Personally, reading through the ABC article I can see some bad...

Personally, reading through the ABC article I can see some bad faith statements being made by Paul Vogel as he cherry picked and cites a sensationalist 10 fold increase in waste and thus waste management as one of the contentious issues:

But Dr Vogel said changes to the proposal had also increased the project's emissions and predicted waste.

This included an increase in the amount of waste to be transported back to TNG's mine in Central Australia — from an initial 50,000 tonnes to a revised 500,000 tonnes a year.

"We asked questions about how is that substantial 10-fold increase in waste going to be managed?" Dr Vogel said.

"That was a question they found some offence with."

While in TNG's announcement, TNG acknowledges that requests and raises no specific issues with it (i.e. not "unexpected"):

7.1 Waste Management Additional information on waste management and disposal is required.
Additional information requested as a result of Project updates presented in the Supplement.