Dear Sir

Setting the record straight on Necsa propaganda – Vaalputs, radiation & transparency

We appreciate Kormorant’s role with respect to giving both sides of the nuclear debate, and wish to draw your attention to editorial statements of 22 November on the “healthy balance between facts and suspicion”, in which you stated ELA is “running the risk of compromising credibility” while Necsa “should be granted a fair chance to do the necessary”.

The full extent of facts we provide to back our claims aren’t often printed so Necsa’s comments can be carried. Of concern however, in your 6 December issue, are Necsa’s seriously inaccurate claims of “20 years of safe nuke waste disposal” and, on pg 12 the editorialised comment that validates an essential “revival” of nuclear energy – both without a single comment for a “healthy balance” on the issue.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the article is your internet search overlooked reams of scientific reports and other respected articles that do not come to the conclusion that “waste is probably the best argument for going nuclear” or that it is always “managed safely and without harm” – quite the reverse is true. This article dangerously minimizes the well-documented truth and reality of the situation in SA and the world over.

The nuclear industry has existed for 50/60 years only, with much of its ills surfacing only years after it was too late. People in the industry are often driven by greed or scientific zeal and care little for communities or their environment – Necsa’s sarcastic responses to real concerns raised in the Environmental Impact Assessment documents are a clear example of this. It is by nature a secretive industry and largely mystified by scientific jargon (what, for example, pleases Mr Adam so about Vaalputs’ ISO 9001:2000 accreditation as you reported?)

A balanced representation of up to date research on the industry is important so that people are able to withstand the misleading arguments of the nuclear industry and its supporters. Ordinary people are the ones who will get cancer and suffer birth defects for generations to come, while nuclear waste lies around for thousands of years after the industry’s current players and polluters are long buried.

The facts are:

• Nuclear energy is bad economics and the taxpayer pays.
• Renewable sustainable energy IS a real option and will not create a pollution monster.
• Nuclear waste lasts thousands of years – how long will repositories last considering some have already shown problems that are still being researched by experts?
o In 1996 Special Assignment on TV-3 exposed ground contamination from a leaking drum at Necsa’s Vaalputs repository. This was also reported by the Uranium Institute Information Service, but only in 1997.
o The Radiation Hill repository at Pelindaba was found with serious leakages during the 90s – reported and quickly forgotten.
o We’ve uncovered at least one official report of leakage at Pelindaba’s Safari 1 reactor which saw it shut down for 6 months – but no public statements or information on this or any other disasters.
• Global warming and climate change are no justifiers for nuclear energy while alternative energy sources such as solar, amongst many others, are feasible, available and economically more viable.
• Nuclear radiation kills! No dose is a safe dose!! Facts are well-documented and this message is amplified over and over again by respected researchers. The only people who say that a safe dose exists are those who profit from saying that. The “safe” dose measured by the industry has dropped every few years, until the current “safe” dose is a small fraction of the original “safe” dose. The trend is clear.
• Earthlife’s medical study found serious illnesses exist among at least 18% of all ex-Necsa workers and as Necsa squabbles over its findings, the Health Gap Network asserts that the full extent of illnesses will only become apparent over the next 20 years.
• In addition, Dr Coombs’ report indicates “a much larger group of ex-employees with radiation related illness” exist but “these employees are covered by pensions and medical insurance and are reluctant to come forward to join the study”.
In the only recent Necsa annual report (2004) Dr Coombs managed to find on the internet and could report on, 15 incidents of exposure were reported, some way over international maximum limits, with a reference to a worker who received 707.60% overdose of radiation the previous year!
Internationally, a single incident in a 2 year period is considered serious.
• Safety standards incorporated into the conditions of authorisation under the National Nuclear Regulatory Act 47 of 1999 were drafted for comment on 13 June 2003, but it appears they’ve never been finalised. Amongst others, these identify control procedures; control record systems, exposure limits, set out health surveillance requirements and radiation dose monitoring.
• Pelindaba, Vaalputs and Koeberg civilian communities have yet to be monitored.
• Necsa is a public company wholly owned by the State.

Necsa’s claims on the health study in the Kormorant of 22 November are untrue.

The ill workers are represented by Mr Sepepe and want Necsa to negotiate with their leaders first and agree on how those people will be assisted. It is an undemocratic intrusion for Necsa officials to visit their houses at night.

Necsa claims 119 workers were not found in the system, this was not communicated with Earthlife as we knew of only 48 people they did not recognise. We are aware that numerous people on our list were subcontracted by Necsa. They nevertheless were paid by Necsa and by law are Necsa’s responsibilities.

Johannes Monare is one of the people Necsa claims to be “unknown”, but why then was he recruited by them for a medical with Necsa’s doctor a week ago? Solomon Maruleng is another whom Necsa officials have searched for despite their claim to ELA that he is on their “unknown” list. One of the workers, Mr MD Makamo, who did visit the Necsa doctor, was referred to Kalafong for his own account, this despite a diagnosis of multiple occupational related diseases.

Since the start of our medical study, requests for medical files were submitted to Necsa by South African History Archive (SAHA) in terms of the Promotion of Access for Information Act (PAIA). Since last year, some 150 medical records remain outstanding from Necsa. In his study, Dr Coombs also reports “major gaps”, “insufficient information”, deaths or referrals to hospitals with inadequate or no records.

Among the files received, as with ex-worker J. Ramotshidisi, Necsa sent 3 medical records for the same person! This means Necsa record-keeping is still poor although over R1m was set aside in March last year to fix the problem.

Necsa is making a big mistake by only looking up the people already covered by our report. If they intend disputing the results of the respected and qualified Occupational Health expert Dr Coombs, they’re shooting themselves in the foot.

Necsa CEO Rob Adam canceled a scheduled meeting in October with ELA and Dr Murray Coombs to discuss the health study, and instead Necsa opted to try to discredit ELA and our health study via the media. Despite this, Mr Adam has made repeated calls to Dr Coombs for a private meeting. We’ve approached Mr Adam again, and he has finally agreed to set another meeting.

For the record, it is in the interests of a largely ill-informed public that we keep social and environmental justice issues transparent and in the public domain. Unpublicised reports or meetings behind closed doors – especially where the mighty nuclear industry with its huge resources for brainwashing the public is concerned – could be fatal.

For more information contact