Letter: Sellafield lapses
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your article ("Crisis talks after Sellafield safety alert", 15 September) and leader ("The nuclear industry must answer some tough questions") about BNFL's MOX fuel operations cannot go unchallenged.
We never "take shortcuts" or "play fast and loose" with safety, nor would we ever allow a commercial or production imperative to encourage unsafe working. Safety is our number one priority and always will be.
Representatives of our customers are visiting the plant to inspect our data and quality assurance (QA) procedures in order to satisfy themselves that our fuel and systems are of the quality they should expect. It is quite ridiculous to describe this as "crisis talks". It should also be borne in mind that these irregularities came to light as a result of BNFL's own QA procedures.
The falsification of data at the heart of this story is not a safety issue, but one of quality assurance.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments