Sellafield's plans to replace ageing nuclear waste facilities posing significant risks to the population face considerable uncertainty, a public spending watchdog said.
Owners of the Cumbrian nuclear power station do not know how long it will take to build storage and treatment centres for the hazardous material or how much the final bill will be, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
For more than 50 years, operators failed to plan how to dispose of the radioactive waste and some of the older facilities have deteriorated so much their contents pose significant risks to people and the environment, the report said.
Progress in 12 of the 14 major buildings and equipment projects considered "critical" for reducing risk, which range in cost from £21 million to £1.3 billion, failed to achieve what they were supposed to and had not provided good value for money, the NAO said.
Its report found there "is still considerable uncertainty in the schedules and costs" of the projects.
A long-term plan to clean up the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority-owned site, which is managed by Sellafield Limited, was agreed last year after an earlier one stalled because it was "unrealistic".
Sellafield, the UK's largest and most hazardous nuclear site, stores enough high and intermediate level radioactive waste to fill 27 Olympic swimming pools.
The highest risks are posed by the ponds and silos built during the 1950s and 1960s to store fuel for early reprocessing operations and radioactive waste, according to the report.
Margaret Hodge, who chairs the Public Accounts Committee, said: "Projects of this length and ambition are ripe for dithering and delay. I am dismayed to discover the clean-up of Sellafield is no different.
"My concern is that unless the authority holds Sellafield Ltd to a clear and rigorously benchmarked plan, timetables will continue to slip and costs spiral. It is unacceptable."
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