sources:2 more hurdles, eoy & wave of protests, page-32

Slasher’s comment is spot on, ‘offshore’ will replace ‘country of origin’ concerning disposal of waste, IMO.
Why the hell would anyone, even the opposition, in Malaysia care where it was taken as long as it left Malaysia? Anyone there with the authority to dictate direction to a ship’s captain once he exits Malaysian waters? Ridiculous.

“International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohmed said adequate research had been done to ensure the Lynas plant was not a threat to public safety.

‘The PSC has recommended that waste generated be disposed of at a location outside the country. We expect that the AELB will take heed of this and make it a condition for the granting of a TOL,’ he said in a statement.”

If Lynas agrees, it may satisfy most Malaysians and spell the end of any significant LAMP opposition, not only to the TOL but to permanent operation.

There may be very little residue classified as waste once it is adequately processed. There may be some to ship away but perhaps no more than a token amount. But the comfort and good will engendered by committing to take it offshore would be fantastic, especially playing well with voters.

We’ll see how Lynas handles this but I tend to agree with alkefguy, I doubt if it will present a big problem.VLLW (very low level waste) is disposed off in clay lined landfills all over the world. View VLLW disposal sites on the IAEA website.
If Lynas agrees to ship waste offshore, (even if they ultimately have none to ship) it could be a real game changer in the PR campaign. A tremendous positive, I believe.

Also, Lynas plans to reduce the VLLW to EW (exempt waste) which has no regulatory control according to the IAEA Safety Standards defined in their pub Classification of Radioactive Waste, available on their website. EW can be shipped anywhere.