Cape Town Government's entire environmental-impact assessment (EIA) process was thrown into disarray yesterday when the Cape High Court overturned its approval of the construction of a pilot nuclear pebble bed modular reactor.
The ruling is expected to have wideranging consequences for future decisions by the environmental affairs and tourism department, and places additional steps in the process of soliciting environmental approval, a process already seen as too long and cumbersome.
"It turns the EIA process into a completely impractical and unworkable thing," said the department's director general, Chippy Olver, who gave Eskom the go-ahead for the pilot reactor in June 2003 and has since announced his resignation.
The department plans to appeal the court's decision, meaning further delays in deciding whether Eskom will continue with the project, which is critical for the utility to prove the reactor's technology and economic viability and ensure its export potential.
The blow to the approval process for the reactor, which Eskom plans to start building at Koeberg in 2007, has been hailed by environmentalists as a victory for public participation on critical issues, such as the economic cost of the project and the safety of what they claim is "untested" technology.
Some estimates have placed the cost of building and decommissioning the pilot plant at a staggering R15bn.
Judge Ben Griesel ordered Olver to give environmental lobby group Earthlife Africa and other interested parties the opportunity to submit further written submissions to him before making a new decision on Eskom's application.
Griesel also ordered Olver and Eskom to pay the costs of Earthlife's application. He found it "just and equitable" to set aside Olver's "flawed" decision.
Olver said although the process would not have to go back to "square one" he would have to allow public bodies an opportunity to comment on the final environmental-impact report he received from Eskom's environmental consultants, instead of merely giving them an opportunity to react to the draft report. He said he would have to unwind the EIA to the point at which the report was submitted to him by Eskom.
"We will not have to start from scratch, but insert an additional step in process," he said
He said a further problem caused by the judgment was that an administrative decision of a director-general was now subject to judicial review, even before the departmental appeal process had been completed and "even though the minister's decision will also be subject to judicial review".
Yesterday PBMR Ltd, a joint venture between Eskom, the Industrial Development Corporation and British Nuclear Fuels, said the verdict might cause further delays.
"We feel it is crucial that this inherently safe technology should be demonstrated without undue delay.
"It will be a sad day if our competitors (such as the Chinese) overtake us because of unnecessary delays, especially since SA is internationally recognised as the leader in the field," said PBMR communications manager Tom Ferreira.
