Recently TASC member Jackum Brown, much to her horror, found herself on the front cover of EDF’s April Project update when EDF used her photo without permission. She was not content with a written apology from EDF and so she sent the story to Private Eye:

The recently formed A12 Bypass Action Group (BPAG) have decided to fund technical experts and environmental lawyers to challenge Suffolk County Councils decision on the 4 village Bypass. The group need to reach £10.000 in the next 2 weeks, and as of March 12th, they have raised over £5.000 via a crowdfunding page. The crowdfunding deadline is march 24th at 8.00 am, and it is an all or nothing apeal meaning that if the target is not met, they get nothing. BPAG Only formed in January and they are taking a lot on and can do with all the support they can get.

If they don’t reach the target no money is taken.

This is an indication of what we could expect at Sizewell - EDF doing as they please without regard to any agreements with residents. The 'temporary' increase looks like it could last for over a year.

The article  was taken from the Somerset live website, the link to the article is here

Bridgwater residents leaving near the Hinkley Point C site will see a 50 per cent rise in the number of HGV movements from the beginning of next year.

EDF made a request to temporarily increase the number of HGV movements from 500 to 750 per day until a jetty for construction boats is fully operational 

Their request was approved, subject to legal agreements, by the Transport Review Group at a meeting on December 18th.

The move has been criticised by Somerset County Council's Labour leader, who has branded the move as "truly wrong".

The decision and its impact

The Transport Review Group is made up of representatives from the county council, West Somerset Council, Sedgemoor District Council and Highways England.

EDF assessed the impact of the extra lorries when it submitted its original application in 2011, and is already able to run this number of vehicles on any weekday - but until now it has been capped to a quarterly average of 500 per day.This agreement increases the quarterly average cap to 750 on a temporary basis. The number of lorries around peak times when the majority of traffic is on the road will not change.

To enable the Hinkley Point C project to progress, EDF Energy requires the change to take effect from January 2018.

Local councillors were consulted on this matter on December 8 to enable this decision to be taken.

The new jetty being constructed will enable 80 per cent of the aggregates needed to build the power station to be brought to the site by sea rather than by road. It is expected to be completed at the end of 2018 and be fully operational in 2019.

Money for mitigation

Following its decision, EDF will agree to both a legal agreement and an implementation plan in the new year. The company will put forward a mitigation package of more than £4M, the delivery of which must be related to the impact which the work will cause - it cannot be secured for wider community benefits. The money will be used to maintain roads in the local area, contribute towards the county council's traffic control centre, and create more walking and cycling routes. It will also support construction of the long-awaited Colley Lane Southern Access Road, the construction of which will begin in the spring.

Funding is also available for business support - to be held by the two district councils - and residents living directly adjacent to the two HGV routes to the site will be able to apply for free double glazing from EDF Energy.

The reaction

Councillor Peter Downing, Sedgemoor District Council’s portfolio holder for infrastructure, said: "We remain supportive of the EDF project to build Hinkley Point C, recognising its national significance and the economic benefit to Sedgemoor and the wider south west...We are of course concerned with the effects of the additional road traffic on an already stretched highways infrastructure, but welcome the prospect of funding to ease the effect on our businesses and communities, and we are committed to working with EDF to mitigate the impact wherever possible."

Councillor David Hall, the county council's cabinet member for resources and economic development, said: "We have carefully considered the impacts the increase will have, especially on residents and businesses. We recognise the natural concerns some have raised about the prospect of more traffic. However, a project of this scale will without doubt cause some disruption; it’s important to keep focused on the bigger picture. We believe an appropriate package of mitigation has been secured to address these impacts. I look forward to progress being maintained on the project to achieve a sustainable legacy from its construction, benefitting our County for generations to come."

Not all the reaction, however, has been positive.

Somerset County Labour Group Leader, Leigh Redman, chairman of the county council's children & families scrutiny committee, issued the following statement:

"I am disgusted by the way that this decision appears to be have been steamrolled through both councils. From my position, an elected member of both councils, to be presented with a fait accompli, a final package of mitigation that will see thousands of additional HGV movements forced on to my town for however short a period, is in my opinion truly wrong.

The mitigation package negotiated is lacking any form of real community benefit, something that could have been discussed and negotiated into the package if they had been open about the decision, this is effectively shutting out the people that will be directly impacted by this massive 50 per cent increase in HGV movements.

I know that many people took the limited opportunity to make comments, only to be apparently ignored by the councils.

It seems that despite the urgency of the decision there is still a need to agree the small print around the mitigation and I have called for involvement but won't hold my breath considering the way this decision has been pushed through both councils."


The Euratom Basic Safety Standards Directive was agreed upon by members of the European union in 2013, and member states have until February 2018 to explain how they will implement the Directive into national law.

The UK Government has stated that the decision to leave the European Union will not impact on its implementation of the Directive into UK law, as “it is committed to the highest standards in defence and civil nuclear and radiological safety – including standards for emergency preparedness and response”.This will require likely legislative change to the Radiation (Emergency Planning and Public Information) Regulations 2001, often known as REPPIR, which govern offsite emergency plans at nuclear sites. In light of this the government held a public consultation on Revised requirements for radiological protection: emergency preparedness and response.

The Nuclear Free local Authorities (NFLA) Secretariat prepared a report to provide an overview and model response to the consultation. As referenced in the report, TASC has been corresponding with the Government and the Office of Nuclear Regulation over which Euratom Directives are actually being consulted upon, because both TASC and NFLA share concerns over the way the consultation has been framed and run.

You can download a copy of the NFLA report in entirety here:


The conclusions are copied and pasted below.



The Euratom Basic Safety Standards Directive 2013 is a welcome initiative to improve generic nuclear emergency planning across Europe. NFLA is disappointed that the UK Government has implemented various parts of the Directive and not consulted on it in its entirety. It has also given just a relatively short amount of time to receive responses from stakeholders. NFLA does not think this consultation has been publicised adequately, and is aware that a number of local authority emergency planning units have not been pro-actively made aware of the consultation document. To only hold this consultation just four months before measures are supposed to being put in place is also very disappointing, and a much wider level of consultation should have taken place, for example through the BEIS NGO Forum or through local government forums like the Nuclear Legacy Advisory Forum or the Scottish Councils Committee on Radioactive Substances, both of whom are interested in such matters.

Download an A4 poster herenov17jumble sale