SIZEWELL B Also by Timothy O'Riordan ENVIRONMENTALISM PERSPECTIVES ON RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Also by Michael Purdue CASES AND MATERIALS ON PLANNING LAW PLANNING DECISIONS DIGEST Sizewell B An Anatomy of the Inquiry Timothy O'Riordan Professor of Environmental Sciences University of East Anglia Ray Kemp Lecturer in Environmental Sciences University of East Anglia Michael Purdue Senior Lecturer in Law University of East Anglia M MACMILLAN PRESS ©Timothy O'Riordan, Ray Kemp and Michael Purdue 1988 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1988 978-0-333-38944-7 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with writen permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1956 (as amended), or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, 33-34 Alfred Place, London WClE 7DP. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. First published 1988 Published by THE MACMILLAN PRESS LTD Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 2XS and London Companies and representatives throughout the world British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data O'Riordan, Timothy Sizewell B: an anatomy of the inquiry. I. Nuclear power plants-England Sizewell (Suffolk) I. Title II. Kemp, Ray III. Purdue, Michael 621.31 '25'0942646 TK 1362.G7 ISBN 978-1-349-07906-3 ISBN 978-1-349-07904-9 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-1-349-07904-9 Contents List of Figures vi List of Tables vii Preface viii The Main Dramatis Personae at the Sizewell B Inquiry xi Objectors and Commentators at the Sizewell B Inquiry xiii 2 Setting the Scene for the Sizewell B PWR 2 2 The Changing Character of the Public Inquiry 42 3 Fullness, Fairness, Thoroughness and the Legitimacy of the Sizewell B Inquiry 72 4 The Procedures and Calendar of the Sizewell B Inquiry 91 5 The Treatment of Government Policy 117 6 The Appraisal of Need and Economics 146 7 Safety and Public Trust 182 8 Uranium, Plutonium and Decommissioning 234 9 The Suffolk Dimension 260 10 The Tactics of Sizewell B Inquiry 299 11 Funding 345 12 The Sizewell B Inquiry: Perspective and Legacy 374 Appendix 1 Chief Parties to the Inquiry: Their Evidence and Days of Appearance 414 Appendix 2 Acronyms 432 Appendix 3 Abbreviations of Law Reports 436 Appendix 4 Key dates 437 Index 438 v List of Figures 1.1 Central energy forecasts for the UK 8 1.2 The changing pattern of electricity consumption 9 1.3 The policy context of the Sizewell B PWR 11 1.4 The changing price of coal 14 1.5 The advantages of a PWR nuclear family 29 2.1 The evolving functions and procedures of the major inquiry 46 3.1 Forms of acceptance and legitimation 80 3.2 Conditions for distortion-free communication 82 3.3 Ideal normative conditions and inquiry procedures 83 3.4 The handling of the Sizewell B Inquiry 86 4.1 The 'calendar' of the Sizewell B Inquiry 100 6.1 Range of energy projections for the UK to 2000 149 6.2 Economic assessments of the PWR 178 7.1 Public opinion on nuclear power 184 7.2 Nuclear installation licensing in the UK 190 7.3 Risk aversion curve 205 7.4 The Gittus tests for determining the public inquiry 230 approach to safety assessment 8.1 The nuclear fuel cycle 235 8.2 The pattern of objection over parts of the nuclear fuel cycle 236 9.1 The who's who of the Suffolk debate at the Sizewell B Inquiry 262 9.2 Zones for emergency evacuation at Sizewell Bin the light of Chernobyl 274 9.3 Possible routeways into the Sizewell nuclear complex as advocated by the Generating Board and objectors 295 10.1 The tactics of the Sizewell B Inquiry 300 10.2 Ideal normative conditions and the role of Counsel to the Inquiry 313 10.3 Inquiry tactics over project management arrangements 334 12.1 The structure of the Layfield Report 386 12.2 Possible configuration of a future major public inquiry 409 vi List of Tables l.l Energy policy priorities 10 1.2 Department of Energy projections for new nuclear power plant 24 1.3 Energy research and development in the UK 26 1.4 Nuclear power stations in the UK 30 2.1 Length of recent major inquiries 51 2.2 Length from application to decision of major proposals 60 2.3 Stages in major public inquiries 67 5.1 Definitions of radioactive waste 131 5.2 Radioactive waste futures 133 5.3 Total waste arisings over the lifetime of Sizewell B 133 5.4 Drigg futures 139 6.1 Scenario C comparative NECs 152 6.2 CEGB net effective cost sensitivities 153 6.3 The Inspector's conclusions on main plant variables 154 6.4 NEC estimates on the Inspector's central assumptions 155 6.5 Impact on Sizewell NEC of alternative assumptions in the investment appraisal 158 6.6 CERG model sensitivity tests 163 6.7 Expected values of net effective costs 168 6.8 Net decision benefit calculations 168 7.1 Variations and ranges in valuations of a life 203 7.2 ICRP risk factors for stochastic effect 208 7.3 Faults subject to PRA in the Sizewell B safety study 215 10.1 Tuesday morning procedural applications and the Inspector's rulings 321 10.2 Sizewell B Inquiry side-room meetings 324 11.1 The cost of the Sizewell B Inquiry 349 Vll Preface Twenty-five million pounds, plus two and a quarter years of expensive professional time and arduous voluntary labour are the minimum costs of the Sizewell B Inquiry in terms of expenditure and effort. The Inquiry may have cost the nation as much as five times more, depending upon how much one believes the CEGB's economic arguments. It will never be known how much the Inquiry saved the electricity consumer in terms of producing a safer and less expensive reactor. Those benefits depend on how many more PWRs of the Sizewell B design follow, and what influence the Snape Maltings debate had on the precise configuration of Britain's future electricity supply and conservation strategies. Was this extraordinary event, so unknown to the ordinary public and so largely dismissed in the post-Inquiry political rhetoric, really worth it? What is its legacy? Can this nation take major project decisions more quickly, more cheaply and more agreeably? This book examines why the Sizewell B Inquiry was so long, so arduous, so expensive and so ignored by the general public. It also analyses how the Inquiry went about its business. It considers how the Inquiry met the tests of fullness, thoroughness and fairness expected of it by its authorising minister. And it looks at the possible future of the major public inquiry in the aftermath of the Sizewell B experience. This report is based on five years of research sponsored by the indepen dent Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). The ESRC has long been interested in the mechanics of adjudicatory institutions and has supported research into three previous major inquiries-Windscale (1977), Belvoir (1979) and Stansted (1982-4). This particular research had three prime objectives. (1) To consider the procedures of the Sizewell B Inquiry in light of the evolving character of major public inquiries over the past ten years, and especially the changing public expectations of the role and legitimacy of big inquiries. (2) To assess how far the Sizewell B Inquiry was full, fair and thorough both to the arguments placed before it or which it chose to investigate, and to the parties appearing before it. (3) To reflect on the handling of decisions over future major development projects embedded in controversial party political dispute over policy and involving awkward combinations of technically sophisticated analysis and deeply felt value judgements. The research methodology consisted of a combination of monitoring events, interviewing key participants and observers, and evaluation. The viii Preface IX monitoring role applied to the behind the scenes manoeuvring amongst the main non-governmental objectors, plus sitting in on the preliminary meetings, all side-room meetings known about in advance, and all the major Inquiry events. Interviewing took place with representatives of all the leading parties, the principal lawyers and a number of other interested persons whose views were germane to the understanding of the manage ment of the Inquiry. Evaluation took the form of testing a number of theoretical constructs relating to the changing role of the public inquiry, and to the application of concepts of fairness, efficiency and legitimacy. This research did not analyse the content of the Inquiry. That was the job of the Inspector and his Assessors. What follows is inevitably a partial coverage of the relevant arguments. Many themes are omitted or given scant reference, and plenty of individual parties to the Inquiry will look in vain for a reference to them personally or their impact. This book is about the politics of the PWR choice, the metamorphosis of the public inquiry institution and the management of people, ideas, argument and informa tion. Some of the evidence was so abstract and arcane as to be intelligible to only a handful of people. Other argument was presented with deep emotion but was unsupported by factual analysis. At times an analysis was merely the outcome of one individual's fantasising. But some documentation was the product of millions of pounds worth of specialised and painstaking research. How this vast array of material, covering an almost endless spectrum of themes was managed and judged by the Inquiry forms the major purpose of this text. It is hoped that readers will regard this book as complementary to the Inspector's Report. That document provided a compressed synthesis of debate and analysis. This book tries to discover how and why the Inspector arrived at the conclusions he reached, and why the final political decision was so inevitable. Throughout the text the Layfield Report is referred to as LR with the relevant paragraph, and the Decision Letter from the Secretary of State for Energy appears as DL, again with a paragraph reference. The daily transcript citation is of the form: day, page and letter on page. Proofs of evidence and their addenda are quoted as they were labelled by the Inquiry. A full reference appears in Appendix I. Appendix 2 provides a lengthy list of acronyms, Appendix 3 the relevant legal citations, and Appendix 4 itemises principal dates on the nuclear calendar. The two diagrams that follow introduce the reader to the drama tis personae of the Inquiry and to the topics covered by various parties. The book itself is divided into three parts. Chapters 1-3 set the scene for the PWR choice, the evolution of the major inquiry, and the explanation of the tests of fullness, fairness, thoroughness and legitimacy. Chapters 4-11 analyse the Sizewell B Inquiry in terms of the major themes covered - procedures (Chapter 4), policy (Chapter 5), need and economics (Chapter 6), safety (Chapter 7), the nuclear fuel cycle (Chapter 8), local environmen-