MINUTES OF KOEBERG PUBLIC SAFETY INFORMATION FORUM HELD AT THE KOEBERG VISITORS CENTRE
ON 10 March 2011
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Whelmi van Schalkwyk
ATTENDEES
S La Grange
N Lee
C Mentor
J Mentor
M Meyrick
D Olifant
Mr and Ms Williamson
T Wilson
S Wilson
B Rass
L Alias
L Manguwo
P Lategan
W van Schalkwyk
Mayhew
U Storah
W T Henstock
J A Slabbert
P Siyo
OFFICIALS
D Joshua
K Engel
K Featherstone
C de Villiers
J Dyabaza
G Pillay
F Schlaphoff
L Phidza
J Dolby
A C van Schalkwyk
N Ntamnani
T van Schalkwyk
M Ramerafe (NNR)
APOLOGIES
S van Rensburg
D La Grange
Ms Kim Kline
- WELCOME AND APOLOGIES
The Chairperson, Ms Whelmi van Schalkwyk welcomed everyone and declared the meeting opened at 07h02. The chairperson tendered apologies from Mr S van Rensburg and Mr D La Grange.
The Chairperson also offered congratulations on Ms Carin de Villiers recent appointment as Parliamentary Manager.
Mr Greg Pillay from the City announced that it will be Mr Frans Schlaphof’s last attendance at the PSIF as he officially retires as an employee of the City of Cape Town at the end of March after serving the City for 29 Years.
Ms van Schalkwyk wished him well on behalf of the PSIF members.
- MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
A few corrections were noted on the minutes;
Mr Mayhew noted that he was not marked as attending even though he’s been faithfully attending the last three PSIF meetings.
Mr Olifant mentioned that his name was incorrectly captured on the minutes, should be Olifant and not Oliphant.
Mr Williamson mentioned that his name was incorrectly captured on page 2 under Matters arising; it should be Williamson and not Williams.
Mr Olifant also mentioned that even though he asked quite a few questions, no reference was made to him having asked the questions in the questions and answers section.
The chairperson kindly requested that when a member poses a question that he ensures he/she mentions their name for the record.
The minutes with changes were proposed by Ms S La Grange and seconded by Mr T Wilson.
- MATTERS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES
Landfill site issue as per page 2 of the minutes:
Question by Mr Olifant
The Municipality re-advertised for the landfill site and nowhere in the court papers Eskom’s involvement is noted. I appeal to Eskom as an organisation with muscle to get involved in the process as the same consultants are involved in the process which means the study will yield the same results. It seems as if Eskom is playing ‘duck and dive’. I feel that the statement by Mr Marc Maree on page 2 is unacceptable (… 5km radius is governed by the Atlantis Guide Plan and Eskom is not obligated to react against any unlawful acts). Quite a number of companies in Atlantis had to close down as a result of the economic slump and he fears that many more companies will have to close down as a result of the landfill site;he therefore made a strong appeal on Eskom power players to get involved.
Question by Mr Nick Lee
Why is Eskom not getting involved in the process?
Reply (Mr K Featherstone - Koeberg General Manager, Nuclear Support):
Eskom has to abide by legislation and the law which we expect the City to adhere to. He stated that we need to respect the process, We did object to developments within the 5km. We can only object to impacts that is within our jurisdiction and mandate. If it doesn’t affect Koeberg we cannot object as an organisation as we will have no leg to stand on.
Comment by Mr Nick Lee
It will not be healthy for people living in Duynefontein, and quite a number of Koeberg employees live in Duynefontein which gives Koeberg a leg to stand on.
Answer by Mr Featherstone
We have emphasised that the studies should show no impact to the environment not just no impact to Koeberg. The studies will have to prove that it will be safe and that there will be no negative impact. We need to respect and adhere to the process as we cannot object on an emotional basis.
Question (Chairperson)
Did Eskomobject to development in the 5km zone?
Reply (Mr K Featherstone)
At the moment there’s nothing to object. They are in a process to re-do the studies so there is nothing to object at present.
Question by Mr Clarence Mentor
I object strongly to the reasoning of emotion. There is a law preventing development in the 5km zone. The PSIF as a statutory structure other than Eskom, we can object on two grounds; Firstly the roads cannot handle this additional traffic as a result of this (new) development and secondly the country is concerned about safety in the 5 and 16km zone, and as a statutory body we need to table our concerns at the EIA.
Answer by Mr Featherstone
This will also be our objections if the development affects the 5 – 16km zone. There are ways of developing in the 16km area (not 5km). Within the 5km zone we’ll be sure to object. If there is anything the members would like Eskom to do which is within the realm of our jurisdiction to object, let me know. As this forum we do not have any power or authority but we can object as individuals.
Question by Mr Olifant
When we went to court, we went with emotion and with facts. We’ve been writing to Eskom since the court case started. Nobody ever replied. We had a meeting in Melkbosstrand and Atlantis where the mayor also attended. It’s been coming on now for the ninth year. If this body have no power, then what do we do if something happens in Atlantis? This will be another court case If Mr Bredell appointed the same people. We ask you as Eskom to come to the party or tell us who we can write to?
Comment by Mr Clarence Mentor
I would like to take the matter of this body not having any statutory powers further as there are policy and legislation governing it.
Comment by Mr Williamson
Mr Bredell is handling the court case and he has appointed the same consultants. Melkbosstrand and environs strongly opposed this and they have challenged the minister on the basis that they cannot expect the same initial company to do the study and expect different outcomes. Eskom did not at all feature in this process.
Question by Ms Barbara Rass
According to the minutes, Mr Marc Maree stated that he will make the documentation by Judge Griesel available to the members (see page 2 bottom section – question by Ms Rass). Why is this document not available as promised?
Answer by Mr Lewis Phidza:
Mr Marc Maree was overseas for the most part of the year and thus unavailable. We will ensure that the documentation be made available at the next meeting.
Ms Rass expressed her unhappiness at this.
Response by Ms Carin de Villiers
Ms Carin de Villiers stated that we will make the document available as soon as we have it and not wait until the next meeting.
NOTE: Mr Jongi Dyabaza handed out copies to the members of the document by Judge Griesel before the end of the PSIF meeting.
- PROGRESS REPORT ON THE PSIF CHAIRPERSON ANDDEPUTY FOR THE NEW TERM
Mr Mothusi Ramerafe ( from the NNR gave feedback on the above.
Mr Ramerafe informed the members that since Gino Moonsamy was not able to attend the meeting, he has been tasked to give an update on the progress of the campaign to appoint the new Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson. He informed the members that the closing date for entries have passed and that the shortlist have been completed and that a decision will be reached soon.
Question by Mr Olifant
The PSIF members were asked to avail themselves and apply for the positions advertisedhowever the ad states that experienced in Koeberg’s Emergency Procedure required. This puts many members at a disadvantage if they don’t have the knowledge, how do they qualify? How do we get empowered if we don’t have the knowledge?
Comment by chairperson
Running the PSIF don’t require knowledge on Eskom’s Emergency Procedure or experience in Eskom’s safety processes, the chairperson only needs to know how to run a meeting.
Comment by Mr Dries van Schalkwyk
Mr van Schalkwyk suggested that Mr Mothusi take the comments back to the NNR and provide feedback at the next meeting.
Comment by Mr Clarence Mentor
Mr Mentor mentioned that the cut off date for the advert was already reached and that the expectation was that Mr Mothusi come prepared to the meeting to provide more comprehensive feedback and answer questions.
Comment by Mr Kevin Engel
Mr Engel suggested that Mr Mothosi speak to the NNR to reconsider the advert and relook the requirements as it needs to be more practical and realistic.
Comment by Ms Barbara Rass
Ms Rass echoed Mr Engel’s sentiments. The NNR needs to come back and provide more clarity at the next meeting.
Comment by Ms Julie Mentor
The Advert in the Weskus Nuus does not mention that any experience is needed for the Chairperson and Deputy Chair position.
Comment by Mr Clarence Mentor
The NNR was supposed to report back at this Forum. They have sent only a messenger who shared no worthwhile information which is very unprofessional.
Comment by Mr Meyrick
The NNR is there to assist the public and take the utility in question to task
Comment by Ms Carin de Villiers:
According to legislation we need to have a chair and deputy chair at the first meeting of the new year as our current chair, Ms Whelmi van Schalkwk’s term of office is over. Is the NNR sanctioning the current chair to continue until such time that the new chair and deputy chair is appointed?
Reply by chairperson, Ms Whelmi van Schalkwyk
Ms van Schalkwyk, current chair, corrected Carin that her appointment is for two years and her two years are not over yet.
- PRESENTATION BY MR MOTHUSI RAMERAFE – SNR SPECIALIST: EMERGENCY PLANNING (NNR) – NNR EXERCISE FINDINGS:
Question:
A concern was raised by one of the members that the only means of communication was manual in reference to the exercise findings presentation; this is a huge concern in an emergency.
Answer:
Mr Kevin Engel responded by stating that there are many layers of communication. If one system fails e.g electronic, we can fall back onto another system e.g fax system, and if the fax system fails, we can revert to telephonic communication.
Comment by Mr Lewis Phidza (Stakeholder Manager)
Mr Phidza suggested that the members of the public to take a tour of the ECC and a presentation on how it works. He will arrange it.
Question by Mr Meyrick
If a problem occurs here and the power goes down, how do we communicate?
Answer:
Mr Engel responded that there is a back-up of our other power stations and the back-up of our emergency diesel generators. If we evacuate police will go from door to door to communicate and ensure the safety of residents.
Question by Ms Julie Mentor
Two to three years ago, the NNR did a presentation on their findings from an exercise. There were quite a number of contentious issues raised and I note many of the same problems on this findings. What was done about it?
Comment by Mr Clarence Mentor
Mr Mentor thanked the presenter for his honest reporting and pointed out the failure of Eskom to close out actions as the same issues keeps coming up.
Response by Mr Mothusi
The aim of the exercise in not to pin point all the problems with Eskom but to highlight the weaknesses in the EP plan that needs to be addressed.
Question by Mr Williamson
I am concerned about the word denying in the sentence?
Answer
It is not so much about denying but that the potential of information not being available to the public if SABC is not informed.
The way forward:
- Formal report
- Corrective Action Programme (CAP) Implementation
- Verification of CAP
Comment by Mr Clarence Mentor:
When the alarms went off for the siren test only one person was aware of what it meant and the process to follow. Is there a possibility that we can do a simulation of EP preparedness with a part of the Atlantis area so we can generate a greater awareness of how the plan works.
Comment by Mr Olifant
9/11 and Chernobyl could happen here and hence Eskom should do a demonstration with lay people in Atlantis. The media in this country is not effective so Eskom should get their media to report on the plan.
Question by Mr Phinda Siyo (Du Noon)
A few years ago quite a number of calendars were just dumped at the school. Will Du Noon be included in the EP awareness drive. Will the information be simplified?
Comment by Mr Williamson
I would like to comment on the 2 March 2011 siren test. I have two comments;
My first comments is about the announcements, there were two voices doing the announcements, the women’s voice were very clear and very audible, the other was a man’s voice that was not clear or audible and one couldn’t make out a word that was said. The choice of voice is very important in making announcements and one needs to ensure that the voice is clear and audible especially in making announcements over the sirens. My second comment is about the siren leaflet – in the leaflet the refer to residents listening to KFM and Goodhope FM, in Melkbosstrand where I live we don’t get FM only AM in Duynefontein there is clear FM coverage however in the centre of Melkbosstrand there’s no FM coverage. Did you consider using AM to broadcast announcements?
Question by Mr Clarence Mentor
Why don’t you consider advertising on CapeTalk and other community radio stations?
Answer by Chairperson
Your suggestions have been noted, we will take it away and investigate the possibility
Answer by Ms Carin de Villiers
The press release about the siren test is sent to all radio stations
Question by Mr Clarence Mentor
When do you expect Eskom to send corrective actions? Will they be able to report back on this at the next meeting?
Answer by Mr Mothusi
Progress report can be made available at the next meeting.
Question by Chairperson, Ms Whelmi van Schalkwyk
I still need feedback on the back up plan with regards to residents who are not able to take the potassium iodate tablets? What is the alternative?
Answer by Ms Carin de Villiers
The issue was raised at EPC and there is no alternative. Doctors overseas have been asked to canvass for an alternative. Just to assure residents that the issue has been raised and is being attended to.
Comment by Mr Tug Wilson
I would suggest that at the next meeting we have a mandated person from the NNR to address the members on the scope, purpose, role and objective of the PSIF.
6. FEEDBACK ON THE OUTAGE AND THE SHORT DURATION OUTAGE (SDO) BY MR KEVIN ENGEL – KOEBERG ACTING POWER STATION MANAGER
Question by Mr Clarence Mentor
With regards to the 90% local content used during Outages, can we reduce the 10% which is not local content to a minimum of 1% or nothing for the next outage?
Answer
When I was presenting in the last meeting on Outage 118, I showed you a slide on labour which indicated an 80% reliance on local content and a 20% reliance on foreign content/labour. During this outage we’ve moved to 90% local content and 10% foreign content. This confirms Koeberg’s strategy and commitment to rely more on local labour than foreign labour, however there are still areas where we don’t have all the economies of skills and scales which ‘forces’ us to rely on the foreign market of which is the norm in the nuclear industry.
Question by Mr Mentor
Will Eskom have enough capacity to supply SA if Unit 2 is on a 50 day outage?
Answer
Yes. We will have support from our power stations up country.
Question by Mr Mentor
What is the exact date of shutdown?
Answer
The Shutdown is scheduled for 14 March. Although we will be starting to power down on Sunday 13 March already.
Question by Mr Nick Lee
What it the lifespan of Koeberg?
Answer
Koeberg’s design life is 40 years as it stands right now. The plan is to extend Koeberg’s life to 60 years. In order to do this we need to do safety studies and we need permission from the National Nuclear Regulator. We have huge programmes in place to replace some of the equipment and upgrade the plant. Billions have been invested to extend the lifespan of Koeberg.
7.KOEBERG PLANT QUARTERLY OVERVIEWPRESENTATION BY MR KEVIN ENGEL
Question from Mr Mayhew
Who pays for the damaged fuel as it was not Eskom’s fault?
Answer
It was communicated via our CE, Mr Brian Dames, to Areva and Alstom Senior Management that where the repair or damage is their fault, they need to take responsibility for the payment.
Question by Mr Mentor
How did you safeguard employees during the contamination incident?
Answer
Our main objective at Koeberg is to safeguard our employees and the public. We have been commended by WANO in our previous incident where we had to shutdown the reactor, on how we well we havesafeguarded our employees and the public. During the contamination incident and the fuel leak repair, our behaviour demonstrated that we were more driven by the safety of our employees and the public than by production.
Question by Mr Mentor
Why was the public not informed of the contamination incident?