The US Navy Virginia Class submarine USS Mississippi at HMAS Stirling in WA. Photo: ADF.
NSW Government documents have revealed that Port Kembla is the preferred location for an east coast nuclear submarine base for the Royal Australian Navy.
While no location has formally been announced, the documents prepared by the NSW Cabinet Office and the Premier’s Department in 2022 and 2023 were tabled on 15 May and show Port Kembla as the preferred option for the East Coast Base (ECNB) over Brisbane and Newcastle.
Australia plans to acquire eight nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS construct with the UK and US, with the first of between three and five Virginia-class boats due to be delivered and based at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia from 2032.
Royal Australian Navy Oberon and Collins-class submarines had previously operated from HMAS Platypus in Sydney’s Neutral Bay. But with that site closed in 1999 and subsequently handed over to the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust (SHFT) in 2005, there are currently no dedicated east coast submarine bases.
Not long after AUKUS was announced by then Prime Minister Scott Morrison, the Federal Government also said it would build a new east coast base for the submarine fleet.
In March 2022, it said that while HMAS Stirling would be the submarines’ primary base, an east coast base would add capacity and capability and provide deployment options for the boats into the Pacific Ocean.
It said plans to establish an east coast submarine base had been underway for several years, long before the option to acquire nuclear-powered boats arose as part of AUKUS.
“Australia faces a difficult and dangerous security environment, and we must continue to invest in growing the capability of our ADF to ensure we keep Australians safe,” Mr Morrison said at the time.
“This new 20-year investment is vital for our strategic capabilities, but it will also provide long-term economic opportunities at both our submarine bases on the east coast and on the west coast.”
It said the three shortlisted locations were selected “following significant work by Defence”. It said 19 potential sites were reviewed before selecting the shortlist, and that the locations were selected on submarine basing criteria, including access to exercise operating areas, proximity to industrial infrastructure, and significant population centres to support personnel and recruitment.
“A new Navy base on the east coast will also have significant advantages for training, personnel and for Australia’s defence industry,” then Defence minister Peter Dutton said.
The NSW Government documents said Port Kembla’s outer harbour, “presents a viable alternative as a naval base, with the capacity to accommodate increased berthing, a dry dock, and a submarine facility”.
But the documents also identified the likelihood of community opposition to the basing.
“Residents are likely to perceive the east coast nuclear base as a source of risk due to there being nuclear reactors on board the submarines and the military base being a potential military target,” they read.
“The ECNB will harbour submarines that have nuclear reactors fuelled by highly enriched uranium on board. In the event of a military conflict, the ECNB could be a target for Australian military adversaries.
“For these reasons, NSW residents may perceive the ECNB similarly to a nuclear power station as a source of environmental disaster risk.”
Since then, local community and business groups have rallied to oppose the base proposal.
This culminated in more than 40 organisations comprising health, faith, environment, union, creative, social justice and political groups – including three local branches of the Australian Labor Party – signing the Port Kembla Declaration in September 2025, in which they insisted the area should not be the site of a nuclear base because it would endanger the community.
A local labour union said there is broad-based community alarm and dissent over the Port Kembla proposal.
“Port Kembla, as part of Greater Wollongong, was declared a nuclear-free city more than 30 years ago, and its status as a nuclear-free zone was reaffirmed only last year,” a 16 May open letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese from the South Coast Labour Council reads.
“If a nuclear submarine facility was based in Port Kembla Harbour it would require the acquisition and alienation of a massive part of the harbour and the land around it – land which is a valuable and vital asset for our existing manufacturing, steel, land transport and maritime industries whose epicentre is Port Kembla.
“The presence of nuclear attack-class submarines in our Ports would make us a nuclear target and pose an unacceptable risk to the health and safety of hundreds of thousands of people, given potential exposure to hundreds of kilograms of highly enriched uranium.”
Federal Greens Defence spokesman David Shoebridge said the documents show that both the NSW and Federal Governments know the base will be damaging and dangerous for the community.
“It’s no surprise that people don’t want to live next to a bunch of floating nuclear reactors with a big military target on them,” he said.
“We have seen in Perth and Adelaide how governments have run roughshod over the local community and forced AUKUS submarine facilities on them.
“Labor knows that putting a giant US nuclear submarine base in someone’s backyard is not popular, but instead of reversing that dangerous policy, they push on in secret. We now see this taking place in NSW.”
