Decision No: CAB044 - 09/2009

Forward Plan No: ED03567

This record relates to 1 on the agenda for the Decision-Making

RECORD OF EXECUTIVE DECISION

21/09/2009  

DECISION-MAKER:

SAFER COMMUNITIES MANAGER  

PORTFOLIO AREA:

Economic Development  

SUBJECT:

SotonSafe Plan  

AUTHOR:

Graham Wyeth  

THE DECISION

To approve the proposals / recommendations contained in the report as set out below with the following modifications or conditions:

Modifications to Recommendations (i) and (iv).

(i) To approve the HSE determination of the area of Emergency Planning Zone and the Public Information Zone under Regulations 9(i) and 16(i) of REPPIR as a result of which, for future planning purposes, the Pre-planned Counter Measures Zone (PCMZ) within the SotonSafe Plan will be amended from 2km to 1.5km.

(ii) To note that work in support of the former 2km zone will be retained rather than disposed of to inform an extended response capability should that be deemed appropriate upon declaration of an incident under the Plan in the future.

(iii) To note the agreement of the NII as Regulator, to extend the due date of submission and publication of the revised and updated SotonSafe Version 5 Plan by 3 months from September to 18th December 2009, as per attached letter at Appendix 3.

(iv) To confirm that Version 4 of the SotonSafe (Z Berth) Off-Site Reactor Emergency Plan and its component PITs Distribution Operational Procedures Manual (including the 2km PCMZ) remain operationally valid and will continue to apply to any visit by a MOD/RN nuclear powered submarine to the Port of Southampton until such time as Version 5 is revised, approved and published.  

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

1. Having fully considered this matter in consultation with statutory partners, the Emergency Planning Manager (EPM) considers that the request is based upon a detailed risk and safety assessment and consultative process by the submarine operator, set out within attached Appendix 1, 2 & 5. It has also been thoroughly scrutinised by the NII and deemed an appropriate response zone for the Plan. This is based upon limited potential impact beyond the current stipulated Automatic Counter Measures Zone (ACMZ) of 500 metres. The amended PCMZ distance of 1.5 km affords additional resilience which in all reasonably foreseeable circumstances would not be compromised. Following publication of the report additional meetings were held with the Royal Navy, Primary Care Trust and Cabinet Member for Economic Development. The decision maker is satisfied that the operator has updated and reviewed hazard identification risk evaluation in light of advances in technical knowledge and lessons learned in the testing of emergency plans, as well as changes to best practise nationally to hazard identification and emergency planning responses to potential nuclear reactor accidents and therefore the HSE's decision to reduce the PCMZ to not less than 1.5km is reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances. This is further supported by a letter from the HSE dated 21st August 2009 to the Director of Public Health and which is appended to this decision notice. No statutory partner agency has any objection to the proposal. The proposal is not considered by health professionals to compromise public health. The Council is satisfied that sufficient continuing resources will be available to respond to any radiation emergency and the reduction of the zone will allow those resources to be more properly focused on those members of the public for whom there is an identifiable and foreseeable risk rather than providing a more diffused response to the wider population which can be adequately protected through the concept of extendability. This will also allow Emergency Planning staff to concentrate more fully on other more reasonably foreseeable risks and threats that constitute a greater potential hazard to the public such as pandemic and flooding etc.

2. The proposal meets the requirement of all related legislation and has been independently scrutinised and approved by the HSE NII as SCC regulatory authority.

3. It is anticipated that the revised Plan will be approved under officer delegated powers in December 2009, at which time the proposed reduction in the PCMZ, if approved, will be implemented.

4. The decision maker has also taken into account additional representations received following the publication of this report from Mr Vetterlein and from the Solent Coalition Against Nuclear Ships which are further appended to this decision notice. The additional representations raise a number of issues including officers authority to take the decision, the adequacy of the consulation conducted prior to this decision, the appropriateness of the proposed reduction and justification for visits by nuclear powered submarines to the City. In response to the representations the decision maker is satisfied that officers are entitled to make this decision further to delegated powers granted by Cabinet in 2006 and delegation contained within the Officer Scheme of Delegation set out in the Council's constitution to carry out all Emergency Planning functions. The delegation to conduct the testing and review of the Plan in accordance with Regulation 9 of REPPIR, as per the statutory guidance on review procedures the making of such changes as are necessary to revise the Plan in light of new technical knowledge and knowledge concerning the response to radiation emergency and any material changes based on the assessment of risk and the Plan since it was last reviewed or revisited. Reasons for the reduction in the Zone are set out above. It has been noted that the age of the vessels has been raised as a concern, however the Council has been satisfied by way of dialogue with the Royal Navy and HSE that this has been taken into account as part of the risk planning process along with the age of reactor cores, containment vessels and other technical issues etc. In relation to the conduct of the consultation the Council is satisfied that it has met its legal requirement under REPPIR particularly in relation to Regulations 9 and 16 and that those members of the public and other appropriate agencies directly affected by the proposal have had sufficient information and time to respond to the proposals. It should be noted that the public response to the consultation carried out by way of letter and inclusion on the Forward Plan, has been extremly low demonstrating a low level of concern and regard has been had to those points that were raised.

5. In addition to the representations above about the justification for the visits Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee on 10th September 2009 recommended that the Executive express to the Navy a preference for non-nuclear powered or capable ships only to visit Southampton. This is not within the officers delegated authority to pursue and has therefore been passed to Cabinet for their consideration. Officers sole concern in relation to this matter is to ensure that the Authority's Emergency Planning duties are met in the event of such a visit.
 

DETAILS OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

1. • Do nothing, retain current arrangements.
Whilst this would appear the easy option and the RN have intimated that it would support the City Council whatever its decision, it is considered inappropriate not to revise the Plan in light of revised health & safety assessments, the advice of professional bodies, officers and the Regulator.
2. • Agree the proposal without retaining the work supporting the existing 2km zone.
This would appear wasteful given the nature of the broader detailed work available to allow a readily enhanced shelter and PITs distribution response beyond that required in the highly unlikely event that it was ever required. That said, it is acknowledged that its total accuracy will be reduced over time and an appropriate date would be determined by the SEPG to dispense with it.
 

OTHER RELEVANT MATTERS CONCERNING THE DECISION

The following documents were received and noted by the decision maker prior to taking the decision:

1. E-mail from John Vetterlein (dated 14 September 2009). Subject: Submission to consultation on change to CMZ of SotonSafe.
2. E-mail from Solent Coalition Against Nuclear Ships (dated 14 September 2009). Subject: SCANS submission to change to CMZ of SotonSafe.
3. Letter from HSE (dated 21st August 2009).

 

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The decision-maker(s) did not declare a personal or prejudicial interest in the matters set out in the report  

CONFIRMED AS A TRUE RECORD:

We certify that the decision this document records was made in accordance with the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2000 and is a true and accurate record of that decision.

Date:

Decision Maker:

21/09/2009

Safer Communities Manager

Proper Officer:

Judy Cordell

SCRUTINY

Note: This decision will come in to force at the expiry of 5 working days from the date of publication subject to any review under the Council's Scrutiny 'Call-In' provisions.

Call-In Period

21 September 2009 to 28 September 2009

Date of Call-in (if applicable) (this suspends implementation)

Call-in Procedure completed (if applicable)

Call-in heard by (if applicable)

Results of Call-in (if applicable)