Sellafield

New report says Sellafield plans a 'bodge' as operators face prosecution

One year after a series of alarming errors resulted in 18,000 litres of highly radioactive dissolved spent fuel leaking in the THORP reprocessing plant at Sellafield, Greenpeace has published a report which exposes how the current plan to reopen THORP is an 'engineering 'bodge' which risks compromising safety. The publication comes as it was revealed that the plant's operators will be prosecuted over the accident.

The emergency closure of the plant occurred on 21 April 2005. For the past year nuclear fuel has been stored on site at Sellafield. It's not yet clear if and when THORP will reopen, but indications from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority are that storage capacity at Sellafield could run out in the near future (one to two years from now) leading to serious problems for the nuclear industry.

A report prepared for Greenpeace by nuclear engineer John Large castigates the option proposed by the NDA for reopening the plant.

'My investigation exposes a trail of major engineering failures by THORP's operators, British Nuclear Group. It also exposes the NDA's inability to impose an acceptable solution. The result is simply a bodged job rather than a sound engineering solution,' said John Large.

The leak which closed the plant had been going on for nine months before it was detected. British Nuclear Group's (BNG) Board of Inquiry into the THORP accident has stated that there is a risk that the plant could fail again, even if the Board of Inquiry recommendations are implemented. A tank intended for future reprocessing, were the plant to reopen, could be subject to the same failures as the infrastructure which caused the original leak. The operators want to reopen the plant this summer.

John Large's report explains that properly engineered solutions could take up to three years to implement. The NDA has claimed that if it does not reopen the plant it will face mounting problems because of the amount of foreign and UK spent nuclear fuel stored in THORP's receipts and storage unit. Continued closure could even impact on the operation of British Energy reactors which continue to send spent fuel to Sellafield on a weekly basis.

'The nuclear industry is anxious to reopen the plant because it's worried about the prospects for spent fuel storage if it doesn't clear the backlog. What's most worrying is that the operators never had a plan B for this situation, They always assumed THORP would operate smoothly. Now it appears they're prepared to risk the same scenario again with a questionable reopening plan,' said Greenpeace's Jean McSorley. She added, 'All documents relating to the accident and safety case should be released for public scrutiny as soon as possible. As it is, information is currently being withheld because of pending legal action.'

Secrecy currently surrounds the conditions under which the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) would allow THORP to reopen. The NII has not released the 49 conditions which it has imposed on British Nuclear Group (BNG) before it can reopen the plant.

'It is unbelievable that the authorities think it is acceptable that a major plant, which handles such hazardous materials and which may be liable to failure again, should be allowed to operate again without the public knowing exactly what the inspectors have imposed as conditions on the reopening and also what the consequences of a second failure might be,' McSorley added. 'The nuclear industry and the government are so desperate for the industry to appear viable so they can build new stations, they will run extraordinary risks to keep a plant like THORP operating.'

The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which owns THORP, has refused to fully disclose the cost of the accident, despite repeated requests under Freedom of Information legislation by Greenpeace. BNG has been unable to provide sound financial costings for the non-restart options for THORP

Despite its refusal to detail the costs of the THORP'S closure, the NDA has put in an insurance claim for lost revenue and repair costs and stated it estimates losses will amount to £50m - significantly less than the Greenpeace report estimate of £575m.

Download the report Leak of radioactive liquor in the feed clarification cell at BNG THORP Sellafield by nuclear engineers John Large and Associates as a pdf.

For more contact Greenpeace on 0207 865 8255

Note to editors:

• The NDA has said there are 800 tonnes of light-water reactor fuel from overseas reactors, along with 500 tonnes from BE's advanced gas cooled reactors waiting to be reprocessed. Due to the system of reprocessing, less radioactive spent nuclear fuel from British Energy reactors has to be co-reprocessed along with foreign fuel.
• The £2.8bn plant was in its tenth year of operation, but was lagging behind in its reprocessing schedule due to a series of earlier technical problems leading to unplanned closures. This has compounded the current storage problems
• The NDA/BNG have said the LWR fuel needs to be cleared from the receipt and storage facility at THORP in order to change the water quality of the pond for long term storage of AGR fuel.
• It is expected that if reopened the plant will operate on only one accountancy tank although it was designed explicitly to operate with both tanks working properly. Operating on one tank will reduce THORP's throughput to 60% of the original production process.
• Claims that it would be more expensive to not reopen THORP and take alternative measures have not been substantiated either by the NDA or BNG. In particular, BNG has admitted that its costings for some options e.g. having the fuel reprocessed overseas, are not based on sound financial analysis but are purely estimates of what costs they think might be accrued.
• BNG's Board of Inquiry report stated paragraph 5.2 on page 9 of the 34 page document:
  
  "This event has demonstrated that despite high quality construction, serious faults can occur within Thorp which breach primary containment. Given the history of such events so far, it seems likely that there will remain a significant chance of further plant failures occurring in the future even with comprehensive implementations of this report."
  (Board of Inquiry report into the fractured pipe in the Feed Clarification Cell in Thorp, BNFL, 26 May 2005. http://www.britishnucleargroup.com/pdf/2765_1.pdf)

The new Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), which comes into being today, will take ownership of many of the UK's major nuclear facilities - including the controversial Sellafield site. But while the NDA was originally flagged in the Legacy White Paper of 2002 as a body that should focus "squarely on [dealing with] the nuclear legacy", it has not been designed to fully deal with the huge problem of radioactive waste. Instead the government has created a body that will:/what-you-can-do/take-action

• operate two large-scale spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plants at Sellafield, which create massive amounts of nuclear waste;
  
• run loss making Magnox reactors;
  
• possibly commission the Sellafield MOX plant, which is meant to produce plutonium-fuel for reactors overseas; and
  
• relieve British Nuclear Fuels of all of its nuclear waste liabilities - a matter which is currently the subject of an investigation by the European Competition Commission.
  
  The NDA will also be heavily reliant on reprocessing and Magnox reactor operations for a sizeable proportion of its income.
  
  "The government has squandered an ideal opportunity to tackle the urgent need for decommissioning and clean-up at some of the UK's most hazardous nuclear sites," said Greenpeace nuclear campaigner Jean McSorley. "The NDA will be dependent for half of its income on waste-creating activities like spent fuel reprocessing in order to fund its decommissioning and clean-up program. It's like paying dustmen to drop litter. The government has also squandered the public goodwill that greeted the initial announcement to create this Authority."
  
  Greenpeace, which has closely followed the progress of the NDA, has been heavily critical of the fact that the Authority will take over all of British Nuclear Fuels nuclear waste liabilities.
  
  McSorley added: "Although the NDA will take over BNFL's assets, these are overshadowed by the cost of its liabilities. In allowing BNFL to effectively dump these liabilities on the doorstep of the NDA, the government has given a massive state-aid bailout to BNFL. The Commission's investigation of the NDA and state aid issues is of vital concern not only in the context of UK subsidies for the nuclear industry, but for the whole of Europe. If BNFL gets away with ditching its liabilities in this way, other nuclear companies across Europe will try to follow suit. This will have major ramifications for competition in the electricity sector and will particularly hurt the developing renewables industry."
  
  It is expected the Competition Commission's investigation, which began in January, will last until the end of the year.
  
  For further details contact Jean McSorley on 07801 212 959 or the Greenpeace press office on 0207 865 8255.

   

   

   

Sellafield, on the coast at Cumbria

Concerns raised about Sellafield 'clean up' leading to increase in radioactive discharges to Irish Sea

Greenpeace today said that BNFL's plans to close the THORP spent fuel reprocessing plant at Sellafield by 2010, bringing its end forward by 14 years, do not go far enough.

They urged BNFL to bring THORP's closure forward by allowing British Energy (BE) to store spent fuel from its nuclear plants, rather than forcing them to reprocess it. BE last year attempted to pull out of reprocessing contracts with BNFL in order to save funds but were prevented from doing so by BNFL.

"Bringing forward the closure of THORP may sound good," said Greenpeace nuclear campaigner Jean McSorley, "but this plan hides the fact that the plant could close even earlier, probably around 2006, if British Energy was allowed to store their spent nuclear fuel rather than being made to reprocess it. That would mean less radioactive waste being created and less radioactive discharges into the environment."

Greenpeace also said that it would be watching BNFL's "clean up" work at the Sellafield site very carefully to ensure it does not lead to an increase in radioactive discharges into the Irish Sea.

Jean McSorley continued, "The term clean up sounds very nice - but BNFL has failed to say how it will deal with the radioactive materials they clean up. We will be watching very carefully to check that it applies the "concentrate and contain" principle to radioactive waste from the site, rather than just opting to pump more radioactive wastes out into the sea."

Greenpeace also attacked suggestions by BNFL Director Mike Watson that a new nuclear reactor should be built on the Sellafield site, to burn 'MOX' plutonium/uranium fuel. (1) MOX fuel is highly contentious because experts believe it can be used to make low grade nuclear weapons and also because of the highly radioactive and toxic waste created by its production and use.

McSorley said, "Using MOX in reactors is just another dangerous scheme from a company that has a history of loss making and hazardous activities. That is got it so wrong over THORP should act as a warning that it is not be trusted in the future. MOX reactors may reduce the plutonium stockpile, but they also create more spent fuel that has to be dealt with."

At the recent meeting of European Environment Ministers in Germany, the UK delegation raised the possibility of increased discharges from clean up of Sellafield and the matter will be on the agenda for future talks of the Radioactive Substances Committee of the Oslo-Paris Convention.

Notes for editors
(1) Source: "£1.8bn Thorp plant that promised limitless electricity to close by 2010", article in the Guardian newspaper, 26th August 2003.

Internationally the majority of spent nuclear fuel is not reprocessed.

When THORP opened in 1994 it was claimed it would deal with 7000 tonnes of spent fuel, from secure orders within the first ten years. The company also claimed there would be a significant amount of extra reprocessing work in addition to the baseload contracts.

THORP has reprocessed little over 4000 of the 7000 tonne baseload and is running at least three years behind schedule. THORP's throughput is limited by the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate to around 50% of design throughput as the company has been unable to achieve waste vitrification to deal with the amount of liquid High Level Wastes procued by the plant. Designed to reprocess over 1000 tonnes per year, THORP was limited to just 500 tonnes last year.

BNFL posted losses of $1 bn for the financial year ending 2003.

Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant

An international meeting of Environment Ministers ended today with the UK being forced to accept, in writing, the concerns of European countries over radioactive discharges into the North Seas (1) from the Sellafield nuclear installation in Cumbria.

London had previously successfully resisted attempts to record criticism of the UK's failure to meet its commitments to reduce radioactive discharges at the OSPAR conference (2,3). Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands and Sweden were particularly critical of the UK's role.

The discharge of Technetium 99 in particular was the subject of intense negotiation at the meeting. In the last week - after six months of prevarication - the UK Environment Minister Margaret Beckett was pressured into writing to BNFL to ask the company for a 9 month moratorium on technetium 99 discharges. It is expected that research and development will take place over the next 9 months to see if technology to stop the discharges is feasible by March 2004.

"This decision may come back to haunt the UK", said Greenpeace's Jean McSorley at the OSPAR Conference. "The UK Government will be dreading March 2004. They either have to ensure the technology is in place or announce a resumption of the radioactive technetium discharges."

"The UK only moved on this issue because a coalition of countries led by Norway and Ireland, refused to allow Britain to go unchallenged," said McSorley. "The lack of progress in reducing discharges, due to the intransigence of the UK and, to a lesser extent, France", meant that this OSPAR meeting was not able to celebrate significant reduction in radioactive discharges to European waters," he said.

Greenpeace welcomed the adoption of guidelines on offshore wind farm development which will facilitate and encourage the development of clean renewable energy.

For more information please contact the Greenpeace press office on 0207 865 8115.

Notes:

(1) The North Sea and NE Atlantic.

(2) OSPAR Convention deals with marine pollution of the North East Atlantic and North Sea. Member states are: Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the European Commission.

(3) Five years ago in Portugal OSPAR Ministers agreed to "work towards achieving further substantial reductions of discharges, by the year 2000" and to "progressive and substantial reductions in radioactive discharges to achieve by the year 2020 close to zero concentrations in the marine environment above historic levels". The discharges from Sellafield have increased since 1998 and are set to double in the coming years. Technetium has a radioactive half-life of 210,000 years.

Sellafield, on the coast at Cumbria

Tests by Southampton University have found traces of radioactive waste from the controversial Sellafield plant in Scottish farmed salmon sold in British supermarkets, Sainsburys, Safeway's and Marks and Spencer. The revelation comes as Britain is due to face fierce criticism this week (23rd-27th June) at an international meeting of environment ministers in Germany for failing to tackle nuclear pollution from Sellafield.

The levels found in the study, which was commissioned by Greenpeace, are relatively low and pose no immediate risk to human health. However, despite promises by John Prescott to Europe in 1998 to reduce radioactive pollution from Sellafield, discharges have increased and are set to double over the next few years. This will mean increased levels of nuclear contamination in the food chain. High levels have already been found in lobsters and other shellfish.

Four of seven supermarket samples surveyed showed detectable levels of technetium-99, the majority of which is a by-product of reprocessing nuclear waste from BNFL's ageing Magnox reactors. Britain's five operating Magnox reactors are all due to close by 2010 and supply just 5% of Britain's electricity. Technetium-99 has a radioactive half-life of 210,000 years. Its discovery in food is likely to mean other radioactive isotopes from Sellafield are also present

Greenpeace nuclear campaigner Jean McSorley said

"The tests Greenpeace commissioned show that nuclear pollution from Sellafield is contaminating Scottish farmed salmon. The levels we found now are low but this is a real warning sign that if the government does not take action radioactive pollution in salmon and other foods will increase."

"Britain's five oldest nuclear reactors must be shut down now. It is fuel from these plants that cause most of Sellafield' s pollution. We don't need the electricity these reactors produce and we don't want their radioactive pollution in our seas and in our food."

In what will be his first international meeting since his appointment as Environment Minister Elliot Morley is to join ministers from fourteen countries and the EC meeting under the OSPAR convention (1) in Bremen, Germany, to discuss marine pollution in the north east Atlantic and North Sea. This is the first time ministers have met under OSPAR since the historic meeting in Sintra, Portugal, in 1998 which set ground-breaking commitments for action on radioactive discharges. At the time this was hailed as a great step forward for the environment and John Prescott famously declared, "I was ashamed of Britain's record in the past but now we have shed the tag of the Dirty Man of Europe and have joined the family of nations."

Notes
1. OSPAR Convention deals with marine pollution, in the North East Atlantic and North Sea. Member states are; Belgium, Denmark, Finland France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the European Commission.
2. Click here for more information on sample results (PDF format).

For more information please contact Greenpeace Press Office on 020 7865 8255.

Publication date: June 2003

Summary
The UK's Environment Minister will be in Bremen, Germany, on June 25th and 26th for a meeting of the signatories to the OSPAR Convention (the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic).

In 1998 OSPAR called for significant reductions in radioactive discharges. The UK Government has however sabotaged action on reducing radioactive discharges from the Sellafield reprocessing plant - one of the worst culprits in terms of radioactive contamination.

This Greenpeace briefing exposes the UK's failure to act to reduce radioactive pollution in Europe.