Exclusive
DOUNREAY was last night accused by one of is main oppontents of wasting at least #300,000 of public money a year on an obsession with reprocessing other people's nuclear waste, by hiring 20 extra staff to work on a contract which might now never be completed.
At the centre of the latest controversy is the D2670 facility, which until October few people knew existed, and a #2m contract to reprocess Triga (Training, Research, Isotope, General Atomic) fuel from ICI Billingham in it.
Billingham is the only source of Triga fuel in the UK but there are around 5000 rods of spent Triga fuel lying in 19 countries across the world. Anti-nuclear campaigners have accused Dounreay of trying to open up a new line in foreign commercial reprocessing on the quiet.
Dounreay announced the ICI contract in October, describing it only as processing work, but by February it became clear that it was reprocessing and Dounreay had not sought official permission or mentioned it to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. The management said that only the Nuclear Installation's Inspectorate had to be informed. Sepa, however, insisted that an official application would have to be lodged and a public consultation undertaken. The Scottish Office said it was Sepa's decision.
Earlier this week Dounreay announced recruitment of 20 operational staff to work in D2670. This had been done in anticipation of the Triga contract and before the NII's ban on any further reprocessing work announced last week following the recent total loss of electrical power to the whole Fuel Cycle Area. The safety audit, which will involve 10 inspectors from NII and Sepa and which critics believe will finally force an end to reprocessing, was announced shortly afterwards.
Dounreay's director Roy Nelson told The Herald last month that it would now be a year before D2670 could be made ready and approved by the regulators, including Sepa. The Billingham contract, however, was to have been completed in 1998 and 1999, which meant it was now in some difficulty. ''That certainly is something we are having to give a lot of thought to,'' Dr Nelson conceded.
Dounreay's leading critic, Mrs Lorraine Mann of Scotland Against Nuclear Dumping, said yesterday that 20 new salaries would mean at least #300,000 a year to the taxpayer. She believed it to be a breathtaking scandal and one that had to be investigated by the authorities.
''Dounreay clearly signed a contract and intended opening and operating this plant without the proper legal consents. Now we the taxpayers are picking up the bill for the speculative reconfiguration of a plant which is now highly unlikely Dounreay will ever be allowed to use.
''Possibly more damaging than anything is that management time has been invested in this silly distraction, when there have been huge safety problems on the site.
''The real effort should have been going into decommissioning. They cannot get over their obsession with reprocessing, something which has no economic justification whatsover and in itself presents a serious proliferation threat, as the US has long recognised.''
A Dounreay official said last night: ''The 20 people who were recruited for D2670 were brought in for a range of contracts, among which was the ICI Billingham contract.
''They had already begun being trained so that they would do preparatory work on PFR liability material in D2670, which would then have been going on to the residue recovery plant in D1206. That training is continuing and they are on care and maintenance work as well.''
The D1206 plant, however, has not worked since October 1996 when a leak in the sodium dissolver was discovered. A decision is awaited from the Department of Trade and Industry as to whether Dounreay can spend the considerable sums of money needed to do all the necessary repair work in the plant.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article