Native Title Issues

1. Native Title Issues Adrian Murphy Tenure and Native Title Department of Mines and Petroleum

3. The Native Title Act (NTA) process “Right to Negotiate” (RTN) The applicants for mining leases (and some other applications) must negotiate the grant of the application with any claimant or holder of native title. “expedited procedure” The State of Western Australia considers that the grant of exploration and prospecting licences can occur without negotiating with the native title parties. This position includes applications for the purpose of uranium exploration. The NTA under Section 237 (a)(b)(c) Defines the basis upon which the Tribunal determines if the application of the ‘expedited procedure’ is sustainable i.e. when a future act is not likely to result in:- s.237 (a) “interference with community or social activities” s.237 (b) “interference with significant sites” and s.237 (c) cause “major disturbance to land”

4. Regional Standard Heritage Agreements (RSHA’s)

5. Alternative Heritage Agreements (Uranium) Vary from region to region. Before exploration activity the company will be required to provide: any Radiation Management and Radioactive Waste Management Plan. any DMP Programme of Work; any reports and records relating to radiation levels or risks a plan recording the location, including the depth and total area, of all Uranium Materials buried or returned down drill holes, trenches or pits following rehabilitation During exploration activity the company will agree to traditional owner requests for: a traditional owner uranium monitoring team to be present to monitor and report: when the explorer takes baseline measurements; for one day during the conduct of any Ground Disturbing Activity; when the explorer takes the end measurements. The company is expected to facilitate traditional owner compliance and pay invoiced costs and expenses

6. 2007 Hearing: Native Title Group exploration for uranium means a greater likelihood that the native title party’s community or social activities will be directly interfered with and that there will be major disturbance to land: s 237(a): health issues associated the ingestion of dust contaminated with radioactive material because aspects of traditional way of life, such as cooking in the ground, camping on the ground, allowing children to play in the dirt and consuming animals and plants from the area of the proposed exploration. s 237(c): there are no regulations or guidelines that directly regulate the exploration for uranium and that dust contaminated with radioactive material remains radioactive for a considerable period of time (in excess of 100,000 years)

7. 2007 Hearing: Government Standard conditions Program of Work (‘POW’) by the grantee party, as required under s 63(aa) of the Mining Act. Radiation Management Plan (RMP) is required that addresses: (i) the identification and monitoring of radioactive material, (ii) management to minimize potential radioactive contamination, and (iii) management to minimize human exposure to radioactive material.

8. 2007 Hearing: Company Commitment to: work according to relevant guidelines regarding radioactive substances as defined by authorities; having a trained Radiation Safety Officer (defined by authorities) on site at all times; all employees on site receiving general radiation safety training and that it will maintain a safe working environment for all employees; procedures that ensure there is as little exposure as possible of the workforce and of the public to dust contaminated with radioactive material during exploration; and to return any site of ground disturbance to a condition prescribed by relevant regulatory guidelines for environmental rehabilitation to its original state or so that it poses no radiation threat to the public.

9. 2007 Hearing: NNTT Decision No basis to rebut the normal presumption of regularity (State) No basis to doubt undertakings (Company) No evidence that there will not be compliance with the Government party’s regulatory regime But, the NNTT further noted that… If at the end of exploration the land was left in an un-rehabilitated state and there were radioactive waste products which were not properly attended to then this may well constitute a major disturbance to land in the eyes of the general Australian community. There was simply no evidence that under modern regulatory practices (which were assumed by the Tribunal to be more stringent than those of the past) that such an outcome would occur.

10. What does this all mean? The State places a very high value on radiation protection including the system of inspections and monitoring; Exploration and mining company’s must place the same very high value on compliance in full with all obligations and undertaking; Education programs are important in raising awareness and addressing key concerns of the community generally and native title groups in particular; Preferably these would be developed and presented jointly by the industry, government and non-government organisations such as NTRB’s DMP are offering to consult with WA NTRB’s about issues or concerns that they or their clients have about uranium exploration and mining

11. Questions?