Nuclear Information Service

Nuclear weapons are designed to cause extreme loss of life, destruction of the built and natural environment and long-lasting radiological contamination. In the normal world, nuclear regulators would never allow high explosives to go anywhere near fissile material (the 'fuel' for a nuclear explosion). Such is the risk taken in the production, transport, storage and deployment of nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, safety underpins any nuclear weapons regime, primarily to ensure that the weapons will perform as required if it is delivered; the safety of workers, the military, the environment and ordinary people is secondary. Nuclear safety policy is weakened the more organisations there are involved in its procedures, the poorer the standard of nuclear military infrastructure and the more risks taken during transport. Accident contingency plans provide some protection, but in the event would prove inadequate.

Ibex House
85 Southampton Street
Reading
RG1 2QU
United Kingdom

Tel / fax: 0118 327 7489
email: office(at)nuclearinfo.org

Forthcoming events

Remembrance Day Lecture

Professor Philippe Sands QC, Lecturer in International Law at University College London, will be talking about the Chilcott Inquiry and the legality of the invasion of Iraq.

Admission is free, but please register in advance with event organisers the Movement for the Abolition of War.

2.00 - 5.00 pm, Sunday 14 November 2010

Cinema, Imperial War Museum, Lambeth Road, London SE1 6HZ

latest tweet from NIS:

Visits to Aldermaston, Burghfield, Theale, Thatcham, Mortimer, and Newbury today - over 250 objections recorded to AWE planning application.

latest on Peter Burt's blog

NIS calls for independent inquiry into Aldermaston fire
Safety questions unanswered for AWE's Project Hydrus
A street survey shows that 61% of local people are opposed to AWE's Project Pegasus.
Council accused of sneaking through nuclear plans during Christmas rush.
Aldermaston's £500 million new uranium project - read our special briefing.
New AWE emergency plan highlights chilling consequences of a nuclear accident
Emergency services could not cope with Southampton nuclear submarine accident
Nuclear submarine waste bound for AWE?
MOD Stops Live Nuclear Work at AWE due to preasure from NII over safety risks..
2008 Annual Report released by NIS.
A New Film Exposes Deadly Cargo on British Roads..

Hansard on AWE Burghfield Floods, Oct 27th 2008

2008-10-27 15:00

*Harry Cohen* (Leyton & Wanstead, Labour)

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what contingency planning had been conducted at AWE Burghfield before the 2007 floods to prepare for such an eventuality; and if he will make a statement.

*Quentin Davies* (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Ministry of Defence; Grantham & Stamford, Labour)

Contingency planning at AWE Burghfield is based on the output of a rolling programme of assessments undertaken as part of the site safety cases. Before the 2007 flooding these concluded that the surface water management system would be adequate to prevent flooding of the operational facilities in normal circumstances.

Prior to the 2007 event, localised flooding was experienced at AWE Burghfield, which resulted in further contingency measures being implemented. This involved clearing and dredging the Burghfield Brook, which runs through the site, and reprofiling its banks to allow a greater amount of water to be contained and a constant flow to be
maintained.

Although the measures taken mitigated the effects of the July 2007 heavy rainfall, flooding still occurred as run-off from surrounding fields migrated to the site. Water sampling was completed throughout the site and no abnormal results were detected. At no time was there any threat to the operational safety of AWE sites, to the public or the environment.