SEPA ‘deeply concerned’ about nuclear leak into Clyde from Hunterston B

This is not the sort of minute particle the notorious Doonreay regularly released onto beaches in the north of Scotland. This is a 2,600 litre leak of nuclear waste leaked into the Firth of Clyde, the waterway sweeping the shores of Scotland’s largest city and of Argyll.

The lead article in today’s Sunday Herald tells of a massive leakage revealed yesterday to the outrage of those living nearby, of all on the Clyde waterfront, environmental groups and politicians at all levels.

The big issue is that the incident happened back on 15th May but was kept secret.

Hunterston’s laughable defence, quoted in the Sunday Herald, is that the release was ‘inadvertent’. As if anyone had suggested or would imagine that they would do it deliberately. The whole point about nuclear safety is that this sort of accident does not happen.

According to the Sunday Herald, it seems that the accident happened when engineers were ‘pressure-testing discharge pipes from the plant’s low level waste facility’. Wrongly set valves the spilled 2,600 litres of waste into the Firth of Clyde.

What impact will this have had on wildlife and biodiversity – and on the food chain. It is inconceivable that it will have had none. Argyll’s sea lochs have to be closed to shellfish harvesting from time to time because of toxic algal blooms. Where does this hazard stand in relation to 2,600 litres of nuclear waste?

The Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) has described the leak as ‘unsampled’. The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) is ‘deeply concerned’ and has made it known that Hunterston B, owned and operated by French company EDF under the flag of ‘British Energy’, is in breach of six conditions of its authorisation to operate.

A major and enduring concern is the ineffectiveness of the various regulatory bodies.This weakness seems to be as much attitudinal as legislative.

As we reported at the time, the NII allowed AWE Burghfield in Berkshire to operate for years despite it’s negligence in responding to a list of over 1,000 safety shortfalls. Burghfield ‘services’ nuclear warheads in a highly dangerous process which involves taking them apart and rebuilding them.

The NII eventually – in May 2008 – forced Burghfied to close pending its addressing of safety issues long past their deadline. Again, as we reported at the time, while Burghfueld was closed, nuclear warheads were stacking up in Argyll – at the Coulport base which services the nearby nuclear submarine base at Faslane.

Warheads scheduled to have gone to Burghfield for servicing could not leave Coulport while warheads routinely removed from submarines returning from patrol had to be added to the store.

We reported on the UK Government’s final sale of its remaining stake in the Atomic Weapons Establishments (AWE) at Burghfield and Aldermaston – to an American company. The Nuclear Information Service was profoundly concerned about this sale as this company has a recorded safety record of real concern.

SEPA is as ineffectual as the NII. As we have also reported, Hunterston B has the worst safety record of all UK nuclear power stations. It has had 12 fires and 12 leaks since 2001, the most recent being a ‘roof fire’ on 20th March this year. Again as we have reported, official steps have been taken to conceal the facts of a serious hazard at Hunterston.

Despite this genuinely shocking record, SEPA’s response to the newly reported 2,600 litre nuclear waste leakage back in May has not been to initiate prosecution by referral to the Procurator Fiscal. It has been simply to issue a ‘strong reprimand’. Ouch.

The core issue here does not stop with NII and SEPA. It is a widespread systemic problem. What is the point of a regulatory body of any kind if it will not – or cannot – regulate?