 |
|
|
|
|
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12 NOON FRIDAY 21ST MAY 2004. Cape Town at risk Does the current operating practice at Koeberg pose a safety risk to the citizens of Cape Town? "Despite ongoing criticism of the operations record of the Koeberg plant by the NNR, and in the face of open violations of operating procedure, no penalties or shut down of Koeberg has ever been ordered based on safety concerns." According to an Earthlife Africa research report released today, all is not well at Koeberg. It seems Koeberg will never cease to be on news or public spotlight?… Koeberg has been in the news since its construction and operation in 1984. Controversy has always circled the reactor since its inception and commissioning, even though Eskom claims that Koeberg has one of the safest operating records in the world. The report entitled "Safety Issues in the South African Nuclear Industry: Koeberg and the PBMR" raises serious issues:- ?• "In 1997, Three Eskom employees received ?“unplanned?” doses of radiation during a routine shut-down at Koeberg, after contravening safety procedures. They enter a high radiation area within the reactor containment building without protective clothing and receive doses of 50, 90 and 105 mSv respectively. ?• In September 1998 The Council for Nuclear Safety monitors the investigation of faults which caused the shutdown of both turbines at Koeberg. This is the first time in the history of the Western Cape power station that both units have been shut down simultaneously. Brian Statham, national energy manager for Eskom, says that a fault in Koeberg-2 occurred during routine testing when an ?“unexpected vibration?” was found ?• In 2000, The International Council for Radiological Protection (ICRP) recommends the limitation of annual occupational exposure for a worker at a nuclear power station to 20 mSv. (38) It reports that during 1999, 1 756 people were occupationally exposed to levels that exceeded this guideline, at Koeberg ?• In late November 2001, Officials at the Koeberg nuclear plant admit ageing equipment caused a malfunction which blacked out most of the Western Cape six weeks prior. This was despite an initial denial that Koeberg was the cause for the blackout at all. ?• In June 2002 Business Day investigations highlight the fact that Eskom has 18 years worth of accumulated dehydrated sewage sludge that is radioactive. A plan to dump the radioactive sludge along with other at the Vissershok hazardous waste site near Table View was vetoed by a Health Department radiation protection official, who noticed that the sludge was almost eight times more radioactive than the minimum standard set by the National Nuclear Regulator for waste destined for a landfill site There is no satisfactory explanation from either Eskom or the NNR as to the history of safety breaches and incidents, and why Eskom has not been ordered to cease its operations until compliance is achieved. Earthlife Africa is calling for: - A commission of inquiry into ageing equipment risks; and, - A full independent commission of inquiry into health and safety risks and issues being faced by the workforce at nuclear facilities, and the communities surrounding nuclear facilities. Contact: Sibusiso Mimi - 072 494 1395 The full report is available on our website: Please note that the report findings will be publicly discussed for the first time on Bush Radio at 12h10 on Friday 21st May 2004. Notes for journalists: exposure limits - Europe vs South Africa - SA allows 50 times higher! European directive May 2000 Limits exposure to 20mSv annually over 5 years; maximum annual dose for public 1 mSv South Africa (Cape Times, 14 August, 1998) 50 mSv annually ?? |
|
|
||||||||||||||||