Brexit: Radioactive waste to pile up at hospitals, universities and factories due to supply fears
Exclusive: Ministers told to own up about any risks to health and security, after limits are quietly relaxed
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.Radioactive waste will be piled up above normal safety limits at hospitals, universities and factories because of fears that Brexit will disrupt supply chains.
Ministers are under pressure to own up to any potential risks to health and security, after emergency advice was quietly issued to organisations and businesses.
Under the measure, they are being allowed to bust limits if they are unable to export waste because of Brexit – or if they fear they will be unable to obtain the radioactive material they need.
The rules have been relaxed regardless of whether the UK leaves the EU or – as seems increasingly likely – there is an extension to Article 50 until next year or beyond.
Rosie Duffield, a Labour MP and supporter of the People’s Vote campaign for a new Brexit referendum, said it was another example of consequences “nobody voted” for in 2016.
“It is essential that a minister comes to the Commons and makes a statement about the environmental and security risks that storing more waste at industrial or NHS sites pose,” Ms Duffield said.
“It is not acceptable that the rules on something like this can be changed without proper public discussion and accountability.”
The Environment Agency acknowledged the substances were hazardous but insisted there was “no risk to the public or the environment” from the new rules.
The material concerned is used in medicine to diagnose and treat patients, as well as in research, and in industry to manufacture goods – to test the safety and quality of pipes and boilers, for example.
Any organisation intending to use radioactive substances needs a permit, which includes a limit on how much it can store and for how long, from the Environment Agency.
However, under new “regulatory position statements” (RPS), which have been issued, they “can temporarily store radioactive waste in excess of these limits at your permitted premises”.
Organisations need only inform the agency they are implementing one or both RPS – to obtain or retain extra radioactive material – which expire on 30 September this year.
The regulator said it was responding to pleas from the permit holders that the Brexit crisis was already threatening supplies of the material they needed.
The looser limits could be extended beyond September if hospitals, universities and businesses are still unable to secure the supply chains they needed, the Environment Agency acknowledged.
The organisation stressed that anyone seeking to exceed current limits would have to show they had “taken all reasonable steps” to avoid needing to do so.
In addition, the extra waste stored would have to meet “existing security requirements”, which means there would be no added security risk.
“We expect all operators to abide by the law and the terms of their environmental permits, including in the event of a no-deal exit,” an Environment Agency spokesperson said.
“These regulatory position statements include strict conditions which must be followed to continue protecting people and the environment during this period.
“We are satisfied that under these circumstances there will be no risk to the public or the environment.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments