Source · Select Committees · Energy Security and Net Zero Committee
Recommendation 16
16
Deferred
Current SUPDC methodology for excluding nuclear reactors lacks transparency and practical decision-making.
Conclusion
We accept the Government’s view that it is reasonable, in the absence of compelling new safety data, to exclude nuclear reactors from built- up areas. It is rightly the purpose of a national policy statement to provide a consistent definition here. However, the current SUPDC methodology serves neither transparency nor practical decision-making. (Conclusion, Paragraph 60)
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the concerns about the Semi-Urban Population Density Criterion (SUPDC) methodology but states they will keep the current requirement to consult the HSE, deferring exploration of alternative solutions and review of the criterion until after EN-7's designation.
Government Response
Deferred
HM Government
Deferred
During EN-7’s development we did consider a number of ways to enable applicants to assess sites against the SUPDC, including publication of maps. However, a significant portion of the data underlying any map showing which areas of England and Wales pass the population density criterion is updated every six weeks so any map would quickly become outdated. As the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) manage the underlying data, we decided that applicants should engage directly with the HSE. In order to maintain the underlying data, HSE charge a fee to the applicant, as this work is not a statutory duty. We propose to keep the current requirement to consult the HSE in the NPS but remain open to exploring alternative solutions in the future. Given the variety of novel reactor safety measures that are being developed as part of new models, as well as the potential benefits of new nuclear for achieving Net Zero and our energy security, we are committed to reviewing the criterion following EN-7’s designation. We note the Committee’s suggestion to consider replacing the SUPDC with REPPIR. However, we do not consider the SUPDC and REPPIR to be in any way equivalent or duplicative. The SUPDC is not only a mechanism that ensures the immediate area surrounding a nuclear power station can reasonably be expected to be evacuated within two hours of an incident; it is also a political judgement which sets a threshold for the maximum possible impact an accident may have. REPPIR plays no part in site selection; it only ensures that the emergency evacuation procedures are robust once a site has been chosen. If a project, having been relieved of the need to satisfy the SUPDC early on, were to fail to satisfy the requirements of REPPIR subsequently, much time, expense and regulatory resource would have been wasted which could have been invested on a more suitable location. EN-7, including the Semi-Urban Population Density Criterion, will be reviewed at least every 5 years to ensure it remains relevant and effective. The review of the Semi-Urban Population Density Criterion will need to be based on evidence from the sector and international standards, and be conducted with the help of the Office for Nuclear Regulation.