Thyspunt work groups to be established
Seven work groups will be established to help prepare the Kouga municipal area for the construction of a nuclear plant at Thyspunt should the national power project receive the green light.
Kouga Executive Mayor Elza van Lingen said the work groups would serve as sub-committees of the Thyspunt Nuclear Project Joint Steering Committee.
The Joint Steering Committee was established in December last year and is co-chaired by Eskom and Kouga Municipality. Members include Kouga Municipality, Eskom, the Department of Economic Development, Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEDEAT), the East Cape Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (Cogta EC), the South African Police Service (SAPS), Sarah Baartman District Municipality (SBDM) and the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa).
The Mayor said the proposed scope, mandate, activities, budget requirements, risks, milestones and membership of each of the seven groups were discussed at a meeting of the Joint Steering Committee at Jeffreys Bay on Friday (7 April 2017).
“The work groups will be responsible for identifying and addressing opportunities and potential pitfalls for the Kouga area, including infrastructure shortages and socio-economic impacts, should the Thyspunt development proceed,” she said.
“As stated before, the Kouga Council is not opposed to nuclear development per se, but we are not willing for Kouga and its people to be disadvantaged by the project.
“If a nuclear plant is to be built in our area, Kouga’s people must be ready to reap the benefits and proper measures must be in place to mitigate any potential threats.”
The proposed work groups were introduced by Eskom’s acting General Manager: Nuclear New Build, Loyiso Tyabashe, who co-chairs the Joint Steering Committee with the Mayor.
The work groups are: Infrastructure, Human Capital, Regulatory and Environment, Supplier Development, Safety and Security, Finance and Stability, and Stakeholder Management and Communication.
Tyabashe said the groups would be facilitated by either Eskom or Kouga Municipality, as the main roleplayers, and consist of senior representatives from key government departments and state-owned enterprises.
They will report back to the Joint Steering Committee on a quarterly basis.
The Mayor stressed that a final decision had not yet been made about the proposed nuclear plant at Thyspunt.
“These structures are being put in place so as to ensure that roleplayers and stakeholders are ready should the project receive the nod. If approved, Thyspunt will be the biggest development our municipal area has ever seen. We want to ensure that the best interests of our communities are taken into account at all times,” she said.
Tyabashe said Eskom was currently awaiting the outcome of the final Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regarding its nuclear plans from the Department of Environmental Affairs. Applications for two Nuclear Installation Site Licences, at Thyspunt and Duynefontein, have also been submitted to the National Nuclear Regulator.
“There have been some delays in the release of the Environmental Authorisation (EA) due to the scope and complexity of the project, but the Department has indicated that the EA should be issued by mid-2017,” he said.
Issued jointly by Kouga Local Municipality and Eskom
Queries can be directed to:
- Laura-Leigh Randall – Kouga Municipality -Media Liaison Officer -084 2055 388 – kougamedia@gmail.com / media@kouga.gov.za
Everything about the Thyspunt proposal is flawed, from the original site selection under apartheid restrictions;to disregard of the Review by the CSIR in 1992, which concluded that the site was not suitable for development; to ignoring of the argument from the local community in 1998 that the site is not viable in terms of international emergency planning requirements; to the Scoping Report, which should have been rejected by the DEA in terms of NEMA requirements for failure to contain material information required; to the “co-operation agreement between the DEA & the Department of Energy, leaving the DoE in charge of nuclear issues, and effectively putting to sleep the viability issue until Eskom has applied to the NNR for a technology licence, which has still not happened; to the proposal by Eskom to apply for a reduction in emergency planning to 3 kilometres around the site, in terms of European Utility Requirements, which have been described by an English nuclear scientist as a “fiction” and only a wish-list; to the multiplicity of flawed draft environmental impact reports; to the flawed impact rating criteria, which made it impossible to have a “fatal flaw”; to the separate, and equally flawed transmission lines EIA, which based its
recommendation on “national interest”, rather than environmental considerations; to the fatally flawed Final Environmental Impact Report. No wonder it is taking the DEA so long to come to a decision!
To-date, Eskom has done everything at risk, on the assumption that the EIA & Regulatory processes will go smoothly.
We can shortly expect the process by the National Nuclear Regulator, to determine whether or not both the site itself, and the proposed technology, are acceptable in terms of the Nuclear Regulator Act & Regulations. An immediate problem with this is that South Africa is a signatory to the International Atomic Energy Agency Convention, which demands that the Regulator must be independent of both political and commercial pressure. This will be difficult to justify in the light of recent political developments in the country,and of the fact that Eskom will be financing the process.
The St Francis community should be aware of the probable social impact of the project going ahead. When the Mosgas project began it is said that 100000 unemployed people con verged on the town looking for work. Mossel Bay is now a large town, with a huge unemployment problem. Much the same applies to Lephalale, following the Medupi project. This can only lead to land invasion, and all the social pathologies associated with informal settlements.
Eskom’s behaviour so far has been irresponsible, and there is no reason to assume that it will change. It may benecessary to go to court to stop this.
There is a lot of sand around here and a lot of heads buried in it. Thyspunt will not be beneficial to our town. Thank you Hilton.
The favourite word “mitigate” so extravagantly used by those hired to deliberate the many impacts likely from the development of a nuclear power plant in the pristine environs of Thyspunt is nonsense. The responses to all concerns raised by Interested and Affected Parties have most definitely been flawed. There will be huge negative impact on this area should the development go ahead and the face of St Francis Bay will change forever