The 2.9 tonne load of thorium nitrate arrived on Wednesday after a marathon sea-and-road trip.

The material was originally produced at Dounreay as a by-product of a reprocessing contract undertaken in 1991.

The UKAEA subsequently signed a contract with Kukala, a Lima-based company, to supply it with material to fuel gas mantles. It was sent over in July 1998 but was never used.

The terms of the contract, brokered by a Dounreay-based contractor, were never publicised but the order is believed to have been worth a few tens of thousands of pounds.

As Peru lacks any specialist treatment or disposal facilities, moves were begun last year to return the thorium to Dounreay. A dozen-strong team from Dounreay went over to Lima to prepare for the operation to move the 43 drums of the waste.

They took out two tonnes of equipment required to prepare and package the metallic sludge for its month-long return journey.

The movement was sanctioned after a protracted series of negotiations and discussions involving government bodies and corporations in both countries.

Dounreay director Simon Middlemas yesterday said the return of the waste was the most responsible solution given the lack of specialist facilities in Peru.

He said the thorium is to be conditioned at Dounreay, along with the tonne or so of the material which has remained on site since the 1991 contract.

It would be treated as intermediate-level waste and kept in secure stores, ready for final disposal in the yet-to-be-built UK national waste repository.

Mr Middlemas denied the £1.7 million bill was a waste of money that could otherwise have been devoted to the clean-up of the site.

He said: "I suppose you could look at it like that but, on the other hand, you have to take into account the money required to decommission a site like this.

"We have got a multi-billion-pound programme here to provide the best value for money for the taxpayer and do the work very safely as well.

"When you look at it in that context, £1.7 million – while it might look a lot to you or me – is very small."

Neither did the director believe that the affair had been an embarrassment for the UKAEA.

"I wouldn't say it's been an embarrassment," said Mr Middlemas.

"The UKAEA of today is looking at restoring the site and I don't really want to comment on decisions taken in the past.

"That was in the past and practices then are completely different to what they are now."

Colin Punler, the site's head of communications, said previous reports that the operation would cost £3 million were misleading. This figure, he said, includes the work needed to condition and store the waste and the cost of its eventual disposal.

Mr Punler said: "This would have had to go ahead had the waste remained at Dounreay so it's a little bit misleading to include it."

iain-grant@ukf.net

Printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend

Bookmark this

---