On 6th June the Coal Authority posted on their website that West Cumbria Mining have finalised their new applications for their three conditional licences for Woodhouse Colliery Onshore, Woodhouse Colliery North and Woodhouse Colliery South. All three original conditional licences had lapsed.
Campaigners say that there is no justification offered by the Coal Authority for the protection of the developers at the expense of public scrutiny into the licence applications – there are no other “commercial interests” and in any event that part of the licence could be redacted. Unless of course the justification for this protection is cronyism? The CEO of West Cumbria Mining Mark Kirkbride is the UK Government’s key nuclear dump advisor at the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management and is simultaneously looking to have his coal mine licensed by the Coal Authority who are under the same Dept (Energy Security and Net Zero) as CoRWM.
Cronyism or what??!
Please write to the Coal Authority asking them not to renew the Nuclear Dump Boss’s licences for Woodhouse Colliery. Woodhouse Colliery lies between the two target areas of Mid-Copeland and Allerdale for a deep nuclear dump. The earthquake inducing coal mine would also be just four miles from the worlds largest civilian stockpile of plutonium at Sellafield. West Cumbria Mining’s CEO fought hard to prevent the “traffic light system” called for by Radiation Free Lakeland at the public inquiry despite coal mining being known to induce more seismic activity than fracking. And this is the guy in charge of advising UK Government on nuclear waste dumping – that diabolic plan which has seen its first wave of Kirkbride’s “invaluable” advice – “investigation techniques.”
Contact the Coal Authority and ask them not to issue licences for Woodhouse Colliery aka – the UK’s nuclear dump boss’s coal mine ! If you would like to mention climate in passing then do so.
Chris Packham was filming in Whitehaven today – I wonder if he mentioned any of this?
Sent today…
An Open Letter to the Coal Authority (an executive non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero). and the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO)
Dear Coal Authority and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office,
The first deep coal mine in the UK in 30 years announced on May 16th that “we have now successfully closed out a new multimillion pound funding package” What they fail to reveal is where the “multimillion pound” investment is coming from. The initial millions largely spent on public relations and investigative boreholes came from EMR Capital whose owner Owen Hegarty is now a director of West Cumbria Mining. Owen Hegarty also has coal mines in Siberia which have been bankrolled to the tune of tens of millions of pounds both by the Russian State and by Russian equity bank Baring Vostok whose investors have just left prison in Russia after fraud sentences. This all begs the question given the UK Government’s current war footing with Russia why hasn’t the Foreign Office stepped in to investigate West Cumbria Mining’s clear links with Russian State investment through Owen Hegarty?
West Cumbria Mining’s update also fails to mention that their conditional licence from the Coal Authority lapsed in October 2022. The Coal Authority have told us that they have not received a new licence application. The fact that the Coal Authority are even considering giving a new licence to drill to West Cumbria Mining is breathtaking given that the House of Lords called for a ban on any new licences being issued for coal mines. The Coal Authority is also now tasked with looking into the ongoing and seemingly unstoppable pollution pouring into Whitehaven harbour from historic mines which have been newly activated by disturbance. West Cumbria Mining’s extensive borehole and water flushing investigations above Whitehaven cannot be ruled out in part or in whole as a catalyst for Whitehaven Harbour running red with a toxic burden of metals and other pollutants. The honeycomb of mines in Whitehaven includes the Anhydrite mine which West Cumbria Mining wanted to dewater of its uranium, acids and metal contaminated water in order to use this as access to the sub-sea area off Whitehaven. The Environment Agency said this would be too dangerous to marine life. Another bizarre twist in the tale is that the coal mine CEO who wanted to dangerously dewater the old Anhydrite mine into the Irish Sea is also tasked (by the same government department who sponsor the Coal Authority) with advising Government on investigation techniques, construction and costings for a sub-sea nuclear dump euphemistically called a Geological Disposal Facility. This investigation includes seismic blasting of the Irish Sea which has already taken place over the heads of the public despite a petition of over 50,000 signatures.
We urge the Foreign Office to fully investigate West Cumbria Mining’s Russian connections through EMR Capital and Owen Hegarty.
We urge the Coal Authority to honour the House of Lords call for a ban on any new coal mine licences being issued in the UK. That an earthquake inducing new coal mine should have even been considered so close to Sellafield is utterly reckless with public safety – this could put climate concerns on the back foot.
We urge an inquiry into the dark cronyism surrounding the appointment of the CEO of West Cumbria Mining, Mark Kirkbride, to the position of Government advisor on Geological Disposal of High Level Nuclear Wastes, his coal mine lies between the nuclear dump target areas of Mid Copeland and Allerdale.
Yours sincerely
Marianne Birkby
Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole – a Radiation Free Lakeland campaign.
Polluted water continues to flow into Whitehaven Harbour. A letter has been sent today through Tim Farron MP to the Coal Authority and asks for evidence that WCM’s activities have had no impact on geological conditions. Also asks for notification of and sight of West Cumbria Minings renewed licence application. Their Coal Authority licence to drill expired in October 2022.
Thank you for the letter recieved from the Coal Authority (pasted below). Given that the Coal Authority say that in issuing new licenses they “are not able to take unrelated matters into account” please could you ask them to provide us with the following:
a) Full documentary evidence that West Cumbria Mining’s extensive borehole investigations on land and sea have not adversely impacted existing geology in the coastal area of Whitehaven.
b) Notification of When the new licence application/s is received by the Coal Authority from West Cumbria Mining (Whitehaven South Prospect Onshore Area) and Sight of that licence application. I understand if financial information has to be redacted for commercial reasons but sight of the renewed licence application by West Cumbria Mining is in the public interest.
Thank you very much for pursuing this.
Marianne
Latest Correspondence from the Coal Authority below
22 March 2023
Dear Mr Farron,
Re: West Cumbria Mining and Whitehaven Harbour
Thank you for your email of 9 March 2023 raising further points on behalf of your constituent Marianne Bennett.
I’m sorry that I can’t add much more information than I have in my response of 14 February 2023. In that letter I advised that the chemistry of the discoloured water discharging into the harbour shows that it is not coming from the local historic coal mine workings.
It makes sense that the independent consultant water sampling shows high metal levels and water consistent with that which has had contact with coal / minerals and I understand that this is consistent with the monitoring undertaken by the Environment Agency. Whilst orange / metal contaminated water can come from mines they are not the only cause.
There is significant coal- related geology in the local area which has not been mined. Any water running through the coal (in a tunnel, drain or similar) may pick up metals and colour and cause this type of discolouration. We have supported the Environment Agency, Copeland Council and other partners from the start of this incident to determine whether mine water was the cause and then to use our expertise to support the wider investigation.
We manage 76 mine water treatment schemes across Great Britain and treat more than 128 billion litres of mine water each year to protect drinking water, rivers and the sea. If the evidence showed that the Whitehaven Harbour pollution was being caused by local historic mine workings we would take action. We have shared your email with Mike Starkie, Mayor of Copeland, who is leading this water quality investigation and with Peter Bardsley at the Environment Agency for their information. I would encourage you to send any future enquiries about the discolouration in Whitehaven Harbour to them directly. I shared their contact details in my previous responses.
Any licence application we receive has to be considered and processed in line with coal mining policy (set by UK Government) and the legislation we operate under – the 1994 Coal Industry Act. We are not able to take unrelated matters into account. If you would like to discuss this, or any of our work in your constituency further in the meantime we would be very happy to meet at this site, in your constituency office, in Westminster or virtually as suits you best.
Yours sincerely, Lisa Pinney MBE Chief Executive, Coal Authority
We have received a letter via Tim Farron MP which reveals the startling fact that the investigations into the reasons behind the pollution in Whitehaven Harbour “is being led personally by Mike Starkie, the Mayor of Copeland.” The Mayor of Copeland has been the most aggressive supporter of West Cumbria Mining from the off, telling people including Tim Farron MP to butt out : “In West Cumbria we are fed up with people from outside the area telling us what is best for us. The mine project is potentially transformational and will significantly improve lives and prospects of the community in West Cumbria.” Mayor Mike Starkie.
It is more than likely that the Mayor in his role “personally leading investigations” would divert investigations away from WCM’s exploration boreholes as a catalyst for the release of historic mine water previously held in place.
We have sent a further letter to the Coal Authority today via Tim Farron MP:
Dear Tim
Thank you for the reply from the Coal Authority to our letter.
The reply is as you say disappointing.
There are three issues and a request we would be very grateful for answers to:
The Coal Authority have not addressed our urgent request that West Cumbria Mining are not granted a new conditional licence for the Onshore Area (Coal Authority ref: CA11/UND/0177/N). West Cumbria Mining require this grant of licence from the Coal Authority in order to carry out exploration/exploitation of the onshore area by September 2023 under 2 miles from Whitehaven Harbour. During West Cumbria Mining’s exploration of the Irish Sea off St Bees their contractors Priority Drilling from Ireland, caused a methane gas leak necessitating the call out of emergency services. It is therefore not unlikely that WCM’s explorations onshore, even nearer to Whitehaven, have also had unwitting impacts. We would like to see evidence from the Coal Authority why they think this is not the case.
The coal mine if given a new licence to drill will cause further damage to the integrity of already compromised historic mines. This was acknowledged by the Planning Inspector in his admission that “earthquakes cannot be ruled out.” At the planning inquiry West Cumbria Mining blocked calls for a Traffic Light System to be put in place similar to that required for the fracking industry despite the proximity to Sellafield, existing mines and the liklihood of ground movements due to earthquake, subsidence and routine drilling. Who will be (or is) ultimately responsible for damage resulting from West Cumbria Mining’s activities?
The Coal Authority ‘reassure’ us that the Mayor of Copeland, Mike Starkie is “personally leading investigations” by the CA, Environment Agency, Harbour Commissioners and others into the cause of the mine water pollution in the harbour. This is hugely concerning. The Mayor has a conflict of interest due to his aggressive promotion of West Cumbria Mining over several years. There is legitimate concern that the Mayor will as “lead investigator” do everything within his powers to direct investigations away from the role of WCM’s onshore (and/or offshore) exploratory boreholes, in being a catalyst releasing previously held in place mine water from the honeycomb of mines, coal, iron ore, hematite etc along the Whitehaven coast which is now a Marine Conservation Zone.
We ask, if necessary under Environment Information Regulations, for full disclosure of the laboratory tests and their results, carried out on the polluted water in Whitehaven Harbour since December 7th 2022
Many Thanks for all your help on this
Marianne
Radiation Free Lakeland (Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole campaign) refs
MP Tim Farron told to ‘butt out’ of West Cumbria by Copeland mayor Mike Starkie
10th April 2019. Tim Farron MP told to “butt out of West Cumbria” by Copeland Mayor “
“In West Cumbria we are fed up with people from outside the area telling us what is best for us. The mine project is potentially transformational and will significantly improve lives and prospects of the community in West Cumbria.”
Offshore area no 2 is the Licence area nearest SellafieldAs can be seen from this Coal Authority image – area number 2 has very little known coal resource (blue hatch) – nevertheless the Coal Authority has just awarded West Cumbria Mining a new licence for this area which adjoins the area under consideration for a Geological Disposal Facility. Coal boss Mark Kirkbride is an “invaluable” member of the government body (CoRWM) advising on nuclear waste. His role is largely to advise on the highly mechanised digging of holes as deep as Scafell is high. We continue to urge individuals and groups opposing the coal mine to look at the bigger picture rather than focussing narrowly on climate, jobs and coking coal. To ignore the big picture (Nuclear!!) does the planet no favours. The mine can still be stopped – we will keep you posted.
the following has been sent to press…
Over the Easter period, the Coal Authority quietly awarded the controversial Cumbrian Coal Mine new “conditional” licences. The developer West Cumbria Mining’s original conditional licences granted in 2013 were valid for 8 years. W.C.M applied for a variation to their original conditional licences in January 2021. The new applications were approved on April 13th 2022.
Nuclear safety group Radiation Free Lakeland who run the Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole campaign have lobbied tirelessly for details of the new licence applications to be released to public view. Despite extensive correspondence between the group and the Coal Authority including an intervention by MP Tim Farron and an internal review, all details of the licences were refused public scrutiny claiming ‘commercial sensitivity.’ Campaigners say that what can be seen is that one of the new licences awarded includes Offshore Area 2, an area of the Irish Sea Marine Conservation Zone off St Bees. The nuclear safety group say that “according to the British Geological Survey most of this area offshore of St Bees and extending towards Sellafield has no known coal reserves” They go on to say that “the awarding of coal licences to the developer ahead of the decision by the Secretary of State, Michael Gove suggests that the Inspector has recommended approval and smacks of the most blatant cronyism”.
The group point out the close relationships between the former Coal Authority Director Stephen Dingle who appointed Sir Nigel Thrift to Chair of the Committee of Radioactive Waste Management, and coal boss Mark KIrkbride, described by Sir Nigel Thrift as an “invaluable” colleague on the Committee tasked with advising government on what to do with the UK’s growing nuclear waste problem.
Marianne Birkby founder of Radiation Free Lakeland said: “there is only one thing worse than opening a new coal mine and that is opening a new coal mine near Sellafield whose boss is advising the government on the digging of big holes for heat generating nuclear wastes”
Coal Mine developers, West Cumbria Mining have asked the *Coal Authority for new licences. Do Not Rubber Stamp the Developer’s Licence to Drill.
*The Coal Authority report to the Dept of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. Kwasi Kwarteng MP is the Secretary of State
BLOCK WEST CUMBRIA MINING’S LICENCE TO DRILL
Leading Cumbrian Councillors had already reassessed their previous unanimous support for the first deep coal mine in decades in the UK and voted “No.” Through this No vote they have voiced their opposition alongside leading academics, scientists, politicians, the public and many organisations.
The reasons for saying No to new licences for West Cumbria Mining are not just “compelling” as Secretary of State Kwasi Kwarteng MP has stated, they are overwhelming.
There is zero need for a public inquiry at the expense of the public purse. The mine could be stopped tomorrow. All it would take is for the Coal Authority to block the developers new applications for a Licence to Drill. It is shocking that details of the new licence applications are being kept secret and from public scrutiny despite Freedom of Information requests from nuclear safety group Radiation Free Lakeland.
CLIMATE AND NUCLEAR SAFETY …OR RECKLESSNESS?
A block on the developer’s new applications for a Licence to Drill would not only save the public purse the huge expense of a public inquiry it would also send a strong message to the UK and our international neighbours that the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, who are responsible for the Coal Authority, are committed to both climate and nuclear safety.
While the significant climate impacts of this coal mine would be EXACTLY the same if this development had been proposed anywhere else in the UK, this coal mine is NOT JUST ANYWHERE in the UK. The mine would be largely subsea off the West Coast of Cumbria, would extend to within five miles of the WORLD”S RISKIEST NUCLEAR WASTE SITE and be directly under a massive nuclear waste dump known as the Sellafield Mud Patch.
COAL MINE UNDER AN EXISTING NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP?
Sellafield has been pumping eight million litres of “low level” radioactive discharges into the Irish Sea every day. It been doing that for decades and nuclear wastes (military and ‘civil’) still continue to arrive in West Cumbria. The nuclear waste discharge pipeline out to the Irish Sea is in constant use. The coal mine developers say there would be “EXPECTED SUBSIDENCE” of the Irish Sea bed. Recent reports have indicated this would most likely result in the resuspension of decades worth of Sellafield’s radioactive wastes now largely (but not completely) immobilised in the Irish Sea bed. Radioactive wastes including plutonium would be resuspended back into the water column, to ours and to neighbouring shores. The one thing not to do with a radioactive waste dump is disturb it.
COAL MINE ADJACENT TO A NEW HIGH LEVEL NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP?
The mine itself would be adjacent to the area being promoted as a “possible” Geological Disposal Facility for heat generating nuclear wastes under the Irish Sea. The CEO of the coal mine Mark Kirkbride has been appointed to the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management to advise government on “Delivery” of a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF). The proposed coal mine would make a void of 136 million square metres. Would this handy hole be used to dump mountains of rock spoil excavated for a GDF from neighboring rocks? What destabilising impact would this have on the neighbouring rocks? Is there a massive unresolvable conflict of interest at the heart of the forthcoming coal mine public inquiry? The final decision about the climate and nuclear dump-wrecking mine will rest with the government – the same government who have appointed the coal mine boss to position of top government nuclear dump advisor (for highly active wastes).
FARCICAL PUBLIC INQUIRY?
These questions (and more) should, but are not likely to be within the remit of a forthcoming public inquiry focussing on planning rather than key issues of governance and nuclear safety.
PUBLIC MONEY
The public have already paid out £millions for this coal mine, to be precise, £2.5 Million in Heritage Lottery Funds for the Haig Colliery Museum which was then handed over to the developers for £1.
This is a coal mine that the public would keep paying for in more than money and climate impacts – the many headed hydra of both a slow burn and immediate nuclear catastrophe are overwhelming.
There is no credible case for this mine either on the basis of finance (no market), climate (flies in face of COP26) or arguably the most serious concern, nuclear safety (under decades of nuclear waste, undermining the geology near the world’s riskiest nuclear waste site Sellafield).
BLOCK WEST CUMBRIA MINING’S LICENCE TO DRILL!
DO IT NOW
References
BEIS Ministerial Responsibility for the Coal Authority, BEIS also responsible for the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management where coal boss Mark Kirkbride is a key member.
“Ministerial responsibility 11. The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy is accountable to Parliament for the activities and performance of the Authority and it is proposed that any new Minister with responsibility for the Authority will carry out a visit to the Authority within six months of taking up appointment to learn about the role of the Authority and its functions. Typically, we would expect the chair and chief executive to meet with the minister at least annually. 12. Specific responsibilities include: approving the Authority’s overall strategic objectives and the policy and performance frameworkwithin which the Authority operates (as set out in this framework document and associated documents keeping Parliament informed about the Authority’s performance approving the amount of grant-in-aid/grant/other funds to be paid to the Authority, and securing Parliamentary approval carrying out responsibilities specified in the Act including appointments to the board, determining the terms and conditions of board members, consenting to the appointment of the, approval of terms and conditions of staff (Including pay) in accordance with the latest pay guidance laying of the annual report and accounts before Parliament”
Sellafield Radioactive Discharge on the Irish Sea Bed directly beneath the coal mine plan and question of ‘Who is Responsible for Safety of the Discharged Nuclear Wastes?’ is subject to complaint being dealt with by the Information Commissioner
Who is Responsible for Radioactive Waste on the Irish Sea Bed – Call from Nuclear Free Local Authorities NFLA troubled by the UK Communities Minister not ‘calling in’ the decision over a deep underground coal mine in West Cumbria
Bottom image is West Cumbria Mining licence application areas for under the Irish Sea – the black bits are known land and sea coal reserves. Details of the latest applications from the developers are being withheld from public view.
Dear Friends,
Thank you so much to everyone for donating to Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole – a Radiation Free Lakeland campaign. Further Donations mean that we will be able to continue to have the expert advice of lawyers Leigh Day to call upon.
The Coal Authority are refusing to give the public sight of the latest licence applications from West Cumbria Mining despite our repeated calls for them to do so
At Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole’s request Tim Farron MP has sent a letter to the Coal Authority urging them to at least ensure the Planning Inspector at the forthcoming Inquiry has sight of the licences.
The inquiry is, I believe, flawed in many other respects. Not least because the County Council have now withdrawn their planning approval for the mine. We wonder if there are any other cases of a public inquiry having been held into an approval decision that no longer stands? The Coal boss Mark Kirkbride has been appointed to advise the government on “Delivery” of a deep geological nuclear dump for the UK’s heat generating nuclear wastes. NO-one in their right mind would think of burying heat generating nuclear waste in or under a coal mine however, the proposed coal mine is slap bang in the middle of the subsea “search area” for a GDF.
The coal mine development will now be ultimately decided upon by government – the same government who have appointed the coal boss to advise them on nuclear dump plans. Crazy creepy or what?
It is remarkable to put it mildly that non of this blatant cronyism has been reported in the media or raised any NGO eyebrows given the huge public interest in this coal mine (the public interest is largely thanks to the help of all who have donated to Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole).
I have copied our latest press release, (ignored by the press) to the Society of Editors to ask if there is a reason for the silence – maybe it just isn’t newsworthy? (!!)
With all best wishes
Marianne
Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole – a Radiation Free Lakeland campaign
We have been directed to you following a FOI to the Defence and Security Media Advisory Committee following the worrying lack of reporting on the appointment of the CEO of Cumbria Coal mine to the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management. There has been acres of press on the climate impacts of the Cumbria Coal Mine in contrast to nothing (apart from in the Isle of Man) on the cronyism surrounding the appointment of the coal boss Mark Kirkbride to CoRWM.
Our latest press release to national and local press is below. So far we have had no response. If this has not got a DA notice on it then we wonder why the silence on this serious issue.
If you can shed any light on why there appears to be a media black out we would be very grateful.
with kind regards
Marianne Birkby on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland
CUMBRIA COAL MINE’S LICENCE APPLICATIONS SHROUDED IN “ALICE IN WONDERLAND” SECRECY.
In a letter sent to the Coal Authority today, the nuclear safety campaigners who were the first to raise opposition to the Cumbrian Coal Mine back in 2017, say that the forthcoming Public Inquiry would be “invalid and an entirely profligate waste of public money”. This is, they say, because “Cumbria County Council has now withdrawn its planning approval for the mine and the latest Cumbrian coal mine licence applications are shrouded in secrecy”
The controversial coal mine developers, West Cumbria Mining (WCM), have applied for two new applications which Radiation Free Lakeland (RaFL) have repeatedly asked for sight of under Freedom of Information. The Coal Authority have replied to the campaign group saying that: “the Operator (WCM) does not give permission to have their applications disclosed…for the reasons (of operator confidentiality) set out in the public interest test.”
Another twist in the long held opposition to the mine by nuclear campaigners is that the CEO of the coal mine, Mark Kirkbride was appointed in 2019 (in the days following the County Council’s coal mine approval) to the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management. CoRWM are the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy appointed body who advise government on ‘Delivery of a Geological Disposal Facility” for high level nuclear wastes. RaFL have long argued that the coal mine is primarily a “Trojan Horse to embed the infrastructure in Cumbria for a deep nuclear dump.”
Marianne Birkby, the founder of Radiation Free Lakeland who set in motion a Judicial Review against the coal mine with environmental lawyers Leigh Day, has said: “For the Coal Authority to say that it is in the public interest to protect the wishes of the developer in non-disclosure is very Alice in Wonderland like. Disclosure of Information regarding developments which would produce emissions is a legal obligation. Emissions in the case of this uniquely dangerous coal mine would include not only CO2, and methane (the developer’s exploratory boreholes have already accidentally hit a methane pocket a few miles from Sellafield under the Irish Sea’) but also radioactive emissions from resuspension of 70 years worth of Sellafield’s wastes resulting from the “likely subsidence” of the Irish Sea bed. There is also the possibility of seismic damage to Sellafield’s infrastructure. A haiirline crack which would be of negligible damage anywhere else, could be catastrophic at Sellafield, the world’s riskiest nuclear waste site.”
The campaign group’s letter to the Coal Authority today concludes that ” disclosure of the licence applications would be the right thing to do, both from a legal aspect and from the Coal Authority’s stated ideals of public interest, openess, transparency and safeguarding”.
ENDS
..contact …
LETTER TO COAL AUTHORITY SEE BELOW
Radiation Free Lakeland are running two major campaigns:
On Monday, July 5th, 2021 at 8:44 AM, Wastwater wrote:
Dear Helen,
Thank you for your email explaining the Coal Authority’s reasoning as to why they will not disclose West Cumbria Mining’s new applications to extend/vary their original 2013/14 licences. It is of huge concern that the Coal Authority is deferring to the developer Mark Kirkbride of West Cumbria Mining in non-disclosure. How can the public inquiry due to start in September be valid when the public and the Inspector have not had sight of the developer’s plans? Our MP Tim Farron has written to BEIS, asking that the Planning Inquiry Inspector should have full sight of West Cumbria Mining’s latest licence applications.
There are serious concerns too about the blatant cronyism between the controversial Government policy for “Delivery” of a Geological Disposal Facility for nuclear wastes and Mark Kirkbride CEO of West Cumbria Mining. Kirkbride has been appointed by BEIS to the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management and has delivered initial costing estimates to government for mining a deep geological disposal facility for heat generating nuclear wastes within the same “search” area as his coal mine (Kirkbride Costing for opening coal mine = £160M / Kirkbride Cost estimate for opening a GDF = £1.7 Billion ‘just for the hole’ using same suppliers as the coal mine)
For the Coal Authority to say that it is in the public interest to protect the wishes of the developer in non-disclosure is very Alice in Wonderland like. Disclosure of Information regarding developments which would produce emissions is a legal obligation. We note the following in relation to release of information to the public about developments which would produce emissions:
“How is information relating to emissions treated differently? – regulation 12(9)
The Regulations stress transparency and openness in relation to information about emissions. They provide a greater right of access to information about emissions – regulation 12(9) removes the right to rely on certain exceptions if someone requests information is on emissions.
When requested information is on emissions, you cannot rely on the exceptions at:
regulation 12(5)(d) – confidentiality of the proceedings of a public authority
regulation 12(5)(e) – confidentiality of commercial or industrial information
regulation 12(5)(f) – interests of the person who provided the information
regulation 12(5)(g) – protection of the environment to which the information relates.
Emissions in the case of this uniquely dangerous coal mine would include not only CO2, and methane (the developer’s exploratory boreholes have already accidentally hit a methane pocket a few miles from Sellafield under the Irish Sea’) but also radioactive emissions from resuspension of 70 years worth of Sellafield’s radioactive waste discharge in the “likely subsidence” (say WCM) of the Irish Sea bed. There is also the possibility of seismic damage to Sellafield’s infrastructure – a hairline crack of negligible damage anywhere else could be catastrophic at Sellafield. A “negligible” risk of seismic damage is too much in this vicinity.
We believe that disclosure of the licence applications would be the right thing to do both from a legal aspect and from the Coal Authority’s ideals of public interest, openess, transparency and safeguarding.
We ask the Coal Authority again for full sight of West Cumbria Mining’s latest licence applications with reference to the following:
“There is a presumption in favour of disclosure. The public authority must weigh the public interest arguments for maintaining the exception in regulation 12(5)(b) against those for disclosure. General principles of regulation 12(5)(b) 5. Under EIR regulation 5(1), public authorities are under a duty to make available environmental information that has been requested. Regulations 12(4) and 12(5) provide exceptions to this duty. 6. The exceptions under regulation 12(5) allow a public authority to refuse to disclose environmental information where “its disclosure would adversely affect” the interests listed in each exception. 7. The public authority must apply a presumption in favour of disclosure, both in engaging the exception and in carrying out the public interest test. https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1625/course_of_justice_and_inquiries_exception_eir_guidance.pdf “
CONCLUSIONS AND ACTIONS
All the information within WCM’s latest licence applications should be made available in the public interest (financial information could be redacted).
MP Tim Farron has at our request written to the Secretary of State for BEIS to ask that the latest full licence applications are made available to the Inspector in the forthcoming Planning Inquiry into the coal mine .
Without full sight of the latest licence applications to the Coal Authority from the developer, – the public and the Planning Inquiry cannot make independent judgements on the severity of the likely emissions. Emissions include CO2, Methane and Radioactive Emissions from Sellafield’s nuclear wastes which are now largely sitting in the seabed but would be resuspended with “likely subsidence” of the Sellafield Mud Patch.
Sellafield’s infrastructure just five miles away is at serious risk from this coal mine notwithstanding the nonchalance of the Office for Nuclear Regulation. On the Sellafield site, the Magnox Swarf Silo for example has unknown leaks from unknown cracks in the concrete containment which is partly beneath ground. Sellafield have last month asked for help in finding and mitigating the leak of 550 gallons per day of radioactive liquor into groundwater beneath the site from unknown cracks. Fracking was halted because of earthquake risk and yet the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering have stated that coal mining induced earthquakes are of a magnitude greater than fracking : “Seismicity induced by hydraulic fracturing is likely to be of smaller magnitude than the UK’s largest natural seismic events and those induced by coal mining”.
Without full disclosure of the latest licence applications the forthcoming coal mine planning inquiry is, we believe, invalid and an entirely profligate use of public money, especially as Cumbria County Council has now withdrawn its planning approval for the mine.
Withdrawal of planning approval for the coal mine from the local planning authority, Cumbria County Council should be honoured by the Coal Authority and BEIS.
In all conscience the Coal Authority and BEIS should act to ensure that the coal mine plan is scrapped with immediate effect. This would avoid the profligate expense of a worse than useless Public Inquiry whose findings (in any event) would be null and void given the lack of social and legal licence from the Local Planning Authority and the non-disclosure of West Cumbria Mining’s latest licence applications.
We are asking the Coal Authority one more time for sight of West Cumbria Mining’s latest licence applications before escalating this as a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner.
Yours sincerely
Marianne
Marianne Birkby on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland
campaigns include:
Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole
Lakes Against Nuclear Dump
Copied to BEIS, Tim Farron MP, Planning Inspectorate
Negligible Risk of Induced Seismicity near Sellafield is too much. “An interactive workshop on Tuesday, May 25 2021…Sellafield are seeking ideas, innovations and technologies capable of game changing solutions to prevent or minimise leaks from Magnox Swarf Silo Storage. Current leak rates are around 1.5 – 2.5 m3/d and Sellafield want to reduce these as much as possible.The concrete silos, built in three stages between 1962-1982, contain magnesium cladding, or swarf, stripped from Magnox fuel prior to reprocessing. The swarf is stored underwater in the silos but, over time, the stored contents corrode, releasing heat and hydrogen…”
Evidence Sent to the Cumbrian Coal Mine Public Inquiry from Radiation Free Lakeland – including water impacts of the proposed coal mine. Cumbria’s drinking water includes that drawn from boreholes by United Utilities at South Egremont, just a mile from the already leaking Magnox Swarf Silo. Sellafield needs top quality water for many nuclear processes and takes R1 (top quality) water from Wastwater. https://keepcumbriancoalinthehole.wordpress.com/2021/05/02/evidence-sent-to-the-public-inquiry-please-send-your-own-in-before-may-6th/
Letter from the Coal Authority to Radiation Free Lakeland
Request for Internal Review under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
I write in connection with your request for an Internal Review, which was received by The Coal Authority on 9 April 2021.
An independent review has now taken place with regard to your original Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) request and response, our reference FOI 71-2020. The review has considered the reasons stated in your appeal and the legislative compliance under the Act.
My findings are as follows:
Your Freedom of Information Act request was received on 4 March 2021 and following our extension of the deadline to consider a public interest test we responded to you on 7 April 2021, complying with the legislative response requirements.
I have considered your arguments in the application of exemptions Section 43(2) Commercial Interests and Section 44(1)(a) Prohibition on disclosure relying upon Section 59(1)(a)(b) of the Coal Industry Act 1994.
The Coal Authority is still determining the two applications and following a request to the Operator as to whether they would assist in any disclosure requirements the Operator does not give permission to have their applications disclosed.
I am in agreement with the application of exemption Section 43(2) for the reasons set out in the public interest test. The commercial interests of the operator must also be considered.
In conclusion, I uphold the decision of the response dated 7 April 2021 not to disclose the West Cumbria Mining Ltd applications for a variation to existing Conditional Licences UND/0177/N and UND/0184/N.
Request for disclosure under Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR)
On 13 April 2021, the Coal Authority received your request that the West Cumbria Mining Ltd applications’ for a variation to existing Conditional Licences UND/0177/N and UND/0184/N be considered for disclosure under Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR).
The Coal Authority has considered whether the public interest favours disclosure or whether it favours maintenance of the relevant exception. When considering this exception the Coal Authority has considered the presumption in favour of disclosure in accordance with Regulation 12(2) of the EIR. The Coal Authority has taken into account the following public interests arguments when considering your request:
The interest in the Authority being transparent and accountable to the public, and the public being able to better participate in environmental decision-making. The information that is contained in the application forms constitutes technical or commercial information. That information requires consideration by the Authority as the expert regulator in the context of its duties within the Coal Industry Act 1994 and these are not matters upon which the public are required to be consulted. In this context the public interest is satisfied by the Coal Authority disclosing the fact that an application for coal mining operations exists and is available on the Coal Authority’s website.
The interest in the public understanding how coal resources are exploited by private entities in England and Wales. However, the same point applies as above with regard to how this interest is met.
The Coal Authority also considers the following arguments to apply in favour of maintaining this exception:
The exception protects confidentiality provided by law. By way of Section 59 of the Coal Industry Act 1994 this specifically provides for the confidentiality of information provided by commercial operators and the Authority also consider that the common law duty of confidence is engaged in these circumstances. There is a strong public interest in ensuring that such confidentiality is maintained.
If the information within these applications were to be made public then applicants may be less inclined to voluntarily provide information within the application forms, which could negatively impact the application process. In determining applications the Coal Authority is required to undertake important considerations in relation to potential subsidence, health
and safety, and ensuring that the operator applicant is able to finance the proper carrying on of the mining operations and discharge any liabilities related to those operations. All of these matters could impact upon the public and it is of primary importance that the Coal Authority is able to effectively undertake its role as expert regulator. The Coal Authority needs to be able to do this in an environment that is considered to be a “safe space” by the Applicant where they are prepared to be fully transparent with the Coal Authority as regulator and not inhibited in the information they provide.
The same public interest arguments in favour of disclosure apply as in relation to Regulation 12(5)(d) above. The Authority also considers the following to apply:
There are a number of primary issues that require consideration in determining a licence application including ensuring that the Coal Authority is satisfied that there are sufficient finances for the project, including sufficient finances to provide appropriate security to address potential issues such as subsidence. This requires the disclosure of sensitive financial information, as well as information gathered by the applicant in relation to the proposed site and which is not otherwise available to their competitors. If this information is made publicly available then the applicant may be less inclined to be transparent with the Coal Authority in relation to such matters, which could negatively impact upon the considerations to be undertaken by the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority therefore considers there to be a legitimate economic interest of operators that there is a public interest in maintaining.
In light of the above, the Coal Authority considers that the public interest weighs in favour of maintaining this exception.
The Coal Authority refuses your request under Regulation 14(3)(a) in relation to the application of the first exception Regulation 12(5)(d).
Haig Mining Museum and Land Bought for £1 by West Cumbria Mining on the “Colourful Coast”
We are asking for two things. Firstly for the Secretary of State for BEIS Kwasi Kwarteng MP to acknowledge that he has the authority to block new licences/variations to existing licences for the Cumbrian coal mine and to use that authority to stop the Coal Authority licences and this coal mine dead in its tracks. This would save the public the huge expense of a Public Inquiry. If the Secretary of State for BEIS / the Coal Authority are minded to approve the licences for what now amounts to an amended development then what on earth is the point of the public inquiry founded on the previous licences?
Secondly, to let the public actually have sight of the developer’s new licence applications. If the licences are exactly the same as previously then why cannot we have sight of them?
The Public Inquiry is asking the public to comment on a development which has changed the goal posts. The public has no idea what the developers have now applied for within their new licence applications (we do know they want to drill 1000 m deeper than the deepest coal seam).
Here is some correspondence below with many thanks to local expertise!
Thank you for your letter dated 19 April 2021 sent on behalf of the Secretary of State in response to our email to him dated 29 March 2021. The apology for the delay in responding is unnecessary as it hopefully reflects the serious nature of the subject matter and the consideration that was given to it. That said, the response is quite unhelpful as the content simply duplicates the standard wording of correspondence from the Coal Authority on the same subject. You may be aware in this regard that the Coal Authority has refused to supply us with a copy of the West Cumbria Mining (WCM) variation request on the grounds, firstly, that it prejudices the company’s commercial interests and, secondly, because the CEO of the company has refused his permission for them to respond positively. Your response also misrepresents somewhat the situation with regard to the powers of the Secretary of State and the relevance of the planning application with regard to coal industry license applications. The essence of the WCM application is that they are seeking a second extension to two of their three licenses. These have already exceeded the normal maximum of eight years without any consideration of introducing competition, as required by law. It has little or nothing to do with planning permission or the division of responsibility between government departments.
In light of the above, we would like to draw to your attention the relevant clauses in the principal legislation that empowers the Secretary of State and restricts the Coal Authority in matters such as these. The first is Article 6 of the Coal Industry Act 1994. This is written in such a broad way as to give the Secretary of State the power, if he is so minded, to call in all available information from the Coal Authority, form his own opinion and then direct the Coal Authority to decide accordingly. This is to all intents and purposes the power to call in. The second is Article 5 of the same Act which, inter alia, states that the Coal Authority does not have power to take any steps for the benefit of another for obtaining planning permission. In this regard the delaying steps being taken by the Coal Authority are consistent with the tenor of your letter but not with Clause 5 of the relevant legislation. We would therefore hope the Secretary of State recognises this and chooses to exercise his power to intervene in order to protect the Coal Authority from erring further. Naturally, in light of his widely publicised statements on this project, on coal in general and his response to the recent parliamentary debate on the future of coal, we hope he will refuse to extend the licenses. In summary, the WCM planning application is not a material factor in determining both of the license variation requests and particularly the inshore area license.
The Secretary of State may find it helpful to be reminded that the citizen opposition to this highly speculative financial project, with its Australian origins and controllers, is made up of at least three strands. The most public strand is, of course, that articulated by those concerned about worldwide climate change and the mixed messages currently being projected by the UK government. Secondly, I speak for many who have concerns at the grave risk to nuclear safety around the licensed nuclear sites at Sellafied and Drigg that the mine and its influential CEO are introducing. The third strand relates to the topical issue of cronyism and financial suspicions that come from the ten year relationship between the CEO and the former Energy Minister Charles Hendry (who in office was keen to “accelerate” Geological Disposal of nuclear wastes), the contracted involvement of New Century Media Ltd and the obscure funding chain routed via funds in Singapore and the Cayman Islands. When these strands come together they really do make a compelling case for refusing these licence variations without waiting for the Planning Inspectorate to act on behalf of another Secretary of State.
In conclusion, we request that you review the above and provide us with a more thoughtful response to our initial email but, if you disagree with our understanding of the legal position, would you kindly explain why that is?
Kind regards
Marianne Birkby on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland / Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole
Nuclear safety group Radiation Free Lakeland have asked for and been refused sight of the new conditional coal mine licence applications from West Cumbria Mining to the Coal Authority. The controversial Irish Sea coal mine developers had originally been granted conditional exploration licences eight years ago over the heads of Cumbria County Council and the public, with no public scrutiny at all. These have now lapsed and the developers have applied for new licences.
Radiation Free Lakeland have asked for sight of the licence applications from West Cumbria Mining. The Coal Authority have refused sight of the licence applications based on two clauses in the Freedom of Information Act 2000: Section 43(2) Commercial Interests and Section 44(1)(a) Prohibition by Enactment.
Campaigners say that there is no justification offered by the Coal Authority for the protection of the developers at the expense of public scrutiny into the new licence applications.
“Your refusal does not begin to explain why the nature and extent of the requested variation needs to be protected in order not to prejudice WCM’s commercial interests. You simply assert that it does”. Radiation Free Lakeland
The nuclear safety campaigners state that information regarding the applications could have been released for public scrutiny in redacted form to protect “commercial interests.” However the campaigners go on to say that there are actually no other “commercial interests” interested in mining the high sulphur and high ash content coking coal as proposed by West Cumbria Mining.
The campaign group have asked the Coal Authority for an internal review into the refusal for sight of the developers’ new licence applications and have also asked that their original request should be dealt with under the Environmental Impact Regulations 2004 noting that where any information relates to an emission to the environment no commercial confidentiality can be claimed.
The Coal Authority are denying any public scrutiny at all of what the developers have planned for Cumbria. What can be seen raises alarm bells for example the plan to mine 1000m deeper than the deepest coal seams in the area nearest to Sellafield where there is, according to the British Geological Society, no known coal resource.
A new petition has just been launched asking that instead of protecting the developer’s “commercial interests” the Coal Authority should Block West Cumbria Mining’s Licence to Drill. This decisive action to Block the Licences would put an end to a development that should have been blocked from the outset on the grounds of both climate and nuclear safety.
Coal Mine developers, West Cumbria Mining have asked the *Coal Authority for new licences. Do Not Rubber Stamp the Developer’s Licence to Drill.
*The Coal Authority report to the Dept of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. Kwasi Kwarteng MP is the Secretary of State
Why is this important?
BLOCK WEST CUMBRIA MINING’S LICENCE TO DRILL
Leading Cumbrian Councillors had already reassessed their previous unanimous support for the first deep coal mine in decades in the UK and voted “No.” Through this No vote they have voiced their opposition alongside leading academics, scientists, politicians, the public and many organisations.
The reasons for saying No to new licences for West Cumbria Mining are not just “compelling” as Secretary of State Kwasi Kwarteng MP has stated, they are overwhelming.
There is zero need for a public inquiry at the expense of the public purse. The mine could be stopped tomorrow. All it would take is for the Coal Authority to block the developers new applications for a Licence to Drill. It is shocking that details of the new licence applications are being kept secret and from public scrutiny despite Freedom of Information requests from nuclear safety group Radiation Free Lakeland.
CLIMATE AND NUCLEAR SAFETY …OR RECKLESSNESS?
A block on the developer’s new applications for a Licence to Drill would not only save the public purse the huge expense of a public inquiry it would also send a strong message to the UK and our international neighbours that the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, who are responsible for the Coal Authority, are committed to both climate and nuclear safety.
While the significant climate impacts of this coal mine would be EXACTLY the same if this development had been proposed anywhere else in the UK, this coal mine is NOT JUST ANYWHERE in the UK. The mine would be largely subsea off the West Coast of Cumbria, would extend to within five miles of the WORLD”S RISKIEST NUCLEAR WASTE SITE and be directly under a massive nuclear waste dump known as the Sellafield Mud Patch.
COAL MINE UNDER AN EXISTING NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP?
Sellafield has been pumping eight million litres of “low level” radioactive discharges into the Irish Sea every day. It been doing that for decades and nuclear wastes (military and ‘civil’) still continue to arrive in West Cumbria. The nuclear waste discharge pipeline out to the Irish Sea is in constant use. The coal mine developers say there would be “EXPECTED SUBSIDENCE” of the Irish Sea bed. Recent reports have indicated this would most likely result in the resuspension of decades worth of Sellafield’s radioactive wastes now largely (but not completely) immobilised in the Irish Sea bed. Radioactive wastes including plutonium would be resuspended back into the water column, to ours and to neighbouring shores. The one thing not to do with a radioactive waste dump is disturb it.
COAL MINE ADJACENT TO A NEW HIGH LEVEL NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP?
The mine itself would be adjacent to the area being promoted as a “possible” Geological Disposal Facility for heat generating nuclear wastes under the Irish Sea. The CEO of the coal mine Mark Kirkbride has been appointed to the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management to advise government on “Delivery” of a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF). The proposed coal mine would make a void of 136 million square metres. Would this handy hole be used to dump mountains of rock spoil excavated for a GDF from neighboring rocks? What destabilising impact would this have on the neighbouring rocks? Is there a massive unresolvable conflict of interest at the heart of the forthcoming coal mine public inquiry? The final decision about the climate and nuclear dump-wrecking mine will rest with the government – the same government who have appointed the coal mine boss to position of top government nuclear dump advisor (for highly active wastes).
FARCICAL PUBLIC INQUIRY?
These questions (and more) should, but are not likely to be within the remit of a forthcoming public inquiry focussing on planning rather than key issues of governance and nuclear safety.
PUBLIC MONEY
The public have already paid out £millions for this coal mine, to be precise, £2.5 Million in Heritage Lottery Funds for the Haig Colliery Museum which was then handed over to the developers for £1.
This is a coal mine that the public would keep paying for in more than money and climate impacts – the many headed hydra of both a slow burn and immediate nuclear catastrophe are overwhelming.
There is no credible case for this mine either on the basis of Finance (no market ), Climate (flies in face of COP26) or arguably the most serious concern, Nuclear safety (the mine would be under decades of “low level” nuclear waste, also undermining the geology near the world’s riskiest high level nuclear waste site Sellafield).
BLOCK WEST CUMBRIA MINING’S LICENCE TO DRILL!
DO IT NOW
References
BEIS Ministerial Responsibility for the Coal Authority
“Ministerial responsibility 11. The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy is accountable to Parliament for the activities and performance of the (Coal) Authority …
Sellafield Radioactive Discharge on the Irish Sea Bed directly beneath the coal mine plan and question of ‘Who is Responsible for Safety of the Discharged Nuclear Wastes?’ is subject to complaint being dealt with by the Information Commissioner
St Bees, where the coal mine would extend to. Sellafield is five miles away, clearly visible.
A public inquiry into the Coal Mine has been scheduled for September. The enormous expense of a public inquiry could be spared if the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Kwasi Kwarteng MP put his ‘coal mine should be blocked’ words into action and put the kaibosh on renewal of the developer’s licence to drill. The letter asking for an immediate block on the licence to drill has been signed by organisations as diverse as the Ethical Consumer Research Association, CND and the Sea Horse Trust. Leading academics have also signed along with Whitehaven locals. Asking the public to pay for an expensive inquiry into a coal mine that is guaranteed to flout climate and nuclear safety and would end up being a stranded asset at a time of austerity is bonkers – the mine could be stopped today.
Here is the letter sent on Friday…
29.3.21
To the Rt Hon Kwasi Kwarteng Secretary of State for BEIS
BLOCK THE CUMBRIA COAL MINE’S LICENCE TO DRILL
I am writing to you again on behalf of nuclear safety group Radiation Free Lakeland. We were the first to call out the proposed coal mine development in Cumbria and remain unequivocally opposed to the plan on both climate and nuclear safety grounds so we were delighted to hear your statement that there are “very compelling reasons” to block the mine.
BEIS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COAL AUTHORITY
The position of Secretary of State grants the wherewithal to put these words into action and to actually block the coal mine by ordering the Coal Authority (who report to BEIS) not to renew or extend existing conditional licenses or grant new unconditional licences to the developers West Cumbria Mining whose licence to drill has now lapsed.
BLOCK THE COAL MINE, SAVE THE PUBLIC PURSE EXPENSIVE PUBLIC INQUIRY
This would save the public purse the huge expense of a public inquiry and send a strong message to the UK and our international neighbours that BEIS is committed to both climate and nuclear safety.
THIS IS NOT “ANYWHERE” IT WOULD BE FIVE MILES FROM SELLAFIELD
While the significant climate impacts of this coal mine would be exactly the same anywhere else in the UK, this coal mine is not just anywhere in the UK. The mine would be largely subsea off the West Coast of Cumbria, would extend to within five miles of the world’s riskiest nuclear waste site and be directly under a massive nuclear waste dump known as the Sellafield Mud Patch. Sellafield has been pumping eight million litres of “low level” radioactive discharges into the Irish Sea every day. It been doing that for decades and nuclear wastes still continue to arrive in West Cumbria. The nuclear waste discharge pipeline out to the Irish Sea is in constant use. The coal mine developers say there would be “expected subsidence” of the Irish Sea bed. Recent reports (attached) have indicated this would most likely result in the resuspension of decades worth of Sellafield’s radioactive wastes now largely immobilised in the Irish Sea bed. Radioactive wastes including plutonium would be resuspended back into the water column, to ours and to neighbouring shores. The one thing not to do with a radioactive waste dump is disturb it.
EIGHT YEARS SINCE THE COAL AUTHORITY/BEIS RUBBERSTAMPED ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL LICENCE TO DRILL EXPLORATORY BOREHOLES. NEW EVIDENCE
The world has changed since the Coal Authority issued West Cumbria Mining with conditional licences 8 years ago. Eight years ago there was no public scrutiny as the Coal Authority was permitted to issue licences above the heads of the public and Cumbrian councillors. Eight years on and many miles of subsea ‘exploratory’ mining boreholes and core samples later, questions of climate and nuclear safety are being asked about this coal mine. Despite the controversy the Coal Authority have replied directly to us saying that there would be no public consultation into issuing West Cumbria Mining with new licences to drill, this is outrageous.
APPOINTMENT OF COAL BOSS TO GOVERNMENT ADVISOR ON NUCLEAR DUMP
As well as being under decades of Sellafield’s discharged nuclear wastes the mine itself would be adjacent to the area being promoted as a possible Geological Disposal Facility for heat generating nuclear wastes under the Irish Sea. BEIS’s wide ranging responsibilities include the provision of and management of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM). The CEO of the coal mine Mark Kirkbride has been appointed by BEIS to CoRWM (Nov 2019) to advise government on ‘Delivery” of a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF). The proposed coal mine would make a void of 136 Million square metres. What destabilising impact would this have on the laterally neighbouring rocks Radioactive Waste Management (advised by CoRWM) tell us are “Possible” for a GDF
PUBLIC INQUIRY WOULD LIKELY BE LIMITED IN SCOPE – THERE ARE QUESTIONS SUCH AS COAL AUTHORITY/BEIS INVOLVEMENT IN HANDING OVER OF HAIG COLLIERY FOR £1 TO COAL MINE DEVELOPERS
These questions (and more) should, but are not likely to be within the remit of a forthcoming public inquiry focussing on planning rather than issues of governance and nuclear safety. The public have already paid out £millions for this coal mine, to be precise, £2.5 Million in Heritage Lottery Funds for the Haig Colliery Museum which was then handed over to the developers for £1 (courtesy of the Coal Authority handing the developers a pre-emption right).
As Secretary of State responsible for the Coal Authority you could ensure that the public do not have to foot the bill yet again, this time for a public inquiry into a coal mine that should have been scrapped yesterday. Tomorrow would be a good day to order the Coal Authority not to issue West Cumbria Mining with licence to drill. By taking this action the coal mine would be blocked and the expense of a public inquiry prevented.
LEADING CUMBRIAN COUNCILLORS HAD ALREADY CHANGED THEIR MINDS AND VOTED NO. A NEW APPRAISAL BY COUNCIL IS NOW SUPERCEDED BY PUBLIC INQUIRY
Leading Cumbrian Councillors had already reassessed their former support for the mine and voted “no.” Through this No vote they have voiced their opposition alongside leading academics, scientists, politicians, the public and many organisations. We urge you to honour the wishes of leading Cumbrian councillors and the millions of people represented by this letter and block this coal mine. The reasons for doing so are not just “compelling” they are overwhelming.
The mine could be stopped tomorrow and the buck stops with BEIS.
Yours sincerely,
Marianne Birkby, founder of Radiation Free Lakeland Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole – a RaFL campaign Brian Jones, Vice Chair, CND Cymru Jo Smoldon on Behalf of Stop Hinkley Jonathon Porritt, Rebecca Heaton Cooper, The Heaton cooper studio, Grasmere Terry Bennett, Emeritus Professor, Nottingham University Kate Hudson, General Secretary, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Anita Stirzaker, Bowness business owner Alison Denwood, George and Dragon Public House, Harrington, West Cumbria Harry Doloughan, Whitehaven Simon Burdis, Northern England, family carer Philip Gilligan, South Lakeland and Lancaster District CND Dave Webb, Chair, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament David Smythe, Emeritus Professor of Geophysics, University of Glasgow Dr Paul Dorfman, UCL Energy Institute Dr Rachel Western Postcards from Cumbria – artists collectiveDavid and Una Hatton, Wigton, Cumbria, Sarah J Darby BSc DPhil Associate Professor, Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford Samagita Moisha, Lancaster. Concerns for nuclear safety presented to Cumbria CC at both committee hearings Tim Deere-Jones, Marine Research & Consultancy Joan West, Cumbria and Lancashire Area CND Martin Kendall, Resident High Walton, Near Whitehaven Oliver Tickell, journalist and campaigner Irene Sanderson, North Cumbria Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Walter Bennett, I am 90 years of age, born in Frizington, Cumberland, son of a coal miner, (former Director responsible for Technology in an International Company) Dr Carl Iwan Clowes OBE, Fellow Royal College of Physicians Faculty of Public Health, Honorary Fellow of the Royal College of General Practitioners Mag Richards, WANA, the Welsh Anti-Nuclear Alliance Ian Ralls, Anti-Nuclear Campaigner Neil Wilson, Life Long Conservationist, Hodbarrow Mine Action to the Royal Courts of Justice London Greenpeace, Core Participant within Undercover Policing Public Inquiry (Spycops) Richard Bramhall, Low Level Radiation Campaign David Penney, Coordinator, Cumbria and Lancashire Area CND Martyn Lowe, Close Capenhurst Campaign Andrew Warren, former special advisor to the House of Commons environment select committee. Neil Garrick-Maidment FBNA, Executive Director and Founder, The Seahorse Trust Christine Gibson, Keep it Green, Northern Ireland
Mark Jennings, West Cumbria Water (Save our water services} David Dane, Veteran Campaigner
Rob Harrison, Ethical Consumer Research Association.
References
BEIS Ministerial Responsibility for the Coal Authority
“Ministerial responsibility 11. The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy is accountable to Parliament for the activities and performance of the Authority and it is proposed that any new Minister with responsibility for the Authority will carry out a visit to the Authority within six months of taking up appointment to learn about the role of the Authority and its functions. Typically, we would expect the chair and chief executive to meet with the minister at least annually. 12. Specific responsibilities include: approving the Authority’s overall strategic objectives and the policy and performance frameworkwithin which the Authority operates (as set out in this framework document and associated documents keeping Parliament informed about the Authority’s performance approving the amount of grant-in-aid/grant/other funds to be paid to the Authority, and securing Parliamentary approval carrying out responsibilities specified in the Act including appointments to the board, determining the terms and conditions of board members, consenting to the appointment of the, approval of terms and conditions of staff (Including pay) in accordance with the latest pay guidance laying of the annual report and accounts before Parliament”
Sellafield Radioactive Discharge on the Irish Sea Bed directly beneath the coal mine plan and question of ‘Who is Responsible for Safety of the Discharged Nuclear Wastes?’ is subject to complaint being dealt with by the Information Commissioner https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/responsibility_for_discharged_ra
Letter from the Coal Authority (who are a BEIS authority) to Radiation Free Lakeland
.”This site currently has 3 conditional licences which have been in place since 2013/14. A conditional licence allows coal exploration and would need to be replaced by a full licence in order for coaling to begin. On 18th January 2021 date West Cumbria Mining Ltd applied to extend the end dates of 2 of these conditional licences (UND/0184 & UND/0177). They were due to expire on 24th January 2021 but they will remain in place until the application to extend them has been determined. No exploratory works will be undertaken during this time. The application will take approximately 3 months to determine. If the conditional licences were extended the operator would still need to apply for one or more full coaling licences before coaling can begin. When the conditional licence extension application has been determined the outcome will be posted on our website: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coal-mining-licenceapplications.
note: the Coal Authority later confirmed there would be no public consultation or scrutiny over the issuing of new licences to drill for West Cumbria Mining.
.jpg)
Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole 