APPENDIX 14
Memorandum by the Nuclear Legacy Advisory
Forum (NuLeAF)
1. NuLeAF [The Nuclear Legacy Advisory Forum]
is a formally constituted "Special Interest Group" of
the Local Government Association (LGA) with a membership of over
90 local authorities in England and Wales, covering both areas
"hosting" nuclear facilities and those with an interest
in the issues raised. Annex 1 to this response sets out the Terms
of Reference of the LGA Special Interest Group on Nuclear Decommissioning
and Radioactive Waste Management while Annex 2[28]
lists our January 2006 membership.
2. NuLeAF has prepared this submission to
assist in your review in relation to the remit and activities
of the NDA (and UKAEA), their performance and accountability and
other general matters. NuLeAF's terms of reference do not extend
to issues of nuclear power generation and no comments are made
on this aspect of your terms of reference.
3. This response comments solely on the
role of the NDA and is structured by reference to the topics covered
in the NDA's Draft Strategy. We do not comment on the UKAEA roles—which
now place it as one potential contractor in a competitive market
place organised through the NDA. As the following detailed comments
make clear, the NDA's approach is broadly supported, but many
of its structures remain to be tested over time—such as
its local and national stakeholder mechanisms. A particular concern
for local government is the very significant burden placed on
local government in engaging with the NDA at all levels and on
the scale required. We would very much wish to see direct funding
to enable local government to engage actively and where appropriately
independently and critically on the NDA's strategy development,
prioritisations processes and in influencing national policy development.
We would welcome the opportunity to further develop evidence on
this matter to be given orally.
4. In 2005, NuLeAF welcomed the NDA's Strategy
consultation as the culmination of a careful and thorough process,
on which the NDA had worked with the present contractors since
its establishment in April that year. However, NuLeAF fully recognised
that there would need to be further significant updating of the
NDA Strategy, as national policy development and further work
with stakeholders provides clarification and feedback. In particular,
issues concerning the implementation of CoRWM's work on radioactive
waste management and what bodies should be given what roles, will
need to be carefully assessed.
5. NuLeAF has welcomed the NDA's commitments
to local communities, local employment and skills; and "nuclear
community" local authorities within NuLeAF's membership are
working particularly closely with the NDA, for example in Cumbria.
A Memorandum of Agreement was concluded between the NDA, local
authorities, Government Office North West and the North West Regional
Development Agency—setting out mutual commitments given
the establishment of the NDA HQ at Westlakes near Whitehaven.
6. In addition, a West Cumbria Strategic
Forum to directly engage at Ministerial level on the impacts of
decommissioning has been formed and is currently developing a
spatial master plan for the area, to counter the major impacts
of employment decline at Sellafield. The understanding of the
urgent need to ensure the availability of the skills required
to deliver the NDA Strategy and the requirement for socio-economic
plans for all communities affected by decommissioning, have demonstrated
the NDA's recognition of these important concerns of Local Authorities
(LAs)within NuLeAF's membership.
7. NuLeAF welcomed the top six decommissioning
priorities in the NDA's draft Strategy as broadly appropriate—particularly
the top priority of addressing the Sellafield Legacy Ponds problem—plus
the fresh approach to the use of the Low Level Waste (LLW) site
at Drigg as just one part of a more dispersed approach. NuLeAF
has been actively engaged with the DEFRA review of LLW policy
given its potential impact on many local communities.
8. The NDA's aspiration to move forward
rapidly on interim Intermediate Level Waste (ILW) management is
also acknowledged, though NuLeAF is also actively engaging in
CoRWM's processes to ensure that open and transparent processes
are continued and that an agreed national way forward can be developed.
9. In respect of Nuclear Safety, the NDA
has rightly focused on hazard reduction and waste retrieval—this
seems sensible and has been welcomed by NuLeAF as a first indication
of prioritisation on safety. We have also welcomed the NDA's developing
`Health, Safety, Security and Environment (HSSE) Policy', which
demonstrates a firm drive by the NDA in these operational areas
and a willingness to require improvement by their contractors.
10. The NDA strategy included what we felt
was, rightly, exceptionally strong wording requiring the Reduction
of Potential High Hazards, with the NDA placing a requirement
on British Nuclear Group (BNG) to report by the end of September
2005. NuLeAF welcomed the pressure on BNG to act to overcome the
history of delay in tackling this primary national problem.
11. NuLeAF has also supported the NDA in
arguing that adequate budget provision must be made available
to enable clean-up to proceed across the UK as well as at the
difficult Sellafield legacy plants. LA's and other stakeholders
are as a consequence being further consulted on the approach to
be adopted, before decisions are finalised.
12. NuLeAF has also welcomed the NDA's proposed
acceleration of reactor site decommissioning. However, many in
NuLeAF's membership consider that there should be an early independent
examination, involving local and national stakeholders, of the
justification for continuing to operate the Magnox reactors to
their present planned lifetimes. In addition, NuLeAF considers
that on-site storage of Intermediate Level Waste (ILW) at the
decommissioning sites, following the early demolition of reactor
buildings, in purpose-built, passively-safe, retrievable and monitorable
stores, should be the favoured option. NuLeAF takes the view that
the 25-year strategy should not be dependent on the availability
of a deep repository or assume a centralised interim store.
13. NuLeAF's membership has begun to be
engaged in the NDA led discussion on the site end states issue.
NuLeAF welcomes the NDA's engagement both directly with NuLeAF's
member Councils and through the various Site Stakeholder Groups,
as they facilitate local discussion. Given the impact that site
end points will have on national radioactive waste management,
we feel that the NDA should consult as widely as possible, and
not just with communities local to their facilities. NuLeAF's
membership is also concerned that leaving sites only partially
decontaminated could result in dilution and dispersal of radioactivity
into the environment, imposing costs and risks on future generations.
In all cases, irrespective of the intended use of a site, full
consideration should be given to decontamination to a level that
would allow unrestricted use (excluding areas used for monitorable
and retrievable waste stores).
14. With reference to Waste Management,
we have made comments to the NDA on each of the waste levels.
Firstly, NuLeAF strongly supports the NDA in its pressure to ensure
the regulatory target for High Level Waste (HLW) immobilisation
is achieved or bettered. However, some local authorities within
NuLeAF's membership strongly disagree with an approach that allows
continued production of liquid high-level waste (HLW) and thus
urge an early end to reprocessing and early closure of Springfields
before its planned 2007 date. Copeland and Cumbria County Councils'
wish, however, to see an open and transparent review of the issues
before final decisions are taken, given the significant adverse
impacts of early closure of THORP.
15. NuLeAF recognised that the NDA draft
Strategy could not reach firm views on Intermediate Level Waste
disposition, while national ILW policy is unresolved. There are
a range of views within NuLeAF's membership on the CoRWM options.
However, NuLeAF's membership primarily support, at this stage,
phased deep disposal or long term interim surface storage, rather
than the deep disposal (with immediate closure) option, as commended
to CoRWM by the NDA. NuLeAF is, as noted above, a very active
participant in both the MRWS (CoRWM) process—which it fully
supports—and engagement with the NDA through its local and
national stakeholder engagement mechanisms.
16. NuLeAF recognised too, that the NDA
Strategy raised some very key issues about the future role of
the Low Level Waste facility at Drigg within the changing national
LLW Strategy. NuLeAF welcomed the evident recognition by the NDA
of NuLeAF's concern that the LLW site at Drigg should not be assumed
to provide a single national solution to low level and decommissioning
waste management. There are also strong concerns within NuLeAF's
membership at the future licenseability of the LLW site. In addition,
NuLeAF would strongly object if any new Low Level Waste (LLW)
management proposals, in West Cumbria or at other nuclear sites,
were to involve a lowering of environmental standards or an increase
in risk to health in order to reduce costs. Cost reduction and
associated operational arrangements associated with US situations
are inappropriate in the developed UK context.
17. Although not directly within NuLeAF's
remit, we regard the issue of Dounreay particles, found on beaches
and the seabed, as one of unauthorised discharges of radioactivity
into the environment. We have urged the NDA, in consultation with
Scottish interests, to review the issues involved in their removal
and treatment as waste. [NuLeAF is also looking forward to working
with a sister body likely to be formed soon under the aegis of
CoSLA—and will seek to work with that body in developing
UK-wide perspectives where appropriate.]
18. NuLeAF has also expressed views on the
commercial operations and assets issues raised in the NDA Strategy.
We are particularly aware of the current uncertainties concerning
THORP recovery, and questions concerning the capacity of the Sellafield
MOX plant (SMP) to deliver at viable throughput rates. However,
there is little NuLeAF can currently say in commenting on commercial
issues. NuLeAF will monitor the situation carefully. However,
NuLeAF also recognises that there could be severe local and immediate
economic consequences for west Cumbria if the plants are closed
early. NuLeAF has requested that the NDA be more open and transparent
as it develops its thinking on the future of THORP and the SMP,
and prepares recommendations to Government. We consider that before
final decisions are taken by Government, relevant financial and
employment information should, as far as possible, be made public
and the views of stakeholders should be widely canvassed and fully
considered.
19. The NDA's strategy for returning reprocessing
waste products to overseas customers (consequential upon the Government
decision on substitution) implies a large number of High Level
Waste (HLW) shipments by sea to Europe and Japan over the next
decade. Consistent with OCNS advice, a draft timetable should
be made public for discussion.
20. NuLeAF has also considered the important
issue of how stockpiled uranium and plutonium is managed in the
UK. These were reviewed over recent years within the BNFL National
Dialogue. It remains a complex issue, associated with the performance
of the SMP and the possible UK use of MOX fuel in new build reactors.
It would be possible to run a reactor as a means of reducing usable
stocks. NuLeAF has no agreed policy position on these matters,
and it would be premature to develop a view until the issues around
THORP and the operational effectiveness of SMP are clarified.
21. In relation to Competition and Contracting,
NuLeAF has noted the proposed timetable set out in the NDA's draft
Strategy. With particular regard to the early contracting of the
Drigg site, NuLeAF can see both pros and cons. The national LLW
policy remains unresolved until mid-2006 (though NuLeAF will comment
on the DEFRA Review when published shortly). There are significant
questions remaining in respect of site licensing for the LLW site
at Drigg raised by the Environment Agency. Councils in NuLeAF's
membership consider these uncertainties could be sufficient to
rule out further LLW disposals at the Drigg site—based on
questions concerning the presence of ILW in the old tumble-tipped
trenches, the problem of how to take into account climate change
issues in assessing coastal site risks and its role in meeting
local (Sellafield), as opposed to national, needs (for example
for small users).
22. A possible "pro" is that a
new contractor could get a real grip on the issues of LLW nationally.
The "con" is that major short-term measures, to keep
Drigg open to customers, will be implemented by BNG just at a
time when it has to concentrate on seeking to retain the contract.
One approach, suggested by Cumbria County Council, is to regard
the LLW site at Drigg (or new locations at Sellafield or elsewhere)
as providing interim storage capacity. (It should also not be
forgotten that in the 1980's, Nirex were investigating co-disposal
of LLW in their proposed ILW repository after objections to LLW
proposals.) NuLeAF will be pressing the Government, NDA and CoRWM
to take an holistic view of the radioactive waste issue in the
way waste policy is developed during 2006.
23. Concerning Socio-Economic & Stakeholder
Support, NuLeAF has made the following comments to the NDA. We
welcomed the NDA's recognition that it has a "leadership
role", working with Government and devolved administrations
to maximise opportunities for local people and businesses arising
through decommissioning and clean-up. The support for west Cumbria
and the Dounreay area, as well as other sites noted in the Strategy,
is important. NuLeAF's Cumbria members were delighted to see the
establishment of the NDA HQ in West Cumbria. In addition, the
NDA's assistance with the development of the National Nuclear
Skills Academy, the Nuclear Institute and opportunities for a
Nuclear Laboratory to maintain legacy management capacity is particularly
welcomed. All in NuLeAF's membership recognise that the UK must
maintain a strong nuclear skills base in order to manage the long-term
decommissioning and waste management agenda. We also welcome the
link to the wider skills agenda, which should assist in providing
generic skills to support a transferable workforce and diversification
of the local economies around nuclear sites. Provision needs to
be in line with the Government's Skills White Paper and support
the skills requirements of local businesses. NuLeAF welcomes the
NDA's recognition that those communities disadvantaged by decommissioning
need to be seen strategically as well as locally. The NDA's work
with the Government, the devolved administrations, their regional
development agencies and local government will be vital in ensuring
support to `isolated', single-industry communities.
24. With regard to the Financial Requirements
needed to fulfill the NDA's remit, we noted the headline in the
NDA draft Strategy that lifetime decommissioning costs are somewhat
higher than previously estimated. NuLeAF will want to ensure that
a fair and clear prioritisation process is developed in respect
of timing and continuity of spend across the sites, with NuLeAF
and its membership fully involved in that process.
25. NuLeAF also welcomed the Environmental
Report that accompanied the draft NDA Strategy, as well as the
NDA's helpful and necessary application of the Strategic Environmental
Assessment (SEA) Directive. The additional topics that the NDA
have identified, we considered were well thought out and useful.
The key issues arising from the environmental baseline will need
to be handled carefully, and prioritisation of work must be open
and transparent. Close consultation with NuLeAF and its members,
as well as all the Site Stakeholder Groups, will be essential.
26. In summary, NuLeAF appreciate the hard
work and integrity that the NDA put into the compilation of their
first draft Strategy and the positive pace of their work in this
first fully constituted year of operation. We hope that the results
of the Government's deliberations on the draft Strategy and its
final publication in April 2006 will have fully recognised the
concerns of English and Welsh local government, as expressed through
NuLeAF.
Geoff Blackwell
Chairman
28 Annex 2 not printed. Back
| 
