Publication delay for secret nuclear dump list - [Sunday Herald]
Publication delay for secret nuclear dump list - [Sunday Herald]: "Publication delay for secret nuclear dump list
By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor
Publication of a highly sensitive and long-secret list of potential nuclear waste dumps, many of which are suspected of being in Scotland, has been delayed by the government in defiance of a plea from its advisers.
The Committee on Radio active Waste Management (CoRWM), which is drawing up a nuclear disposal strategy for ministers, had demanded the list be released before June. But it will not be published before the middle of the month, after it has been checked by defence and environment officials in Whitehall.
CoRWM fears the publicity generated by the release of the list could damage its attempts to win public confidence in its programme. It is considering whether radioactive waste should be stored above the ground or buried in a deep underground repository, and is due to make recommendations to ministers next year.
The list, which has been kept under wraps for 15 years, names 12 sites short-listed in the late 1980s as geologically suitable for burying nuclear waste by the government’s waste agency, Nirex. Two of the sites are known to be near the Dounreay nuclear plant in Caithness, and two near the Sellafield plant in Cumbria.
The location of the other eight, though, has always been a closely guarded secret, along with an original list of 537 sites from which they were selected. But new freedom of information legislation has forced ministers to agree to the list being unveiled.
The Sunday Herald has repeatedly asked for the list over the years and, along with others, filed a formal freedom of information request on January 4 this year. Since then, Nirex has twice refused to provide the list because it did not want it to come out in the run-up to the general election.
Nirex feared that in the heightened political atmos phere, the government could be forced to rule out some of the short-listed sites. This, it warned, “would affect the legitimacy and effectiveness of a new site selection process”.
But at a meeting with local authorities, environmental groups and journalists in Manchester last week, Nirex said it had secured government agreement to publish the list in “mid June”. It is intending to disclose the long list of 537 and the short list of 12.
“We asked CoRWM to come to the meeting and they sent a letter with their preferred timetable. It’s unfortunate but we don’t think that timetable can be met,” said David Wild, Nirex spokesman.
“We are agreeing an actual timetable with the government. What we are trying to do is to publish the information in a way that will be seen to be helpful to the future process.”
CoRWM’s chair, Gordon MacKerron, was disappointed at the delay. “It’s a pity, but I’m glad the information is going to be published shortly,” he told the Sunday Herald.
“This is a very clear demonstration of the importance of being open and transparent, because if you aren’t it inevitably leads to all kinds of mistrust and suspicion.”
MacKerron had asked Nirex, in a letter on May 12, to publish the list “no later than the beginning of June”, well before CoRWM’s national stakeholder forum in Manchester on June 7 and 8. “Further delay could cause significant risk to CoRWM’s programme”, he warned.
The delays in releasing the list have also been criticised by local authorities and environmental groups. “We have yet another delay in releasing this list, which should have been made public 15 years ago,” said Pete Roche, the policy adviser to Nuclear Free Local Authorities (Scotland).
Nirex’s plan to organise the “managed release” of the inform ation was just a way of trying to spin it in the best possible way for the government, he claimed. “Any sites on the list, more than half of which are thought to be in Scotland, are likely to feature on any future nuclear waste dump list – yet another reason to avoid building new waste-producing nuclear facilities.”
Although Nirex stresses the list is “historic”, it cannot rule out the possibility that some of the same sites would be chosen in a future selection process if deep disposal becomes the chosen option. It still regards Longlands farm, one of the short-listed sites near Sellafield, as a “very good site”, though it was rejected after a public inquiry in 1997.
29 May 2005"
By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor
Publication of a highly sensitive and long-secret list of potential nuclear waste dumps, many of which are suspected of being in Scotland, has been delayed by the government in defiance of a plea from its advisers.
The Committee on Radio active Waste Management (CoRWM), which is drawing up a nuclear disposal strategy for ministers, had demanded the list be released before June. But it will not be published before the middle of the month, after it has been checked by defence and environment officials in Whitehall.
CoRWM fears the publicity generated by the release of the list could damage its attempts to win public confidence in its programme. It is considering whether radioactive waste should be stored above the ground or buried in a deep underground repository, and is due to make recommendations to ministers next year.
The list, which has been kept under wraps for 15 years, names 12 sites short-listed in the late 1980s as geologically suitable for burying nuclear waste by the government’s waste agency, Nirex. Two of the sites are known to be near the Dounreay nuclear plant in Caithness, and two near the Sellafield plant in Cumbria.
The location of the other eight, though, has always been a closely guarded secret, along with an original list of 537 sites from which they were selected. But new freedom of information legislation has forced ministers to agree to the list being unveiled.
The Sunday Herald has repeatedly asked for the list over the years and, along with others, filed a formal freedom of information request on January 4 this year. Since then, Nirex has twice refused to provide the list because it did not want it to come out in the run-up to the general election.
Nirex feared that in the heightened political atmos phere, the government could be forced to rule out some of the short-listed sites. This, it warned, “would affect the legitimacy and effectiveness of a new site selection process”.
But at a meeting with local authorities, environmental groups and journalists in Manchester last week, Nirex said it had secured government agreement to publish the list in “mid June”. It is intending to disclose the long list of 537 and the short list of 12.
“We asked CoRWM to come to the meeting and they sent a letter with their preferred timetable. It’s unfortunate but we don’t think that timetable can be met,” said David Wild, Nirex spokesman.
“We are agreeing an actual timetable with the government. What we are trying to do is to publish the information in a way that will be seen to be helpful to the future process.”
CoRWM’s chair, Gordon MacKerron, was disappointed at the delay. “It’s a pity, but I’m glad the information is going to be published shortly,” he told the Sunday Herald.
“This is a very clear demonstration of the importance of being open and transparent, because if you aren’t it inevitably leads to all kinds of mistrust and suspicion.”
MacKerron had asked Nirex, in a letter on May 12, to publish the list “no later than the beginning of June”, well before CoRWM’s national stakeholder forum in Manchester on June 7 and 8. “Further delay could cause significant risk to CoRWM’s programme”, he warned.
The delays in releasing the list have also been criticised by local authorities and environmental groups. “We have yet another delay in releasing this list, which should have been made public 15 years ago,” said Pete Roche, the policy adviser to Nuclear Free Local Authorities (Scotland).
Nirex’s plan to organise the “managed release” of the inform ation was just a way of trying to spin it in the best possible way for the government, he claimed. “Any sites on the list, more than half of which are thought to be in Scotland, are likely to feature on any future nuclear waste dump list – yet another reason to avoid building new waste-producing nuclear facilities.”
Although Nirex stresses the list is “historic”, it cannot rule out the possibility that some of the same sites would be chosen in a future selection process if deep disposal becomes the chosen option. It still regards Longlands farm, one of the short-listed sites near Sellafield, as a “very good site”, though it was rejected after a public inquiry in 1997.
29 May 2005"
posted by Greta Jane at Saturday, May 28, 2005
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home