Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB) today clarified that a temporary operating licence for the Lynas Advance Materials Plant (Lamp) has not been issued.

AELB director-general Raja Abdul Aziz Raja Adnan said the although the board and approved of the TOL on January 30, it would only be issued once Lamp complies with several conditions.

This includes a RM1.2 million licencing fee and acceptance of the government’s deicison to appoint a third-party to monitor the project throughout the two-year TOL period.

“They also need to give an letter of undertaking stating that in the worst case scenario if they fail to recycle the waste, they will return it to the country of origin,” he said.

Upon issuance of the TOL, Lamp has 10-months to submit its proposal for a permanent disposal facility (PDF), failing which the licence would be revoked.

He stressed that Lynas will only be allowed to import raw materials once they receive the TOL.

“They need to apply for a permit to import the raw material even after they received the TOL. So right now, they are not importing. By our assessment they are not ready for operation,” he told reporters at a briefing in Dengkil today.

Mystery safety engineer

When asked what AELB will do if Australia, the country of source, refuse to accept the refinery’s waste, Raja Aziz provided a non-committal response.

“It’s up to the company to do the best decision. We do not require an undertaking from another country when the contract is made with a company,” he said.

Licencing division head Hasmadi Hassan said Lynas will need to observe different set of expandable conditions at different stage of their operations.

“This is a dynamic document. Later when they apply for permit (to process rare earth) and disposal facility, there are different conditions,”

“At this point of time they fulfilled our condition, that’s why we approved the TOL,” he said.

On the New York Times ’ report that raised concerns on the structural defects of Lamp, Raja Abdul Aziz said he was convinced with Lynas’ explanations.

“They had shown proof that the facility was certified by a registered engineer, so under Malaysia law, it’s taken as a proof,” he said.

He was however reluctant to name the engineer when pressed to do so.

No need for detailed EIA

Meanwhile, Department of Environment (DOE) said it has completed a preliminary environmental assessment report (EIA) on Lamp in 2008, so a detailed EIA is deemed unnecessary.

DOE principal assistant director Azuri Azizah Saedon said the only difference between detailed EIA and a preliminary EIA is that the former requires the identification of terms of reference before the report is prepared and an ad hoc committee to evaluate the reports.

“But everything that we want had been addressed in the EIA, and it was exhibited to public between May 30 and June 30 last year,” she said.

She claimed Kuantan MP Fuziah Salleh, among one of the biggest critic of the Lamp, did not make any complaint after seeing the report last year.

AELB also said a briefing session will be held every week to remove public suspicion on the matter.