MP SPEAKS In  the latest AELB statement dated Sept 8, director-general Raja Abdul Aziz Raja Adnan reaffirmed that the removal of radioactive waste by Lynas is legally binding and an integral part of conditions attached to the temporary operating licence (TOL) issued on Sept 5.

It is in the interests of the people that this document is made public, considering that many issues have not been clarified.

These issues require a response from the AELB, before the public can be truly confident in it as a regulator.

1. What is the time frame set for Lynas to comply with the conditions imposed? How long after the start of operations does Lynas have to start removing the waste out of the country?

NONE We must remember that in the first year, the rare earths refinery in Gebeng, Pahang, will produce 32,000 tonnes of WLP solid radioactive waste. The volume will double in the second year of operations to 64,000 tonnes.

We must also remind the AELB that the licence issued to Lynas by the Australian Environmental Protection Agency (Ashton-1992) includes a requirement for the waste to be returned to the mine in Mt Weld, as soon as it is produced.

The tanker that carries the ore to the plant is also tasked with carrying back waste to the mine. A maximum of eight days is given in times of bad weather or flood; otherwise it's straight back to the mine.

2. What happens if the waste from Gebeng is not removed and shipped out of the country within the time frame? Is there a penalty clause in the TOL, and what are the details?

3. Since Australia has repeatedly said that it will not accept the radioactive waste from Gebeng, it means there must be a ready buyer for the commercialised radioactive waste. So far we have not seen any letter of intent from any buyer.

If there is no buyer, does it mean that Malaysia will have to store a stockpile of commercialised radioactive items? And instead of radioactive waste, would we have to deal with commercialised radioactive items? Certainly the people need to know if they are being taken for a ride by the conditions of licence.

So far there has just been a three-line letter of undertaking from Lynas indicating its so-called commitment to remove the radioactive waste from Malaysia. There is nothing concrete and legally binding in that letter of undertaking alone.

4. What happens if there's no buyer for the commercialised radioactive waste, and  Lynas - an Australian-owned company - suddenly pack ups and leaves? We cannot then hold it accountable, and the Malaysian government will have to take over the responsibility for the next 14 billion years.

azlan 5. What about a Detailed EIA which is now compulsory for Lynas to undertake? This will require rigorous study of public health issues, the impact of the plant on people, and a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) study. The need for a HIA was among the recommendations of the parliamentary select committee on Lynas.

6. What about other conditions imposed by the IAEA which have not been fulfilled? Has the AELB laid down these as well?

7. The AELB has said that it will closely monitor Lynas on a daily basis - but monitoring what, may I ask, when we do not even know what conditions are attached to the TOL?

Action only under pressure

The AELB must come clean and be transparent. The people deserve no less than to view the licence document as well as to scrutinise the conditions imposed on Lynas.

We have seen how the AELB manipulated the situation by issuing the TOL, even after the Kuantan High Court granted leave for a challenge on Aug 28, thus making a mockery of judicial procedure.

NONE The AELB has shown no integrity and competency in its actions so far. In April last year, Raja Abdul Aziz (left) created an uproar when he stated that the radioactive waste from Gebeng will be so safe that it can be scattered everywhere.

In fact, if left to AELB, Lynas would have gotten away with its initial proposal to keep the radioactive waste on site forever.

The AELB has never imposed any regulations on Lynas based on its own conscience. It has only done so after receiving input and coming under pressure from the public.

Considering the AELB’s lack of competency in handling issues involving Lynas, the public can be forgiven if they are jittery over its decisions that affect public health and the environment.

In fact, why can't we have an authority similar to the Australian EPA regulating such activities, since it is not just radiation that we're concerned with?

The AELB should either buck up or pack up.

FUZIAH SALLEH is PKR parliamentarian for Kuantan and party vice-president.