Dr Manmohan Singh
Prime Minister
Government of India
New Delhi
September 17, 2012
Subject-Ban production, trade in
products contaminated with radioactive element & hazardous waste
Sir,
This is with reference to
detection of consignment of stainless steel and aluminum products contaminated
with an artificial radioactive element at the Colombo harbor in the cargo which
was imported from India as per the report of September 16, 2012 published in
the Official Government News Portal of Sri Lanka.
(Source:http://www.news.lk/news/sri-lanka/3149-radioactive-contaminated-cargo-detected)
I submit that the report has
extremely relevance for the Indian workers who are/were involved in processing
and manufacturing these stainless steel and aluminum products whose
distribution has been halted in Sri Lanka.
I submit that the contaminated
cargo is currently held at Sri Lanka Ports Authority and Sri Lanka Atomic
Energy Authority (SLAEA) has stopped the release and distribution of the
contaminated products. It has come to light that the
cargo, imported from India contained about 125 units stainless steel and
aluminum products contaminated with cobalt 60 – a radioactive element.
I submit that Sri Lanka Customs
is all set to return the consignment to India and to inform the Atomic Energy
Commission of India and the International Atomic Energy Agency concerning the
products. When this consignment comes back, the government must ensure complete
transparency about what is done with these consignments. It must reveal how the
company and the regulators have been made accountable for exposing unsuspecting
Indian workers who were betrayed by both the company and the government they
trust.
I submit that it is not the first
time that Indian products have been found to be contaminated with radioactive
steel.
I submit that since you also hold
the Environment Ministry cabinet portfolio and are in charge of the Department
of Atomic Energy, there is a logical compulsion for you to acknowledge this
serious lapse and constitute a Independent Trans Disciplinary High Power Expert
Committee to investigate metal scrap units, foundries and every yard of the
ship-breaking industry in order to trace the workers and communities who have
been exposed to radioactive radiation within India while handling these
products throughout its life cycle from processing to manufacturing to
packaging these radioactive contaminated steel and aluminum products.
I submit that if the finished
products have radioactive hazards, one can visualize the fate of raw scrap and
the workers who process the scrap. Only a bare minimum of these finished products
are exported. The major portion of the recycled scrap is used in India.
I submit that there has been a
news report about the incident of exposure of workers from radioactive
contaminated metal scrap in the past as well. It is an open secret that huge
amount of hazardous wastes, end of life products and scrap metal is coming to
India in the name of it being a recyclable material. It is apprehended these
are contaminated with radioactive wastes etc.
I submit that in 2009, Scrap
News, a journal reported that more than 50% of the total 123 shipments of
contaminated steel is from India. The 67 shipments from India were denied entry
into European and US ports because of contamination of Cobalt-60 in the
finished products. There were unconfirmed reports that the highly radioactive
Chernobyl scrap was shipped to Asia but there isn’t any substantial evidence on
that.
I submit that radioactive Co-60
is also a byproduct of nuclear reactor operations, when metal structures, such
as steel rods, are exposed to neutron radiation. A tale of radioactive
radiation, hazardous substances and toxic trade has consistently been brushed
under the carpet in the name of secrecy.
I submit that a Hazardous waste
case has been going on in the Supreme Court since 1995 because of non-cooperation
from the concerned ministries. In the matter of radioactive contaminated scrap
metal lack of coordination among Commerce Ministry, Steel Ministry, Environment
Ministry and Department of Atomic Energy is quite manifest. Huge amount of hazardous radioactive scrap
metal is imported into India considering the cheap rates. Indian harbors and
ports do not have a proper regulation on hazardous materials and are
admittedly, ill-equipped to detect radioactive materials.
I submit that even earlier in
2009 lift buttons made of scrap steel which were being used by Otis elevators,
that was being handled by a French firm were found to be contaminated with
radioactive radiation from Indian products. Some 30 workers of theirs suffered
radioactive radiation. French nuclear safety authority informed Indian Atomic
Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) and all other nuclear countries. There have been
complaints from Russia and Sweden too.
I submit that the buttons has
been traced to factories near Pune. AERB issued a letter asking all port
agencies to use radioactive monitors but while French workers who suffered are
identified, the Indian workers who suffered are yet to be traced. These lift
buttons were contaminated with Cobalt 60, a byproduct of nuclear reactors. The
radiation was measured between 1 and 3 on an International Nuclear Event Scale
(INES). There are 7 levels on the INES scale; 3 incident-levels and 4
accident-levels.
I submit that the French France's
Nuclear Safety Authority detected that the steel lift buttons brought from
India contained traces of radioactive Cobalt 60. It had also alerted the Indian
authorities about the radioactive buttons. The original complaint was from Otis
firm, a French subsidiary of the US company.
I submit that the factory belonging
to Mafelec company, which delivers the buttons to Otis noticed in early
October, 2009. Nuclear Safety Authority classed the incident at a factory of
the Mafelec firm in the east-central town of Chimilin at level two on the
seven-level International Nuclear Event Scale (INES). It said that of 30
workers exposed, 20 had been exposed to doses of between one mSv
(milli-Sievert) and three mSv.
I submit that the maximum
permitted dose for workers in the non-nuclear sector is one mSv. Otis Elevator
Company's lifts in France were traced to a foundry in Maharashtra. There is a
foundry near Khopoli on the way to Pune from Mumbai called Vipras, which melted
this scrap. French firm Mafelec delivered thousands of lift buttons to Otis.
Otis has said it is now in the process of removing the buttons, after the
Nuclear Safety Authority announced that 20 workers who handled the lift buttons
had been exposed to excessive levels of radiation.
I submit that the components used
by Mafelec were supplied by two Indian firms, which purchased the inputs from
SKM Steels Ltd, which in turn worked with foundry Vipras Casting Foundry.
Vipras was provided scrap by SKM Steels to convert into bars. Currently, it is
not mandatory for Indian foundries to install radiation detectors to check
scrap metals. It is noteworthy that although the factory explosions of October
2004 in the missile scrap metal imported without detection by the Bhushan Steel
Ltd in Ghaziabad, UP had compelled governmental responses at the highest level
both in the state and at the centre but it has been of no avail. No visible
punitive action or remedial action was taken beyond routine posturing. In this
case too in all likelihood it would meet the same fate.
I submit that scrap metal and its
contamination comes under the Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling and
Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008, but this incident and several others in
the recent past illustrate that the Rules offers no resistance to transboundary
movement of hazardous and radioactive contaminated scrap materials. According
to the Rules, it does not matter if contaminated "recyclable scrap
metal"/hazardous waste comes without prior decontamination in the country
of export although it is in manifest contempt of Supreme Court's directions in
its order dated 14 October, 2003 in Writ Petition (Civil) 657 of 1995.
I submit that radioactive
contamination is dealt under Radiation Atomic Energy (Safe Disposal of
Radioactive Wastes) Rules, 1987 that deals with the radioactive waste, not with
radioactive contaminated finished products. The framers of both the Rules were
oblivious to a situation where hazardous waste (recyclable metal scrap,
according to Environment Ministry) and the products made out of it would be
contaminated with radioactive materials.
I submit that Hazardous Waste
Rules lays down the procedure for import of hazardous waste and how it would
facilitate the same by providing administrative mechanism to ensure that even
Port and Customs authorities ensure compliance when hazardous waste is imported
by paying lip service seeking "safe handling". After creating the
loophole it says, Custom authorities would take samples as per Customs Act 1962
prior to clearing the assignments. Technical Review Committee of Ministry of
Environment & Forests as noted in the Rules should now show its sense of
purpose by finding out where did the radioactive materials come from in the
lift buttons made of scrap steel.
The case illustrates how even the
new Rules remain full of loopholes. One would have been surprised, had it not
been so because the Ministry defines hazardous waste as recyclable metal...and
then asks agencies Customs and Atomic Energy Regulatory Board to probe the
consequences of the flawed Rules. The Hazardous Waste Rules do not apply to
radioactive waste as covered under the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 (33 of 1962) and
rules made there under. Consequently, Atomic Energy (Safe Disposal of
Radioactive Wastes) Rules, 1987 apply to it.
I submit that neither the
Hazardous Waste Rules nor the Safe Disposal of Radioactive Wastes Rules seem to
have foreseen a situation where metal scrap products are found to be
contaminated with radioactive materials although while providing the
definition, the Radioactive waste Rules, it says, "radioactive waste"
means any waste material containing radio-nuclides in quantities or
concentrations as prescribed by the competent authority by notification in the
official gazette".
I submit that Safe Disposal of
Radioactive Wastes Rules also provides for a "Radiological Safety Officer"
who can advise the employer regarding the safe handling and disposal of
radioactive wastes and on the steps necessary to ensure that the operational
limits are not exceeded; to instruct the radiation workers engaged in waste
disposal on the hazards of radiation and on suitable safety measures and work
practices aimed at minimising exposures to radiation and contamination, and to
ensure that adequate radiation surveillance is provided for all radiation
workers and the environment.
I submit that neither the
environment ministry nor the atomic energy ministry provides for Radiological
Safety Officer in the scrap metal factories and ship breaking yards.
I submit that the labor
ministries do not seem to have any role in ensuring worker's safety although
International Labor Organization provides guideline to be followed. As per the
Radioactive Waste Rules, Radiological Safety Officer has to carry out such tests
on conditioned radioactive wastes, as specified by the competent authority; to
ensure that all buildings, laboratories and plants wherein radioactive wastes
will be or are likely to be handled/produced, conditioned or stored or
discharged from, are designed to provide adequate safety for safe handling and
disposal of radioactive waste. He has to help investigate and initiate prompt
and suitable remedial measures in respect of any situation that could lead to
radiation hazards; and ...to ensure that the provisions of the Radiation
Protection Rules, 1971 are followed properly.
I submit that there is an urgent
need to rewrite the present Rules that is more concerned about human health
than hazardous waste trade. Officials who draft such Rules must be made
accountable. The issue must be dealt with at a much higher level than is case
now.
I submit that CAG should be
requested to do an audit of radioactive radiation exposure detection
preparedness at all the ports and airports. When different government complained
to Government of India, the government had announced that it is putting in
place radiation monitors at ports to check cargo. It merits inquiry as to
whether this has indeed been done.
I submit that it is an act of
grave omission on the part of Environment Ministry and its loophole ridden
Rules that allow import of hazardous wastes in the name of recycling. It is
also a result of an exercise in linguistic corruption while drafting the Rules
that redefines hazardous waste as a recyclable metal scarp.
I submit that while
unsatisfactory governmental response in matters of environmental health and
workers occupational health is nothing new, what is alarming is that even the
alerts by different foreign countries has failed to hammer the frozen passivity
of the government. What else can justify the ongoing dismantling of end of life
ships by migrant, casual workers of UP, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa that is
evidently and admittedly contaminated with radioactive material and killer
asbestos fibers.
I submit that each time such
incidents occur, Radiological safety division of India's Atomic Energy
Regulatory Board announces investigation into the concerns raised but either
such inquiries remain incomplete or the outcome of such exercises are never
made public.
The million dollar question is:
Has AERB's lackadaisical approach as revealed in the Supreme Court in September
2007 in dealing with radioactive material in ships changed? It has chosen to
become oblivious of for instance 1088 radioactive material containing
equipments onboard Blue Lady, a contaminated ship under demolition in Alang,
Bhavnagar, Gujarat.
I submit that under the new Rules
from the Ministry of Environment, hazardous waste gets classified as hazardous
material meant for recycling, and it would fall in the category of second hand
materials. The commerce ministry allows even hazardous waste since as per the
new notification a waste would be deemed as non-waste. In this way toxic waste
will reincarnate itself as a reusable or recyclable product.
I submit that it is high time the
government revised its existing Hazardous Waste and Radioactive Waste Rules.
I submit that the Supreme Court
had taken cognizance of this problem in the hazardous wastes case wherein the
role of Atomic Energy Regulatory Board was also specified. The issue of
radioactive material has also been raised in the matter of the ship breaking
activity on Alang beach.
I submit that earlier, when the
French ships such as radioactive material laden SS Blue Lady (SS France, SS
Norway) and RIKY, the Danish ship got dumped purportedly for scrap metal in
India, the ship owners from developed heave a sigh of relief because they
manage to escape decontamination cost but they do realize that the scrap metals
would end up in their backyards as lift buttons and other steel products are
made of the same contaminated secondary steel.
I submit that even the Division
Bench of Justice Dr Arijit Pasayat and Justice S H Kapadia overlooked the
admittedly known dangers of radioactive material in their order that gave a go
ahead to dismantling of the Blue Lady, a dead French ship.
I submit that the bench granted
permission for the dismantling based on the submission by Gopal Subramaniam,
the then Additional Solicitor General, to the effect that the ship does not
have any more radioactive material and beaching is irreversible. But contrary
to the recommendations of the Technical Experts Committee on Hazardous Wastes
relating to Ship-breaking, Gujarat Pollution Control Board, Gujarat Enviro
Protection and Infrastructure Ltd, (GEPIL) and the ship's current owner Priya
Blue Shipping Pvt Ltd., the ship does contain radioactive substances at
thousands of places.
In the order passed the apex
court merely states, "There was also an apprehension rightly expressed by
the petitioner regarding radioactive material on board the vessel Blue Lady.
Therefore, an immediate inspection of the said vessel beached at Alang since
16.8.2006 was undertaken by Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) and by
Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB). The apprehension expressed by the petitioner was
right. However, as the matter stands today, AERB and GMB have certified that
the said vessel Blue Lady beached in Alang no more contains any radioactive
material on board the ship." I was the applicant.
I submit that a perusal of the
report of the inspection undertaken on 14 August 2007 showed that the entire
inspection of 16 floors of 315 meter long ship seems to have been completed
within a period of 4 hours (a commendable task no doubt) and the report states
that they could detect only 12 smoke detectors containing Americium 241. Having
found these 12 smoke detectors containing radioactive materials, the report
concludes that the ship "now, does not contain any radioactive material on
board".
In a petition to the Supreme
Court, a letter sent by one Tom Haugen (who had been the Project Manager for
Engineering, Delivery, Installation, Commissioning and later services and
upgrades as regards Fire Detection Installation Systems on-board the Blue Lady)
was brought on record. Haugen had written to Chairman of the Technical Experts
Committee (by virtue of being the Secretary at the Ministry of Environment)
that the fire detection system on the Blue Lady contained 5500 detection points
which included 1100 ion smoke detectors that use radioactive elements composed
of Americium 241.
I submit that in a separate
letter to you dated 19 September 2007, Haugen has reiterated the fact about the
enormity of radioactive material on the ship given that he himself supervised
its installation. Countering the AERB-GMB report that that ship did not contain
any radioactive material after their inspection, Haugen wrote that in most
cases, the fire detection systems are not labeled or indicated in any way, as
they are typically 'buried' out of sight. According to Haugen, due to the risk
of hazardous radioactive exposure, they should only be handled by professionals
or certified technicians. "The system and its detectors are very subtly
placed and virtually completely hidden in most parts, so it is totally
understandable that a non-expert team might miss it during a broader inspection
of the vessel," wrote Haugen.
I submit that even though the
technical experts committee had put in its 2006 report that there was no
radioactive material on the ship, one of the Committee's members Dr Virendra
Misra of the Industrial Toxicology Research Centre, Lucknow, had disagreed with
the findings. He wrote that, "Presence of radioactive materials should be
ascertained well in advance. Though it is mentioned in the report that
radioactive material is not available, in my opinion there is possibility of
the presence of radioactive materials due to existence of liquid level
indicators and smoke detectors on the ship." This was ignored by TEC's then
chairman, Prodipto Ghosh, the then Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment
& Forests. Not surprisingly, the final report of the Technical Committee
was signed by only Mr Ghosh. All of this is in the records of the Supreme
Court.
It is clear that exposures from
radioactive radiation be it in the scrap metal or hazardous trade or from
nuclear plants do not get treated by paying lip-service to environmental and
occupational health and safety concerns. It can be brushed under the carpet
within the country but repeated incidents and complaints from countries ranging
from Sri Lanka, Europe, Russia to US reveals that skeletons in the cupboards
cannot be hidden for long.
I submit that the IAEA is aware
that the international community has been confronting a new security threat:
the risk of the malicious use of nuclear or other radioactive material, an area
in which the IAEA has unique expertise. Much of its work focuses on trying to
ensure that this does not happen in the first place. But within India, thus far
Department of Atomic Energy appears to have failed to stop indiscriminate entry
of radioactive materials or radioactive contaminated products and wastes and to
take preventive steps.
I submit that so far even IAEA
does not appear to be pro-active in the matter of radioactive steel that gets
produced when radioactive sources containing cobalt gets amalgamated with scrap
steel such as the ones sourced from ship-breaking industry and other secondary
steel production sources.
In view of the above mentioned
facts, it is high time you, the government and IAEA gave up its Ostrich policy
in this regard.
Thanking
You
Yours
Sincerely
Gopal Krishna
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi
Phone: +91-11-2651781, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb: 9818089660
No comments:
Post a Comment