The Australian government is taking an important step as part of Australia’s acquisition of conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines. Public consultation has opened on the regulatory framework that will underpin Australia’s Naval Nuclear Power Safety Regulator. This is another milestone occurring under the AUKUS partnership, a core pillar of the Albanese Government’s national security policy, creating more than 20,000 direct jobs over the next 30 years.
This consultation allows for the development of a framework that will ensure the highest standards of nuclear safety and radiological protection are applied across the nuclear-powered submarine program. The consultation period will run from 2 July to 30 July 2025, with key stakeholders and the Australian public invited to provide input.
The draft regulations focus on licensing the facility and material activities necessary to support work associated with the current stage of Australia’s nuclear-powered submarine program. Regulations for submarine-specific activities will be developed at a later stage. The new Regulator and supporting regulations will build upon Australia’s strong nuclear stewardship credentials, while drawing on the experience of our AUKUS partners to deliver international best practice in nuclear safety.
The Regulator will operate within a national regulatory system that supports the safety of people, the public and the environment, and will be established on 1 November 2025. That system includes Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), the Commonwealth’s existing radiation protection and nuclear safety regulator, and the Australian Safeguards and Non-proliferation Office (ASNO), who regulate nuclear safeguards and nuclear security, as well as the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW), Comcare, the Defence Seaworthiness Regulator, and appropriate state and territory government regulatory organisations who have broader safety and environmental protection roles.
Information about how to view the regulations and submit feedback is available at https://defence.gov.au/annpsr-consultation.
Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said: “The Albanese Government is committed to the highest standards of nuclear safety and stewardship, as we continue to progress the AUKUS pathway at pace. This important period of public consultation will help inform the first Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Regulations. These regulations are an important part of our approach to building a fit-for-purpose legislative and regulatory framework for Australia’s future conventionally armed, nuclear‑powered submarines.”
For Editorial Inquiries Contact:
Editor Kym Bergmann at kym.bergmann@venturamedia.net
For Advertising Inquiries Contact:
Group Sales Director Simon Hadfield at simon.hadfield@venturamedia.net
Why do I get the feeling that Albanese and Marles are looking for a way out of AUKUS that doesn’t leave them with egg on faces. Antagonising tRump so he’ll cancel it, Opening up a debate ( call it hat you will but thats what it is ) so Public opinion will demand it be canceled. I personally don’t have a problem with nuclear boats , just buying second hand Boats that are to big for us to Crew….
I don’t get that feeling – on the contrary it looks like they will continue to throw vast amounts of money at AUKUS.
Mr Bergman, It was a stupid program to begin with but who really knows what is going on. I often wonder if the Government Departments Actually consult their Ministers . I base my assumption on two things . The First is that an Albanese Government was never going to be favourable to Defence in General as his rhetoric has always been one of Diplomacy Of confrontation. The second is he will do what ever it takes to placate China, because of Australia’s dependence on Trade. I also think that it is Marles who is the driving force behind AUKUS because of his , Save the Alliance, what ever the cost attitude, it’s also why I think he is Albanese’s Deputy, keeping your friends close and your enemies closer idea. I look forward to more of your reporting.
I think the real concern is not nuclear submarines or their implementation but the gap in capacity between the Collins class retirement and the introduction of the aukus subs.. what’s needed is an immediate off the shelf stop gap built by either German industry or Japan… both contract on Australian naval design and both are defence partners .. an off the shelf sub of conventional power to allow coverage Till the nuclear subs come on line is what’s needed fast to implement from conception to delivery …
I think consulting the Australian people is a great idea.
I don’t remember ever being consulted on pine gap, the Darwin bases Exmouth or Perth submarine base which they get rent free.
The plan is straight out of the neocons playbook .
Let’s ring fence china + put some subs down in Australia.
We might have to give the Aussies a sub or 2 but let’s get the Aussies to pay for it .
Keating was right we don’t need nuclear attack subs to piss off china when we can’t even defend ourselves with conventional arms.
Should get diesel, electric subs and production of our own drones for land,sea,air made here in Australia.
PLEASE GET SOMETHING NOW AND NOT IN TWENTY YEARS THE TIMEFRAME IS DEAD SET STUPID …………. ………..MMMM
Maybe it works the other way..They may want an out from the disastrous Green Energy fiasco and hope the contradiction of allowing Nuclear subs yet maintaining an embargo on Nuclear Energy will result in them turning the opinions of the rusted on Peter Garret idiot fanboys.
As it is we are clearly led by idiots and hippocrites…
Diesel, electric subs and production line in Australia for thousands of drones.
Diesel, electric subsand production of drones in oz.
AUKUS is a colossally expensive and monumentally stupid policy that paradoxically makes us less, not more, secure as a nation, by tying us even further to a chaotic and increasingly dysfunctional USA, a country constantly at war. Their next target is China, a country that has never been a military threat to Australia, and is the source of our national wealth. We’d be much better off pursuing an independent and neutral foreign policy.
Well Morrison cancelled the French deal ,and now the American deal is sinking,and how embarrassing it should be for Albo to go cap in hand to the French asking for a new deal ,maybe were better off going to the Ukraines ,and doing a joint deal on how to build under water drones ,saving a lot of Australian lives and dollars
Small and plenty = drones! More bang for our Aussie dollar.
Drones for the land, sea (surface and sub surface) and air.
Strategy proven by Ukraine to be effective and cheap.
My thought is that the Australian people should have been asked if they wanted AUKUS in the first place, as that’s who is paying afterall. Secondly, I’ve never thought Nuclear Submarines were a good idea for Australia and lastly, in recent years, I’ve come to think that there was something underhanded and undisclosed in the AUKUS arrangement/deal.
Unfortunately, this government – just like the Coalition – is totally wedded to secrecy, especially when it comes to Defence projects. We probably know more about what is going on in the North Korean military than in our own.
Selling arm is a big part of the American economy. They cause wars and will eventually go to war with China and we will be China’s first target. Lets get out of this costly deal
Crazy waste of money on a few subs. How are they going to cover AUSTRALIA’s massive coastline? Instead hire a bunch of 15 year old kids, sitting safely in their lounge rooms in their bedrooms, and give them a bunch of drones that will destroy whatever you want them to. Look at what the drones are doing in Ukraine Russia!!!
Why does Australia need nuclear subs when our “close ally and friend” has 24 up and running and intends to build another 42.
We should leave nuclear boats to the USA and spend the money on something that we can provide like more surface ships, more planes, and a fully equipped and manned Mechanised Division.
Despite the review I am pretty sure the US will continue support AUKUS. I don’t think Australia will change its position either. Having watched the progress of drone technology only over the last 10 years or so I find myself wondering whether manned anything will be relevant going into the 2030s and 40s.
I believe the US and UK will continue to support AUKUS while successive Australian governments transfer billions of dollars to their submarine industry bases – with no accountability and no refund.
I think AUKUS is a great idea, but I also think that we need a stop gap for between the Collins class retirement and, the incoming AUKUS subs. To those thinking we should have a vast fleet of sea drones, it’s all about force projection and force denial. That is a trio of Australian nuclear subs can leave fleet base west and or east and, be on station at the choke points, thousands of kms from Australian shores long before they get to within reach of Australia. The nuclear subs can travel underwater at up 30 knots plus 24/7 and be on station in days not weeks as a conventional sub would take. Drones have a purpose but force projection and force denial, is not it. The stop gap conventional subs would be ideal for littoral duties.