Ray Kemp

Investigation as legitimacy: the maturing of the big public inquiry

Abstract All major resource development schemes lie embedded in political prejudices and commitments, in interest group expectations which themselves are influenced by past events, and in the changing atmosphere of public priorities. A proposal to develop a new technology, which, especially if successful, would lead to further investments of a similar nature but which would by necessity restrict the scope for other opportunities in other policy areas, is bound to be controversial. The inevitable demand is for full justification through some kind of reputable open examination whose conduct and outcome are deemed to be fair and legitimate. While the form of that examination will vary from country to country its function remains the same — namely, to mobilise public support for a decision and the policies that envelop it. In the U.K. the public inquiry seeks to serve such a function. Its constitutional role, history, contemporary style and emerging problems of legitimacy are all examined with reference to the Sizewell B Inquiry into Britains first pressurised water reactor.

Public Concerns about LLRW Facility Siting A Comparative Study

A comparative analysis of public concerns about siting low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) disposal facilities in the United States (specifically New York State), the United Kingdom, and Hungary was performed. The analysis was based on publicly expressed responses to LLRW siting processes, plans, or decisions in each country. A typology of public concerns was developed. There was a substantial similarity in the concerns expressed in all the three countries. Fifteen of the twenty concerns were observed in all three, and another two were shared by two. However, there were differences in the relative importance of the concerns and the nature of specific arguments. The results suggest that idiosyncratic economic, social, and political factors significantly influence the importance of various concerns and proposed alternative solutions to LLRW management.

The context and conduct of the Sizewell B Inquiry

Abstract The Sizewell B Inquiry is turning out to be the longest and by far the most expensive investigation of its kind ever held in the UK. It is evolving from a statutory public inquiry into something akin to a commission of investigation. This paper looks at the circumstances which led to the current political support for the pressurized water reactor (PWR) and to the convening of the Sizewell B Inquiry. It also describes the purpose of the Inquiry and its constitutional role. The implications of the more independent, investigatory approach taken by the inquiry are discussed. The paper also comments on the view that the Inquiry is not just an examination of the merits and drawbacks of the PWR: it is provoking questions concerning the workings of the ‘big inquiry’ itself.

Social Implications and Public Confidence: Risk Perception and Communication

Public attitudes to risk have developed into an important area of concern for both operators and regulators of industrial processes as they face increasing demands to explain the likely consequences of potentially hazardous products and activities to both workers and the general public, and to the environment. There is public concern about the long-term health risks arising from industrial processes and products; risks from accidental releases; the effects of exposure to chemicals at low dose levels; and the inter-generational effects of such exposures. These problems are not only crucial areas of concern for the health and safety of the public, they also raise important questions of equity, distributional effects, efficiency of resource use and economic planning. The sine qua non of any action to address such issues has to be a careful assessment of the role and effects of information generation and dissemination - the question of risk communication.

How the sizewell B inquiry is grappling with the concept of acceptable risk

Abstract There is no agreed level of safety that is ‘acceptable’. Those responsible for managing and regulating safety believe that they can establish adequate parameters, but they recognize that those standards must meet with ‘public approval’. This paper examines one way in which that approval is sought, namely the quasijudicial examination of the merits of a proposal to construct Britains first pressurized water reactor at the Sizewell B site on the Suffolk coast. The authors argue that the Sizewell B Inquiry appears to operate on the assumption that acceptable risk levels can be determined through argument and cross-examination. In its approach to the determination of acceptable risk the Inquiry seems dependent on professional judgement and expertise as assessed by legal minds trained to sift evidence. To ensure that all the necessary evidence comes before it, the Inquiry has established procedures to initiate the preparation and examination of expert viewpoints. The authors examine how far this approach is likely to command public confidence, and the extent to which the Inquiry pinned down the elusive concept of acceptable risk.

Planning for radioactive waste disposal: Some central considerations

Abstract Planning for radioactive waste management has become one of the most important environmental issues in recent years. The land use planning process which has emerged in the UK for dealing with the radioactive waste disposal problem has proved especially inappropriate. This article outlines and examines the nature of that process, reflects on alternative strategies that might have been employed, and identifies a number of key considerations which need to be taken into account if radioactive waste management is to move forward with both tolerably-safe and publicly-acceptable proposals.

The risk management of UK landfill sites: catching will-o'-the-wisp

Methane gas migration from UK landfill sites continues to be a hazard of significant concern. Many incidents have been recorded in which the safety of site workers and members of the public has been put at risk, and investigations by waste disposal authorities have shown that the size and nature of the problem is still notfully understood. A method of assessing the risk is described. The interests of those at risk is not currently being fully served by the policy, planning and regulatory controls.

Sizewell B and environmental assessment

The Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) won ministerial consent for a pressurised water reactor (PWR) following the Sizewell B public inquiry, but it failed to convince the inspector of its case for a new access road adjacent to an important wetland. The board was also criticised for its handling of local environmental and community impacts. In advance of the implementation of the European Community Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, the Sizewell B experience provides important lessons regarding the need for comprehensive environmental appraisal of major projects. The structure of future big public inquiries should be modified to take these lessons into account as well as to establish adequate local consultative arrangements. Most of the revenue provided by the Board via local rates cannot be spent by the local authorities concerned. The matter of ensuring that some at least of local rates paid by the CEGB is channelled back to the communities most in need of extra revenue, also requires u...

Safety and Public Trust

This exchange between Mr Brooke and Stephen Reed, Mayor of Harrisburg Pennsylvania, the community most immediately affected by the notorious TMI incident encapsulates the motivations behind much of the examination before the Sizewell B Inquiry with regard to the safety aspects of the CEGB’s application. The Inspector and his Assessors knew that the Inquiry could not examine the safety case in depth (261, 99A). They had neither the resources nor the expertise to do that. In any case, the public inquiry is not designed to undertake such a task, which is the function of the statutory licensing proceedings. The Generating Board itself only chose to present what it called the ‘highlights’ of its mammoth documentation on safety aspects in its Statement of Case and Proofs of Evidence. The totality of the safety case ran to 26 volumes and over three hundred supporting documents. Yet these were for only one stage, the pre-construction safety review, of what is essentially a continuing and evolving process (CEGB, P.10, 3).

The Tactics of the Sizewell B Inquiry

This chapter concentrates on how the Inquiry went about its tasks of reporting fully, fairly and thoroughly to the Secretary of State. While our central theme will be to emphasise the innovative and investigatory aspects of the Inquiry tactics or working practices, we stress that these elements were built onto and indeed were in a sense an extension of, the more conventional adversarial procedure and legal formalities found in the mainsteam of British public inquiries. These processes have been described in Chapters 2 and 3.