Table Of ContentSIZEWELL 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-
