AND TOURISM (MS HINTON) Ms Hinton provided an update on DRET activities during the reporting period. Key points are summarised below. Australian National Dose Register - agreement between the various parties has been finalised and the relevant NT legislation is being amended to allow collection of data. Ms Hinton thanked Alister Trier and Russell Ball for their assistance with finalising arrangements. Uranium Council – there is no funding beyond June 2012 so it is unlikely programs will continue e.g. The ERICA workshops presented by Ms Paulka and the development of the assessment tool for impact on human biota. Complementing workshop – non human biota program being run by ARPANSA – note SSD also involved – this information will feed into the development of an Australian database for ERICA. Post project probably not much work but possibly some toxicology work and further work on transport strategy. Funding is limited. May be able to pick up next year subject to funding U production workshop cycle regulation best practice IAEA – to be held in Darwin in August 2012 and sponsored by the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office with assistance from SSD and ERA. Ms Hinton noted that ASNO will be at Ranger next week for an inspection. DRET will continue normal regulatory role working with relevant stakeholders.

8.2 ENVIRONMENT CENTRE NORTHERN TERRITORY (MS BEATON) Nothing to report.

8.3 AFMECO MINING AND EXPLORATION PTY LTD / AREVA GROUP (MR POTTER) Nothing to report.

8.4 NORTHERN LAND COUNCIL (MR THOMPSON) Nothing to report.

8.5 GUNDJEIHMI ABORIGINAL CORPORATION (MR KYLE) Nothing to report. Mr Ball noted that relevant Commonwealth and Northern Territory Ministers had recently approved GAC’s request to be a full member of the Ranger and Jabiluka Minesite Technical Committees.

8.6 AUSTRALIAN RADIATION PROTECTION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AGENCY (PROF JOHNSTON) Prof Johnston provided an update report on the results of monitoring during the reporting period. He advised that the National Dose Register is still missing data from the Northern Territory but this should be addressed in due course, subject to passage of legislation through the NT Parliament. He noted there has been some preliminary discussion with Honeymoon Mine in South Australia but no data has been collected as yet.


8.7 NT DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (MR ROBINSON) Mr Robison provided an update report on behalf of the NT Department of Health. He confirmed that the legislative amendments required to facilitate NT participation in the National Dose Register are currently before the Legislative Assembly. Mr Robinson offered to provide further information on the specific changes to the Act at next meeting. ARRAC37 Action 3: Mr Robinson to provide an update to next ARRAC meeting on the status of NT legislative amendments associated with the National Dose Register.

8.8 PARKS AUSTRALIA (MS MORGAN) Ms Morgan provided an update report on the results of monitoring during the reporting period. Key points are summarised below. Ms Morgan provided an update on the status of the South Alligator Valley Remediation project. The management of the South Alligator Valley Remediation Project was transferred from the Parks Australia office in Darwin to the Park Manager at Kakadu National Park in January 2012. Minor erosion and settlement was significantly less, and in different spots, in 2011 than in 2010, despite higher rainfall (~2 m). Five more monitoring bores were installed in December 2011, one up gradient and four down gradient (2 close, 2 distant). Bare areas were reseeded during a dry period in early January 2012. At that time erosion in the south-east corner of the containment was minor and other areas had shown almost no signs of erosion, cracking or slumping. Parks is currently awaiting an “as constructed report” from the consultant. ARPANSA has issued Parks with a new licence for disposal of a radiation facility. A monitoring plan has been developed with SSD which will enable any potential off site contamination to be detected. The consultant has provided an erosion mitigation report which recommends reinforcement of the south east corner of the containment with tree debris. Discussion Prof Johnston noted that as is the case with all repositories there are always small amounts of maintenance required and this is quite normal. Prof Webb asked if the reinforcement to the south western corner of the containment had been done and Ms Morgan confirmed this work has been completed. Members expressed concern regarding the statement in the report tabled by Parks that the monitoring plan was developed with the view of “...demonstrating to ARPANSA in about four years that the containment is having no impact on human health or the environment, and that therefore the requirement to hold a radiation facility licence can be removed’. A number of members queried the technical basis for the four year timeframe and suggested that ongoing monitoring will probably be required beyond this point.

8.9 CAMECO AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (MR EWINGTON) Mr Ewington provided an update report on the results of monitoring during the reporting period. Key points are summarised below. Safety, health, environment performance – results presented for Cameco’s operations Australia-wide and included 1 MTI, and FAI which involved finger injuries. The other MTI was identified as Rhabdomylosis following a blood clot in the arm which was assessed by a Specialist as work related. Both MTI became Restricted Work Day Injuries. There is no trend in the near misses which ranged from fumes on a forklift, a slip, muscle soreness, bogged truck, and horse hit by car. The only environmental incident recorded was a very minor spill (1 litre fuel) near the Nabarlek airport apron. 2011 Exploration activities (Northwest Arnhem Land) - All drilling operations ceased in late September 2011. During 2011, 11,371 m in 38 Diamond Drill holes was completed at King River, Nabarlek and Wellington Range. Almost 3 months of ground based gravity surveys were conducted at the Wellington Range and Nabarlek projects. Mapping and surface sampling (some helicopter-assisted) was carried out over most projects.


2012 exploration activities – planned for Wellington Range (up to 7,000m diamond drilling and ground gravity surveys), King River (up to 5,000m diamond drilling and airborne EM survey), Nabarlek (up to 1,500m diamond drilling, Mount Howship (up to 750m diamond drilling (helicopter-assisted) and Beatrice (up to 750m diamond drilling (helicopter-assisted). Activities expected to commence late May/early June 2012. Cultural and heritage - Work Clearance meetings are scheduled over the coming weeks and months on all projects, with heritage surveys and clearances following these meetings. Safety, health, environment and quality - all safety, radiation and environmental procedures and processes are being progressively reviewed and updated in preparation for the field season. King River Camp and the Cameco exploration projects will be independently reviewed and inspected similar to previous years. A new staff member is being recruited and will be nominated as the ARRAC deputy member. Rehabilitation success - Wellington Range project is an example of good site revegetation after 12 months. PVC pipes are capped but once complete will be removed 300mm below ground and rehabilitated. Discussion Mr Ball asked what actually happened at the AGEAS conference. Mr Ewington advised that a geologist had provided a presentation containing data from exploration activities in the Wellington Range area at the conference and had stated that mineralisation results looked exciting. He noted that the reports in the ABC and other media outlets were incorrect as the presentation was essentially technical in nature and did not contain the level of detail necessary to warrant a statement to the market. Mr Ball asked if the results indicated a significant deposit and Mr Ewington advised the results indicate the presence of high grade uranium in Arnhem Land. Mr Thompson asked what volume of hydrocarbons was released in the spill and Mr Ewington advised about 5 litres. Mr Thompson advised he thought the amount involved was significantly more than that.

8.10 NT DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, ENVIRONMENT, THE ARTS AND SPORT Nothing to report.

8.11 WEST ARNHEM SHIRE COUNCIL Nothing to report.

8.12 URANIUM EQUITIES LTD (Ms Taylor) Ms Taylor provided an update on Uranium Equities Ltd (UEL) exploration activities during the reporting period. Key points are summarised below. UEL operations include the Nabarlek Mining Lease (exploration and rehabilitation), the Headwaters project (exploration) and the West Arnhem Joint venture (exploration – with Cameco Australia Pty Ltd). Nabarlek ML Exploration - during 2011, 47 RC drill holes (avg depth 100m) for 4933m were completed in the Boomerang Prospect and a ground gravity survey (1637 stations, 100m x 50m grid pattern) was conducted. For 2012, planning to use 2011 drilling and gravity results to produce new targets for RC drilling (probably 2000m) and, subject to funding, diamond drilling will target uranium mineralisation at depth beneath the pit. Rehabilitation – all 47 2011 drill holes have been rehabilitated. The demonstration of successful rehabilitation of exploration drill holes enabled UEL to secure a reduction in the exploration bond. The 2011-12 wet season program is continuing with weed management programs however no tree planting is planned due to lack of seedling availability.


Closure Criteria – UEL is focused on developing agreed closure criteria and moving towards closure. The second stage groundwater review is nearing completion and will provide better understanding of groundwater quality trends and the hydrogeological conditions around the Pit. UEL is currently reviewing options and costing for design of appropriate facility for the Radiological Anomalous Area on site. Dr Sean Bellairs has developed a draft discussion document on the Assessment of Vegetation Development at Nabarlek, including Revegetation Closure Criteria (RCC). Initial plans were to conduct the monitoring at Nabarlek commencing Oct 2011 with follow up monitoring in the wet season of 2012. Time restrictions prevented full prior consultation with stakeholders so the monitoring has been postponed until the closure criteria have been agreed. Headwaters project - exploration 2011 - planned drilling didn’t proceed due to late start and early onset of wet season. 2012- RC drilling planned in southern part of tenement. Further field reconnaissance planned to ground check additional identified targets. Discussion Mr Tayler asked if the proposed drill holes around the Pit at Nabarlek will be offset or vertical. Ms Taylor advised she expected drill holes will be inclined rather than on top of the Pit. Mr Tayler agreed offset drilling was more appropriate given the Pit has been backfilled with tailings.

9 Other Business Prof Webb commended members and presenters on the quality of their reports and thanked the Secretariat for meeting arrangements.

10 Next meeting Following discussion, it was agreed the next meeting of ARRAC would be held in September in Jabiru. The meeting was closed at 1.00pm. Mr Scott Parker ARRAC Secretary 08 89201122


ARRAC37 – Actions No. Action Responsibility ARRAC37-1 Mr Waggitt to advise whether DoR is looking at using micro-purging

techniques as part of ground water quality check monitoring Mr Waggitt

ARRAC37-2 Mr Simms to provide Mr Robinson with copy of the Ranger Radiation Monitoring Plan.

Mr Simms

ARRAC37-3 Mr Robinson to provide an update to next ARRAC meeting on the status of NT legislative amendments associated with the National Dose Register.

Mr Robinson

alligator rivers region advisory committee meeting 37 › system › files › pages ›...

Documents