         |
|
UK
Nuclear-Powered Submarines Banned From Visiting UK Commercial Ports: Reactor
Problems Vindicate New Zealand’s Nuclear Propulsion Ban
By Commander Robert Green, Royal Navy (Ret’d)
28 May 2004
T
On 23 April 2004, sea trials of the UK nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN)
HMS Trafalgar were postponed for 24 hours after 11 crew members –
including 3 out of the 4 specialist safety crew – refused to go to sea
because of safety concerns. The submarine had just completed repairs after
running aground off the Isle of Skye in November 2002. One sailor who
refused to go to sea said 250 safety problems were still unresolved.
Unusually, only one of the sailors was disciplined. This could be because
the Royal Navy wants to avoid exacerbating morale problems in its nuclear
submarine force caused by safety issues.
In other reports from reliable Royal Navy sources, serious doubts have
emerged about the future viability of nuclear propulsion for UK
submarines. Key factors include:
Shrinking of the shipbuilding and repair manpower base.
* The public and political leaders are much more risk-averse and
safety-conscious, linked to their perception that nuclear power is
unclean, unsafe and uneconomic (British Energy, the operator of all UK
nuclear electricity generation plants, was recently only saved from
bankruptcy by a 5 billion GBP government loan).
* Since the early 1990s, the nuclear submarine force has struggled with
major reactor engineering problems, which have impacted severely on hull
availability, crew training and morale.
* Questions regarding naval nuclear reactor safety have been widely
voiced.
* Over 40 years after the first UK nuclear submarine was launched, there
is still no agreement on how to scrap them safely.
Nuclear Propulsion Problems.
UK SSN nuclear propulsion technical difficulties arose in about 1991 from
cracks discovered in welds of the primary coolant loop within the nuclear
plant’s steam generators (the aging Polaris nuclear-armed ballistic
missile submarine force was also affected). Put simply, the welds were not
strong enough to withstand the stresses placed on them, and repairs proved
difficult and time-consuming.
When HMS Tireless discovered reactor coolant leaks in the Mediterranean
nearly ten years later in May 2000, the Royal Navy judged them
sufficiently serious not to risk steaming her back to the UK but to have
them repaired in Gibraltar, causing protests and anxiety among the local
population and in southern Spain until repairs were completed in April
2001. Further checks revealed that another six SSNs had the same defect.
The US Navy had had similar problems in the 1980s with its 688 Class SSNs;
but the US-UK special relationship had clearly not extended to sharing
information on solving them.
One of the 11 concerned sailors in HMS Trafalgar reported that there were
high radiation levels on the hull above the reactor compartment. This was
probably linked to a known problem with the reserve control rods, which
were not dropping as fast as they should in their key safety role of
shutting down the reactor in the event of electrical failure.
In addition, a second reactor problem was discovered in HMS Sceptre in
2000, causing her refit to be extended by three years. In January 2002,
the Ministry of Defence stated that “small original fabrication
imperfections” had been found in the reactor pressure vessel. There was
concern that another SSN of the same class, HMS Superb, could have the
same serious defect, which probably required replacement of the pressure
vessel.
UK Commercial Port Visits Banned
Concern about nuclear propulsion plant safety has always restricted the
choice of UK ports which SSNs could visit. Both naval and commercial ports
must provide a specific “Z berth” with a safety plan. Because of the
reactor safety problems described above, the UK Nuclear Powered Warships
Safety Committee was sufficiently worried to ban UK SSNs from foreign port
visits in the early 1990s. Also, significantly, no UK SSN visited
Southampton – which until 1989 had had a visit almost annually – between
1990-96, probably because of the reactor weld problem.
Currently, no SSN is allowed to visit any UK commercial port, where the
only established Z berths now are in Liverpool and Southampton. Those in
Cardiff and Hull have been closed, while Z berths in Swansea and Tilbury
(London) proposed in 1989 still await approval. Indeed, SSNs are not
permitted to enter the Pool of London, in Britain’s capital city, where
all conventionally-powered warships smaller than aircraft-carriers
traditionally berth. The fact that SSNs are not even cleared for Tilbury,
at the mouth of the Thames, is an indicator of the potential hazard they
pose.
In Southampton, since May 2001 the City Council has accepted that it could
not cope with an accident and any associated compensation claims, and SSN
visits are banned. It has produced a new contingency plan for the
countermeasure zone around the Z berth, which is to be exercised next
year, then evaluated before any SSN can use it. Meanwhile, Liverpool is
off-limits awaiting resolution of a plan to distribute potassium iodate
tablets to the local population as a precaution in the event of a nuclear
disaster. The Department of Health states: “Stocks of potassium iodate
tablets are held in the vicinity of all British nuclear reactors for
immediate distribution in response to a nuclear accident involving the
release of radioactive iodine. Further stocks of tablets are also held in
case of overseas accidents…”.
Even in naval bases, safety concerns are being raised. For example, on 8
October 2003 the Portsmouth News reported that potassium iodate tablets
had been issued to 80,000 people, including 34 schools, in Gosport – the
home of the Submarine Service – and Portsmouth before the visit of the
nuclear submarine HMS Torbay.
Implications for New Zealand
Soon after the 1992 Somers Report on the Safety of Nuclear-Powered Ships
was published, classified UK contingency plans for a worst-case submarine
reactor accident were leaked showing the need for evacuation to 10km.
Since then, UK SSNs have had persisting nuclear propulsion safety
problems, such that no British commercial port is prepared to accept its
own SSNs and crew members are voicing concern. The New Zealand government
is vindicated, therefore, in keeping its nuclear propulsion ban, which is
not anti-American but pro-New Zealanders’ security.
|