The Nuclear Issues Board met to discuss the ongoing developments in the nuclear sector in Cumberland, including updates on Sellafield and Nuclear Waste Services (NWS). The board agreed to note the Community Visions developed by the Mid and South Copeland Community Partnerships, acknowledging their alignment with Cumberland Council’s strategic priorities, and agreed the draft Cumberland Council response to the consultation on the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) Strategy Five. The board also agreed to consider a letter received from the South West Lakes Anti-GDF Community Group as part of the consultation on the Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) siting process.

GDF Community Visions

The Nuclear Issues Board noted the GDF Community Visions developed by the Mid Copeland and South Copeland Community Partnerships, acknowledged their alignment with Cumberland Council’s strategic priorities, and recognised these visions as the foundation for future development of a potential Significant Additional Investment package.

Representatives from Nuclear Waste Services (NWS) provided an overview of the report [Community VisionsNuclear Issues BoardSept 2025], detailing how the Mid and South Copeland Community Partnerships were established and how the Community Visions were developed with input from the communities over 18 months. The board heard that this would be an ongoing process, with an annual review taking place.

The Principal Community Engagement Advisor from NWS noted the Significant Additional Investment that the government would provide if the community was chosen to host a GDF¹, as well as the shared links between the visions and priorities of the partnerships and Cumberland Council.

A councillor commented on the good link between the partnerships' aspirations and Cumberland Council's, but noted the potential for clashes on certain topics, such as developing areas for tourists and repositories.

Another councillor queried whether the implementation of the Cumberland Local Plan (when developed and agreed) would impact the Community Visions, as these related to the Copeland Local Plan². The Chair of the meeting, Councillor Mark Fryer, Leader of the Council, assured the board that, as Cumberland had agreed the Copeland Local Plan, there would be no changes that would impact the Community Visions once the Cumberland Local Plan was in place, as the Cumberland Local Plan would incorporate the Copeland, Allerdale and Carlisle Local Plans.

An observer gave their support for the Community Visions, thanking officers for their hard work in helping to create them alongside the Mid and South Copeland Partnerships. The observer also welcomed the partnerships' willingness to work with the community and hear all views regarding GDF, and highlighted that it was only through active engagement with the community that all potential solutions and ways forward would be able to be considered and explored.

The [Annex A.1Community Vision alignment with CC PrioritiesMid Copeland] and [Annex A.2Community Vision alignment with CC PrioritiesSouth Copeland] documents, which were included in the reports pack for the meeting, showed how the visions aligned with Cumberland Council priorities.

Draft Cumberland Council Response to NDA Strategy Five

The Nuclear Issues Board agreed the draft Cumberland Council response to the consultation on the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) Strategy Five, requesting additional information on specific points.

The Nuclear Policy Advisor provided the board with an overview of the draft response [Draft response to NDA S5], noting that the NDA's strategic approach is something that evolves continuously and that Strategy Five reflects developments over the past few years on which Cumberland Council has been engaged as a stakeholder, including the updated UK policy framework for radioactive waste management and decommissioning published in 2024.

A councillor asked for further information on the terminology used in points 17 and 22 of the draft response, relating to environmental impacts, which the Nuclear Policy Advisor agreed to provide after the meeting.

Members asked for further information with regard to Disposal Mox (DMOX) and Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIP), which the Nuclear Policy Advisor noted related to the plutonium immobilisation programme but was unable to provide any specialised information at this point and agreed to send some articles to the board with further information.

The chair noted a link between points 21 and 26 of the draft response, highlighting issues for the community that the council needed to make sure the strategy was cost effectively delivered and deliverable as safe.

Letter from South West Lakes Anti-GDF Community Group

The Nuclear Issues Board agreed to consider a letter from the South West Lakes Anti-GDF Community Group as part of the consultation on the GDF siting process.

The chair read out the letter from Tim Kendall on behalf of the group, which raised concerns about the GDF siting process and called for Cumberland Council to withdraw from the process for the Kirksanton/Haverigg area. The letter referenced the decisions by Millom Town Council and Whicham Parish Council to formally reject the proposed GDF area of focus, and quoted Councillor Bob Kelly, Environment and Planning Portfolio Holder, as saying that the GDF siting process has caused unnecessary suffering both financially and psychologically .

Councillor Andy Pratt, relevant ward councillor, noted that Millom Town Council had a motion on the agenda for their next meeting on whether to rejoin the South Copeland Partnership to enable them to have a better position to support and interact with their community. He also stated that the comments within the letter, attributed to himself about the compensation measures, were said but related to a particular stage of the process and that he was interested to see what they would look like in the future. Councillor Pratt also highlighted that six drop in sessions had now been organised by the Mid and South Copeland Partnerships to help further engagement within the community, noting that from those he had talked to, there were different opinions on whether a GDF should be in the area – including groups for and against it – but that a large number felt they did not have enough information to make a decision. The councillor encouraged the GDF siting process to continue so that the communities could find and be given more facts about what GDF would mean for the community.

A member noted their objection to a point in the letter, noting that Millom Town Council did not vote against the repository issue but rather to withdraw from the partnership because it did not feel it was working well and a concern with how residents of Bank Head were being treated with a devaluation of their properties. They reiterated the need for more information about GDF to be provided before a final decision could be made, and highlighted the importance of building a GDF in the safest place available for the community, if one was put in place.

The chair noted that there was a 'Test of Public Support' within the legislation around the GDF siting process, which would only go ahead if Cumberland Council agreed to proceed to that stage of the process.

The chair commented that the council were separate to Nuclear Waste Services (NWS), and had a need to be both critical and positive around the GDF siting process, with communication from communities a serious part of the final decision.

Nuclear Issues Update

The Nuclear Issues Board noted the Nuclear Issues Update report [Nuclear Issues Update Report September 2025] and the Pioneer Park Update [Pioneer Park Update 26 August 2025].

The Nuclear Policy Advisor provided the board with an overview of the report, highlighting the updated South Copeland Partnership being up and running, New Nuclear and the plutonium immobilisation programme.

He also noted some additional points, which included the new government Minister for Nuclear Energy (Lord Vallance), the appointment of Councillor J Ghayouba as Chair of NuLeAf (Nuclear Legacy Advisory Forum)³, the Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce's interim report and that more information was becoming available regarding the Great British Nuclear (GBN) and Rolls Royce SMR partnership.

The chair noted the unintentional link between paragraphs 1.2 and 1.3 of the report, seeming to show that a decision had been made regarding the Chapel Bank site even though conversations were still ongoing. The Nuclear Policy Advisor reaffirmed that the apparent link was unintentional, and the two paragraphs were for separate points.

An observer commented that it should be acknowledged that following the withdrawal of Lincolnshire County Council, Cumberland Council was now the only area talking about GDF and the community's concerns should continue to be addressed. The chair agreed and noted that conversations would continue outside of the meeting to address concerns and improving engagement with the community.