BBC issues belated correction over nuclear waste report in Lincolnshire village

BBC Look North (East Yorkshire and Lincolnshire) has issued a correction to a June 2025 broadcast that mistakenly claimed plans for a nuclear waste dump were located directly beneath a Lincolnshire village. In fact, the proposed underground facility was off the coast, with only the entrance and part of the tunnelling system situated near and beneath the village.

The correction, quietly published on 31 October 2025, acknowledges the error nearly five months after the original broadcast. The June segment, which aired on BBC One, discussed local opposition to the government’s plans for a geological disposal facility (GDF) to store nuclear waste. The report suggested that the waste itself would be stored beneath residents’ homes — a claim that, according to the BBC’s update, was inaccurate.

The clarification reads:

“The programme mistakenly said that plans for a nuclear dump were located underneath a village in Lincolnshire. In fact the dump was underground off the coast, with the entrance and some tunnelling located near and beneath the village.”

The distinction may appear technical, but it is significant: the facility’s main chambers are planned to extend several miles offshore beneath the seabed, not directly under populated land. The original phrasing risked exaggerating the proximity of nuclear material to local homes, potentially heightening public concern in a region already wary of the project.

It is unusual for such a correction to appear so long after the broadcast, given that the report aired in early summer and drew local attention at the time. The BBC has not explained why the clarification was issued only now, months later, though campaigners in the area say the delay has done little to ease public confusion.

Critics of the GDF plan have long accused ministers of downplaying the risks of underground nuclear storage, while supporters argue it is essential for safely managing the UK’s legacy waste. The BBC’s late correction, while small in wording, serves as a reminder of how precision in language — and timing — matters in debates where trust and geography are everything.