Submission to the Portfolio Committee on Minerals and Energy
By Dr. J.C. Botha Radiation Specialist, Anglogold


I wish to thank the honourable members of the Portfolio Committee for the opportunity to testify before the Committee on the proposed National Nuclear Regulator Bill. At the outset I would like to make it clear to the Committee that the comments I am about to make are in the first instance in my capacity as a radiation specialist whose work in this field spans international research with 37 years of experience. My association with the company I represent spans five years in which the radiation risks to which the workers and the public could possibly be exposed, were fully evaluated.

My company is a member of the Chamber of Mines and subscribes to the testimony presented to the Committee by members of the Chamber. Further, we support the testimony of Business South Africa.

My company supports the new Bill in that it places the regulation of radiation on the mines under the Mine Health and Safety Act. The activities at a gold mine do not have the same radiation risks associated with them as those of a nuclear power station. There is no possibility that a mine can "go critical" and produce the same levels of radioactivity as a nuclear plant. Furthermore, there is no possibility that a gold mine can release enormous amounts of radioactivity like Chernobyl. Therefore, there are no nuclear safety risks at typical gold mine that need regulation by the National Nuclear Regulator.

The radiation risk at mines is one of the occupational health risks to which workers may be exposed; and then, only a limited number of those workers may be affected. The mines do not pose any radiation risk to any member of the public. This was adequately demonstrated by the radiation environmental risk assessment performed for all mines last year.

The International Commission on Radiation Safety (ICRP, in its publication ICRP 60; 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, states in paragraph 6 on page 1 of the document:
"Since there is little direct evidence of harm at levels of annual dose at or below the limits set by the Commission, a good deal of scientific judgement is required in predicting the probability of harm resulting from low doses."

In paragraph 87 page 21, the Commission states: "If the damage occurs in the germ cells, this damage (mutations and chromosomal aberrations) may become manifest as hereditary disorders in the descendants of the exposed individual. Radiation has not been identified as a cause of such effects in man".

An epidemiological study (The Mortality of White South Africa gold Miners1 Reid and Schluys-Cremer, Epidemiological Research Unit, Bureau for Occupational Disease) performed on 4 925 miners over a period of 20 years, has found that miners have an excess mortality rate of 30 per cent. No link could be found to radiation (radon) as a cause of the additional deaths. Indeed, they could be ascribed to the excessive use of alcohol and tobacco.

It is therefore fair to say that, at present, there is no evidence of any miner dying from cancer due to radiation. As there is still a probability, however small, that radiation may affect the health of a small number of workers, it still requires consideration.

My company is considering all health and safety risks in an holistic manner. Radiation as a health risk is being treated in the same manner as all other mining risks. The new Bill makes it possible to consider all aspects of health risks under the control of a single regulator under the Mine Health and Safety Act (MHSA).

The MHSA uses the tripartite system where government, labour and the employers are represented in one forum. This allows for input by all affected parties to the regulation and control of health and safety issues.

The MHSA has a set of regulations regarding the regulation of radiation hazards in the mine environment based on the Basic Safety Standards published by the International Atomic Energy Agency. This Standard was drawn up in consultation with the World Health Organisation and the World Labour Organisation.

There are no regulations under the Nuclear Energy Act which this Bill is intended to replace and it is commendable that it provides for the promulgation of regulations by the Minister after consultation with all affected parties in a transparent manner.

The mines have found it extremely difficult in the past to deal with two different regulators. Radiation safety from a nuclear power generation perspective differs radically from that of a mine, where all risks have to be addressed in order of priority.

A fundamental aspect of radiation protection is the ALARA principle introduced by the ICRP. This recognises that all risks have to be evaluated in relation to their severity and that their evaluation should take into consideration all social and economic aspects. Alara is the acronym for As Low As Reasonably Achievable considering socio and economic factors. This means that any practice involving radiation, must be considered in terms of its benefit and its detriment to society. If the benefit exceeds the disadvantage or detriment, the practice is acceptable. For example, the benefit of a medical X-ray or radio therapy, outweigh the risks. To quantify the risks, the ICRP recommends that a cost benefit analysis be performed where the cost of the benefit is compared to the cost of the risk. To achieve this, one has to have a financial value to equate to the benefit and the risks in order to compare apples with apples. It is customary for nuclear regulators, such as the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission to provide a monetary value after consultation with the public and all other stakeholders. This allows for a value judgement on the severity of the radiation risk posed by radiation.

The new Bill, in providing for the MHSA to regulate radiation risks, will solve a dilemma that the mining industry has always had in evaluating the severity of the radiation hazard. The MHSA with its tripartite system of regulation, which AngloGold fully supports, will provide the necessary agreement between the members to evaluate radiation in its relation to the other health risks under control of the MHSA. This approach of the Bill will prevent fragmentation of the regulatory approach to mine health and safety.

The independence of both the National Nuclear Regulator and the Mine Health and Safety Inspectorate is ensured in the MHSA through their establishment as separate administrative agencies reporting directly to the Minister of Minerals and Energy. Although accountable to the Minister, both regulatory bodies are in addition held accountable entirely independently of the Ministry of Minerals and Energy through performance audits conducted by the Auditor-General. The responsibilities and reporting structures set out in the Bill, is supported.

The International Commission for Radiation Protection (ICRP) declares in its publication ICRP 77 "Radiological Protection Policy for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste", that waste disposal strategies can be divided into two groups described by two simple labels: Dilute and Disperse and Concentrate and Retain. Both strategies are in common use.

The internationally accepted norm is that spent nuclear fuel is not diluted and dispersed but is retained in waste repositories approved for the purpose. The argument is clear in that the myriad of very active and dangerous radioisotopes that are produced artificially in the nuclear reactor cannot be dispersed into a pristine environment. It is accepted internationally that if the radioactivity (3%) in the fuel is separated from the depleted uranium, that the depleted uranium is safe and that the artificially created radioactivity should be safely stored.

On gold mines, naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) are concentrated during the gold extraction process. Should these concentrates be diluted back to their original concentrations and dispersed into the environment from where they were originally taken, there can be no argument against the dilute and disperse philosophy as it does not contaminate the environment with material that did not exist there previously. The Basic Safety Standards of the IAEA indeed recommends this route as ALARA. The MHSA, in adopting international standards, has ensured that the health of the workers and the public is not compromised. The New Bill, in assigning all regulation of all radiation health issues at mines to the MHSA, has ensured that there will be no compromising on the safety of the workers and the public.

The Bill is supported in its proposed system of setting of licence fees by the Minister. The publication of the fees in the Gazette and the payment of fees into the National Treasury provide for good financial management practice. The levying of a separate fee for compliance inspections is not supported because it could lead to severe distrust of the regulator, as has happened in the past, in evaluating the necessity of such inspections. It is recommended that inspection fees be incorporated into the fixed annual licence fee.