DOCSLIB.ORG

South African National Report On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
South African National Report On SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL REPORT ON THE COMPLIANCE TO OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE JOINT CONVENTION ON SAFETY OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT AND ON THE SAFETY OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT Third Report September 2014 SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL REPORT ON THE COMPLIANCE TO OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE JOINT CONVENTION ON SAFETY OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT AND ON THE SAFETY OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT Third Report September 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The South African National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) acknowledges the support and cooperation of the South African Department of Energy (DoE), the South African Department of Health (Directorate Radiation Control), the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa), Eskom and the South African Mining Sector in the preparation of this report. CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................................................... ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 1 SECTION A: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 3 A-1. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................. 4 A-2. PURPOSE ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 A-3. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT ....................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION B: POLICIES AND PRACTICES .................................................................................................................... 7 B-1. RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICY FRAMEWORK OF SOUTH AFRICA ....................................... 8 B-2. RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ...................................................................................... 9 B-3. USED FUEL MANAGEMENT POLICY ............................................................................................................. 10 B-4. USED FUEL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ....................................................................................................... 11 B-5. CRITERIA USED TO DEFINE AND CATEGORISE RADIOACTIVE WASTE .......................................................... 11 SECTION C: SCOPE OF APPLICATION ....................................................................................................................... 14 C-1. USED FUEL AND REPROCESSING ................................................................................................................. 15 C-2. THE SAFETY OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................... 15 C-3. SAFETY OF USED FUEL AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE FROM MILITARY OR DEFENCE PROGRAMMES ............ 16 C-4. DISCHARGES ................................................................................................................................................ 16 SECTION D: INVENTORIES AND LISTS OF USED FUEL AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES ............ 17 D-1 LIST OF USED FUEL MANAGEMENT FACILITIES ........................................................................................... 18 D-2 USED FUEL INVENTORIES ............................................................................................................................ 18 D-3 LIST OF THE RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES ................................................................... 18 D-4 INVENTORY OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE ......................................................................................................... 19 D-5 LIST OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES IN THE PROCESS OF BEING DECOMMISSIONED ............................................ 19 SECTION E: LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY SYSTEMS ............................................................................................ 20 E-1 IMPLEMENTING MEASURES ........................................................................................................................ 21 E-2 LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................ 21 E-2.1. ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF A LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK TO GOVERN THE SAFETY OF USED FUEL AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT ............................... 22 E-2.2. LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................ 23 E-2.2.1. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF APPLICABLE NATIONAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS AND REGULATIONS FOR RADIATION SAFETY ....................................................................................................... 23 E-2.2.2. A SYSTEM OF LICENSING OF USED FUEL AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ............. 24 E-2.2.3. A SYSTEM OF PROHIBITION OF THE OPERATION OF A USED FUEL OR RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY WITHOUT A LICENCE ........................................................................................... 26 E-2.2.4. A SYSTEM OF APPROPRIATE INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL, REGULATORY INSPECTIONS AND DOCUMENTATION AND REPORTING ........................................................................................................... 26 E-2.2.5. ENFORCEMENT OF APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND CONDITIONS OF AUTHORISATION ........................ 28 E-2.2.6. A CLEAR ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BODIES INVOLVED IN THE DIFFERENT STEPS OF USED FUEL AND OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT ....................................................... 28 E-3 THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A REGULATORY BODY .......................................................................................... 29 E-3.1. NATIONAL NUCLEAR REGULATOR ............................................................................................................... 29 E-3.1.1. ORGANISATION OF THE NNR ....................................................................................................................... 30 E-3.1.2. HUMAN RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................... 33 E-3.1.3. FINANCIAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 34 E-3.2. DIRECTORATE RADIATION CONTROL ........................................................................................................... 34 CONTENTS (continued) E-3.2.1. HUMAN RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................... 35 E-3.2.2. FINANCIAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 36 E-3.3. INDEPENDENCE OF THE REGULATORY FUNCTION ...................................................................................... 36 SECTION F: GENERAL SAFETY PROVISIONS ............................................................................................................ 37 F-1 RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHORISATION HOLDER .................................................................................... 38 F-1.1. RESPONSIBILITY FOR SAFETY ....................................................................................................................... 38 F-1.2. RESPONSIBILITY FOR USED FUEL OR RADIOACTIVE WASTE .................................................................... 39 F-2 HUMAN AND FINANCIAL RESOURCES ......................................................................................................... 40 F-2.1. QUALIFIED STAFF ......................................................................................................................................... 40 F-2.2. FINANCIAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 41 F-2.3. FINANCIAL PROVISION FOR POST-CLOSURE MANAGEMENT OF FACILITIES ................................................ 42 F-3 QUALITY ASSURANCE .................................................................................................................................. 42 F-3.1. QUALITY ASSURANCE AT NECSA .................................................................................................................. 43 F-3.2. QUALITY ASSURANCE AT KNPS .................................................................................................................... 44 F-3.3. QUALITY ASSURANCE AT NORM FACILITIES ................................................................................................ 45 F-4 OPERATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION ..................................................................................................... 45 F-4.1. OPERATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION: LEGAL FRAMEWORK .................................................................. 46 F-4.1.1. DOSE LIMITS ................................................................................................................................................ 46 F-4.1.2. ALARA FOR WORKERS AND PUBLIC ............................................................................................................ 48 F-4.1.3. OCCUPATIONAL
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Treaty of Pelindaba on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone
    UNIDIR/2002/16 The Treaty of Pelindaba on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Oluyemi Adeniji UNIDIR United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research Geneva, Switzerland NOTE The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. * * * The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Secretariat. UNIDIR/2002/16 Copyright © United Nations, 2002 All rights reserved UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. GV.E.03.0.5 ISBN 92-9045-145-9 CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements . vii Foreword by John Simpson . ix Glossary of Terms. xi Introduction. 1 Chapter 1 Evolution of Global and Regional Non-Proliferation . 11 Chapter 2 Nuclear Energy in Africa . 25 Chapter 3 The African Politico-Military Origins of the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone . 35 Chapter 4 The Transition Period: The End of Apartheid and the Preparations for Negotiations . 47 Chapter 5 Negotiating and Drafting the Treaty (Part I): The Harare Meeting . 63 Chapter 6 Negotiating and Drafting the Treaty (Part II): The 1994 Windhoek and Addis Ababa Drafting Meetings, and References where Appropriate to the 1995 Johannesburg Joint Meeting . 71 Chapter 7 Negotiating and Drafting the Treaty (Part III): Annexes and Protocols . 107 Chapter 8 Negotiating and Drafting the Treaty (Part IV): Joint Meeting of the United Nations/OAU Group of Experts and the OAU Inter- Governmental Group, Johannesburg.
    [Show full text]
  • NPR 1.1: a Chronology of South Africa's Nuclear Program
    A Chronology of South Africa's Nuclear Program by Zondi Masiza Zondi Masiza is a research assistant at the Program for Nonproliferation Studies. He is currently a US AID/Fulbright Scholar at the Monterey Institute for International Studies. Introduction nuclear explosives for the mining industry. The sense of urgency in developing a nuclear capability was sharpened The recent history of South Africa's nuclear program by the southward march of the African liberation presents an important and unprecedented case of a state that movement, which the South African government viewed as developed and then voluntarily relinquished nuclear inspired by the Soviet Union. South Africa conducted its weapons. As we near the 1995 NPT Extension Conference, nuclear weapons program in absolute secrecy. Very few the case of South Africa presents a significant example for government officials and even top Cabinet members knew the declared nuclear powers as well as for those considering of its existence. nuclear deployment. Nuclear weapons may not be the guarantors of regime security that they are purported to be Throughout the 1970s and the 1980s, the Group of 77 by some supporters. Indeed, there may be sound reasons pressured the IAEA to carry out inspections on South why other states in the future may also choose to relinquish African nuclear facilities, such as the pilot uranium them or, in other cases, choose not to develop them at all. enrichment plant. Allegations that South Africa had made preparations to conduct a nuclear test in the Kalahari desert This chronology is based on a survey of publicly-available in 1977 increased concern about the country's intentions.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2019
    INTEGRATED ANNUAL REPORT 2019 South African Nuclear Energy Corporation SOC Limited TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 7. HUMAN RESOURCES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT ------------------------79 1. GENERAL INFORMATION-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 INTRODUCTION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 80 ABOUT THIS INTEGRATED ANNUAL REPORT - - - - - - - - - - - 4 STAFF FINANCIAL STATISTICS - - - - - - - - - - - - 85 NECSA’S ORIGINS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 STAFF SOCIAL STATISTICS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 87 NECSA STRATEGY - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 8. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES- - - - - - 99 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 BOARD OF DIRECTORS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 100 2. CHAIRPERSON’S FOREWORD-- -- -- -- -- -- 8 COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 108 3. CEO’S OVERVIEW ----------------------11 EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE - - - - - - - - - - - - -112 4. HIGHLIGHTS OF 2018/2019 - - - - - - 13 RISK MANAGEMENT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -116 5. KEY PERFORMANCE INFORMATION-- -- -17 9. SUSTAINABILITY REPORT - -- -- -- -- -- --119 STATEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERFORMANCE INFORMATION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18 INTRODUCTION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    [Show full text]
  • Highly Enriched Uranium Production for South African Nuclear Weapons
    Science <I:Global Security, 1994, Volume 4, pp.33-48 Photocopying permitted by license only Reprints available directly from the publisher o 1994 Gonion and Breach Science Publishel'B SA Printed in the United States of America Highly Enriched Uranium Production for South African Nuclear Weapons Weestimate that South Africaproduced 735± 53 kilograms ofthe equivalent of 90 per- cent-highly enriched uranium (HEU). This amount, were it enriched to 80 to 90 per- cent, could be used to construct 12 Hiroshima-type fission bombs. The South African government maintains it constructed only six such devices,and never intended to con- struct more than seven. The excess HEU was apparently less enriched than that desired by South Africafor its weapons, but probably still weapons-usable. Implosion- type devices were apparently being researched at the time the nuclear weapons pro- gram was dismantled in 1989. Had this effort continued, eventually South Africa would have been able to construct four times as many weapons from the same amount of fissile material. Because of a 15.6 percent uncertainty in the tails assay, the two standard deviation uncertainty in the amount of U-235 in the HEU produced is 256 kilograms. It is in the interest of all parties to reduce this uncertainty. South Afri~a decided to build a nuclear weapons program in 1974. The first of six gun assembly •.type nuclear weapons was constructed using South African- produced highly enriched uranium. In 1989, South Africa decided to accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and dismantle its nuclear weapons program.
    [Show full text]
  • Pelindaba Treaty
    THE TREA T Y OF PELINDABA Towards the Full Implementation of the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty Noël Stott, Senior Research Fellow, Institute for Security Studies As a leading African human security research institution, the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) works towards a stable and peaceful Africa characterised by sustainable development, human rights, the rule of law, democracy and collaborative security. The ISS realises this vision by: • Undertaking applied research, training and capacity building • Working collaboratively with others • Facilitating and supporting policy formulation • Monitoring trends and policy implementation • Collecting, interpreting and disseminating information • Networking on national, regional and international levels © 2011, Institute for Security Studies Copyright in the volume as a whole is vested in the Institute for Security Studies, and no part may be reproduced in whole or in part without the express permission, in writing, of both the authors and the publishers. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute, its trustees, members of the Council or donors. Authors contribute to ISS publications in their personal capacity. ISBN 978-1-920422-45-5 First published by the Institute for Security Studies, P O Box 1787, Brooklyn Square 0075 Pretoria, South Africa www.issafrica.org Printing: Marketing Support Services +27 12 346-2168 THE TREA T Y OF PELINDABA Towards the Full Implementation of the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty Noël Stott, Senior Research Fellow,
    [Show full text]
  • Research Report Proliferation Risk Assessment of Former Nuclear
    Research Report UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA GRADUATE SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT Research Report Proliferation Risk Assessment of Former Nuclear Explosives/Weapons Program Personnel: The South African Case Study 21 July 2007 ________________________________________________________________ This research project was supported by the University of Pretoria and the Ploughshares Fund in the USA. The Ploughshares Fund is a public grant-making foundation that supports organizations and individuals working to stop the spread of weapons of war, from nuclear arms to landmines and build regional security. www.ploughshares.org _________________________________________________________________________________ © University of Pretoria 21 July 2007 1 Research Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This research provides detailed information on the fate of South Africa's former Nuclear Explosives/Weapons Program (NEWP) personnel after the termination of the program in 1991. Some of the findings of the study were that there is a strong and direct association between the type of post-termination employment and mode of termination of employment of former NEWP personnel. Only a few (10%) of those that resigned were unemployed or went into retirement. The majority (63%) of those that were retrenched or retired was unemployed or went into retirement. The study also found a strong association between the personal income and the type of employment of the former NEWP personnel after leaving the program. The income of most (78%) of those that joined another firm increased or was unchanged. The income of most (58%) of those that were transferred was unchanged, and the income of the majority (84%) of those that became unemployed, retired or started their own businesses declined. A major finding of this research is therefore that many of South Africa's former NEWP personnel suffered financially after termination of the program.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 7Th NATIONAL REPORT by SOUTH AFRICA on the CONVENTION
    7th NATIONAL REPORT BY SOUTH AFRICA ON THE CONVENTION ON NUCLEAR SAFETY August 2016 Restricted 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS The numbering of the Articles of the Convention has been used as the basis for the paragraph numbering system adopted in this Report. Page no. ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................ 3 A. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 7 B. SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 9 C. ARTICLES..................................................................................................................... 12 ARTICLE 6: EXISTING NUCLEAR INSTALLATIONS ....................................................... 12 ARTICLE 7: LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ..................................... 16 ARTICLE 8: REGULATORY BODY ................................................................................... 28 Figure 8-1. NNR Organisational Structure and Reporting Line. ......................................... 32 Figure 8-2. NNR Document Structure ................................................................................ 34 ARTICLE 9: RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LICENCE HOLDER ........................................... 44 ARTICLE 10: PRIORITY TO SAFETY ............................................................................... 47 ARTICLE 11: FINANCIAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • South Africa Nuclear Chronology
    South Africa Nuclear Chronology 2006-2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999-1998 | 1997 | 1996 1992-1989 | 1988-1983 | 1982 | 1981 | 1980 | 1979 | 1978-1970 | 1969-1944 Last update: May 2007 As of May 2009, this chronology is no longer being updated. For current developments, please see the South Africa Nuclear Overview. This annotated chronology is based on the data sources that follow each entry. Public sources often provide conflicting information on classified military programs. In some cases we are unable to resolve these discrepancies, in others we have deliberately refrained from doing so to highlight the potential influence of false or misleading information as it appeared over time. In many cases, we are unable to independently verify claims. Hence in reviewing this chronology, readers should take into account the credibility of the sources employed here. Inclusion in this chronology does not necessarily indicate that a particular development is of direct or indirect proliferation significance. Some entries provide international or domestic context for technological development and national policymaking. Moreover, some entries may refer to developments with positive consequences for nonproliferation. 2006-2005 December 2006 South Africa plans to use fuel created from former Russian nuclear warheads to fuel a new line of small nuclear power plants. Since 1999, South Africa has been developing Pebble Bed Modular Reactors, relatively low-power units, and plans to build 24 of them by 2028. However, the decision to use foreign fuel might change as the nation's demand for fuel increases with the increase in power plants. South Africa has stated that "We are re- evaluating our nuclear program." — "South African Reactors to Use Uranium from Former Russian Nuclear Warheads," Global Security Newswire, 7 December 2006; www.nti.org.
    [Show full text]
  • 6642 ISS Nuclear Security Final.Indd
    Contents About the authors . .1 Acronyms . .2 Foreword . .4 Researching the African nuclear security environment . .5 Nuclear security risks . .6 Africa and the threat from organised criminal elements and from acts of terrorism . .8 Existing and potential sources of radiological material in Africa . .9 Conclusion . .11 Section I An assessment of nuclear security in Africa . .14 Introduction . .14 Nuclear security . .15 Current international security threats . .16 The international nuclear security regime . .17 Status of the international nuclear security regime in Africa . .18 Africa’s response to the threat of terrorist acts . 27 The implications of nuclear energy . 29 Conclusions and recommendations . 32 Section II Experts’ workshop on ‘progress on securing Africa’s nuclear resources’, 8 – 9 February 2012 . 35 Chairpersons’ summary . 35 Discussion outcomes and updated ‘action plan’ . 37 i Annexure A Status of conventions and treaties related to nuclear security in Africa . 47 Annexure B Select list of conventions, protocols, documents and initiatives regarding nuclear security . 50 About the authors Amelia Broodryk is a Researcher in the Institute for Security Studies’ Transnational Th reats and International Crime Division in Pretoria. She is cur- rently working on the ‘Africa’s Development and the Th reat of Weapons of Mass Destruction’ project (WMD Project). Her areas of expertise include nuclear security, including nuclear power and uranium mining, as well as various disar- mament and non-proliferation treaties such as the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba) and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Amelia has a Master’s degree in International Studies from the University of Pretoria.
    [Show full text]
  • A Technical Retrospective of the Former South African Nuclear Weapon Programme Robert E
    SIPRI A TECHNICAL Policy Paper RETROSPECTIVE OF THE FORMER SOUTH AFRICAN NUCLEAR WEAPON PROGRAMME ROBERT E. KELLEY October 2020 STOCKHOLM INTERNATIONAL PEACE RESEARCH INSTITUTE SIPRI is an independent international institute dedicated to research into conflict, armaments, arms control and disarmament. Established in 1966, SIPRI provides data, analysis and recommendations, based on open sources, to policymakers, researchers, media and the interested public. The Governing Board is not responsible for the views expressed in the publications of the Institute. GOVERNING BOARD Ambassador Jan Eliasson, Chair (Sweden) Dr Vladimir Baranovsky (Russia) Espen Barth Eide (Norway) Jean-Marie Guéhenno (France) Dr Radha Kumar (India) Ambassador Ramtane Lamamra (Algeria) Dr Patricia Lewis (Ireland/United Kingdom) Dr Jessica Tuchman Mathews (United States) DIRECTOR Dan Smith (United Kingdom) Signalistgatan 9 SE-169 72 Solna, Sweden Telephone: + 46 8 655 9700 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.sipri.org A Technical Retrospective of the Former South African Nuclear Weapon Programme robert e. kelley October 2020 Contents Preface v Acknowledgements vi Abbreviations vii Summary ix 1. Introduction 1 A brief history of the South African nuclear weapon programme 3 Political statement of the programme 5 The end of the programme 5 IAEA transparency visits in 1993 6 Box 1.1. The records of the International Atomic Energy Agency visits 2 to South Africa in 1993 Box 1.2. Special limitations on inspectors 8 2. The Somchem plant 9 Shaped charge development 11 Enrichment support at Somchem 13 Box 2.1. Gun-type weapons 10 3. The Vastrap nuclear test site 15 Box 3.1. A possible nuclear test in the South Atlantic 16 4.
    [Show full text]
  • The True Cost of Nuclear Power in South Africa Report 2011 for More Information Contact: [email protected]
    The True Cost of Nuclear Power in South Africa Report 2011 For more information contact: [email protected] Written by: Ferrial Adam, Dr. David Fig (chapters 2; 3.4; 4; 5), Dominique Gilbert (chapter 5.3), Mike Kantey (chapter 5.5), Fiona Musana, Nina Schulz, Melita Steele, Dr. Rianne Teule, Professor Steve Thomas (chapters 3.1-3.3; 3.5-3.7) Edited by Dr. Rianne Teule and Fiona Musana Acknowledgements: Rod Gurzynski, Nkopane Maphiri Published in August, 2011 Greenpeace Africa 10A and 10B Clamart House, Clamart Road, Richmond Johannesburg, South Africa Postal Address: Greenpeace Africa PostNet Suite 125 Private Bag X09, Melville Johannesburg, 2109 South Africa Tel: +27 (0)11 482 4696 Fax: +27 (0)11 482 8157 Website: www.greenpeaceafrica.org Designed by: Kai.Toma Creatives Printed on 100% recycled post-consumer paper with vegetable based inks. © Greenpeace Africa, 2011 Koeberg Nuclear Power Station, Cape Town, South Africa. Town, Station, Cape Nuclear Power © Greenpeace Africa, 2011 Koeberg Foreword 4 1. Introduction 5 2. South Africa’s nuclear industry 6 2.1 The beginning 6 2.2 South Africa’s nuclear bomb 7 2.3 Disarming apartheid’s nuclear bomb 7 2.4 Nuclear trafficking 8 2.5 The start of democratic flirtation with nuclear 8 2.6 The Integrated Resource Plan 2010 8 2.7 South Africa’s nuclear establishment today 9 3. Ignoring the writing on the wall 10 3.1 The legacy of the apartheid government 11 3.2 The Pebble Bed Modular Reactor: 1998-2010 11 3.2.1 Poor budgetary control and unrealistic time schedules 11 3.2.2 Lack of investors 11 3.2.3 Lack of markets 11 3.2.4 Failure to develop a final design 11 3.2.5 Failure to monitor the programme 12 3.3 Conventional nuclear reactors: 2006-2011 12 3.4 Eskom in crisis 12 3.5 Earlier generation reactors: 2010 onwards 13 3.6 The new call for nuclear tenders 13 3.7 Experience elsewhere in the world 14 4.
    [Show full text]
  • South African National Report On
    SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL REPORT ON THE COMPLIANCE TO OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE JOINT CONVENTION ON SAFETY OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT AND ON THE SAFETY OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT Fourth Report 2017 This page is left blank intentionally ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The South African National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) acknowledges the support and cooperation of the South African Department of Energy (DoE), the South African National Department of Health (NDoH), Directorate Radiation Control (RADCON), the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa), Eskom, iThemba Labs and the South African Mining Sector in the preparation of this report. FOURTH SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL REPORT ON COMPLIANCE TO OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE JOINT CONVENTION i ii FOURTH SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL REPORT ON COMPLIANCE TO OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE JOINT CONVENTION TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 SECTION A: INTRODUCTION 3 A-1. BACKGROUND 4 A-2. PURPOSE 5 A-3. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT 5 A-4. SUMMARY RESULTS FROM THE PREVIOUS REVIEW MEETING 6 A-5. OVERVIEW MATRIX FOR USED FUEL AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT 8 SECTION B: POLICIES AND PRACTICES 11 B-1. RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR SOUTH AFRICA 12 B-2. RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 13 B-3. SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT POLICY 14 B-4. SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14 B-5. CRITERIA USED TO DEFINE AND CATEGORISE RADIOACTIVE WASTE 15 SECTION C: SCOPE OF APPLICATION 21 C-1. USED FUEL AND REPROCESSING 22 C-2. THE SAFETY OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT 22 C-3. SAFETY OF SPENT FUEL AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE FROM MILITARY OR DEFENCE PROGRAMMES 23 C-4. DISCHARGES 23 SECTION D: INVENTORIES AND LISTS OF USED FUEL AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 25 D-1 LIST OF SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 26 D-2 USED FUEL INVENTORIES 26 D-3 LIST OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 26 D-4 INVENTORY OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE 26 D-5 LIST OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES IN THE PROCESS OF BEING DECOMMISSIONED 27 SECTION E: LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY SYSTEMS 29 E-1 IMPLEMENTING MEASURES 30 E-2 LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 30 E-2.1.
    [Show full text]