from Sunday Herald, 04 April 2010
The Royal Navy has failed to minimise the risk of nuclear submarines colliding with oil tankers or cruise ships in the Firth of Clyde, according to a report by the Ministry of Defence’s internal safety watchdog.
The Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR) says that naval plans meant to protect Scotland from submarine accidents in the Clyde and on the north west coast are riddled with flaws.
There are “difficulties” with commercial shipping in the Clyde, it reveals. At some submarine berths, weather information is outdated, maps are inadequate and there haven’t been any emergency exercises for years.
The DNSR report, secret until it was released under freedom of information law, has prompted calls for a ban on the use of submarine berths. It has also heightened fears of radioactive leaks from submarine reactors.
There are designated berths for the UK’s Trident and other nuclear-powered submarines at the Faslane naval base on Gareloch and at the Coulport nuclear weapons depot on Loch Long. There is another berth in Loch Goil, off Loch Long.
There is also an official berth, known only as B4, in the middle of the Firth of Clyde off Gourock. According to shipping charts, it is close to the junction of three busy shipping lanes through the firth.
Nuclear submarines can use a further berth in Loch Ewe off Poolewe in Wester Ross. And there are berths on the south coast of England, at Plymouth, Portsmouth, Southampton and Portland.
All the berths have to be covered by a safety plan, under regulations introduced after the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986. This involves “hazard identification and risk evaluation” and measures to protect local communities such evacuation and sheltering.
The safety plans have been reviewed by DNSR, which operates secretively from within the Ministry of Defence. Its report, written in July 2008, highlights a series of problems with the plans for Scottish berths.
At B4 in the Clyde “there are difficulties in the descriptions of the control of commercial shipping”, it says. No emergency exercises had been carried out “for many years” at B4 and Loch Goil.
Meteorological data for Loch Ewe is “outdated and unsystematic” and its conclusions “not apparent”, the DNSR report says. “Mapping is frequently not adequate to provide an appreciation of the surrounding area,” it adds.
“Of particular interest are any geographic features that may impact upon safety management but will not show up on a very local map, e.g. travelling time to Loch Ewe.”
The DNSR report concludes that safety plans for all the UK berths “do not fully provide the level of safety substantiation expected”. They fail to show that the risks of radioactive contamination are “as low as reasonably practicable”, it says.
But the report adds that it’s not “appropriate” to prevent submarines from using the berths. Instead it expects safety plans to be submitted in 2011 to be “significantly improved”.
The report was obtained by John Large, an independent nuclear engineer who advises governments on the safety of nuclear submarines. “These nuclear berths should not be permitted to operate under any circumstances,” he says.
“This shows an unacceptable level of incompetence and the MoD's cavalier disregard of its duty to safeguard members of the public. It looks like admirals are neglecting their duties in Scotland whilst sipping pink gins in Whitehall.”
John Ainslie, the co-ordinator of the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, points out that the Clyde is used by oil tankers and cruise liners. But the risks of collisions with nuclear submarines has not been properly assessed, he argues.
“The general public can have no confidence in the safety schemes for these nuclear sites when they are based on such flimsy evidence,” he says. “The navy has adopted a casual attitude towards the risk of a nuclear accident even though the consequences would be horrific.”
The Ministry of Defence insists that concerns raised in the DNSR report have been “addressed”, but it doesn’t say how. “Regulators are happy with the current safety management arrangements,” says a ministry spokeswoman.
“We are committed to maintaining the safety of our operational berths and the neighbouring communities. That is why regulators carry out such strict checks.”
The Scottish government is pushing for naval nuclear sites to be independently regulated, like civil nuclear plants. "We have written to the Ministry of Defence and requested a meeting,” says a government spokeswoman.
British nuclear submarines, including three that carry nuclear weapons, have been implicated in 14 collisions since 1988. They have run aground, snagged the nets of fishing boats and crashed into a French submarine, an iceberg and a yacht (see below).
14 nuclear submarine crashes
February 2009: HMS Vanguard collides with a nuclear-armed French submarine, Le Triomphant, in the Atlantic
May 2008: HMS Superb hits an underwater pinnacle in the Red Sea
May 2003: HMS Tireless strikes an iceberg while on Arctic patrol
November 2002: HMS Trafalgar runs aground off the Isle of Skye
November 2000: HMS Triumph runs aground off the west coast of Scotland
November 2000: HMS Victorious runs aground on Skelmorlie Bank in the Firth of Clyde
July 1997: HMS Trenchant runs aground off the coast of Australia
July 1996: HMS Repulse runs aground in the North Channel
July 1996: HMS Trafalgar runs aground off the Isle of Skye
March 1991: HMS Valiant runs aground in the North Norwegian Sea
November 1990: HMS Trenchant snags the fishing vessel Antares near Arran
October 1989: HMS Spartan runs aground west of Scotland
November 1989: HMS Sceptre snags the fishing vessel, Scotia
July 1988: HMS Conqueror collides with the yacht, Dalriada, off the Northern Irish coast
source: Hansard
There's a lot of hazards with keeping nuclear weapons. It's a shame the government wont even allow Trident to be debated in the Strategic Defence Review. There was a parliament Q&A in feb about the SDR and Jeremy Corbain brought up the absurdity of not including nuclear weapons in the defence review! But alas Bob Ainsworth (Sec of State, MoD) quickly dismissed it with fob:
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2010-02-03a.303.0
What is the government so afraid of? Democracy?
Posted by: Gummy Bear | 08 April 2010 at 01:53 PM