§ Mr. Hoyleasked the Secretary of State for Energy what is the precise nature of the programme of further work that 521W the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate has requested the Central Electricity Generating Board to carry out at the Bradwell nuclear power station; how long this programme of work will take; which other magnox stations are having long-term safety reviews; and when they will be complete.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerThe Nuclear Installations Inspectorate's requirements including time scales for further work are set out in its report, a copy of which is in the Library of the House. Completion is a matter for the Central Electricity Generating Board.
The Nuclear Installations Inspectorate has asked for long-term safety reviews to be carried out for each magnox station and will be pressing the licensees concerned to keep to agreed timetables.
§ Mr. Hoyleasked the Secretary of State for Energy why the International Atomic Energy Agency has not been asked to inspect the British magnox reactors; whether any of the Central Electricity Generating Board staff who produced the long-term safety review of Bradwell nuclear power station ever worked at Bradwell; and whether any staff from the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate visited Bradwell in the course of assessing the Central Electricity Generating Board's long-term safety review.
§ Mr. Hardyasked the Secretary of State for Energy if, in the light of the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate's report on the Bradwell power station, the International Atomic Energy Agency will now be invited to survey an older magnox station in fulfilment of the United Kingdom's obligations to co-operate internationally on such matters; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerI am considering how the United Kingdom might participate in the agency's programme of reviews of operational safety. The deployment of staff by the Central Electricity Generating Board and the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate is a matter for those organisations, but naturally Nuclear Institutions Inspectorate review team staff visited Bradwell.
§ Mr. Mullinasked the Secretary of State for Energy what information he has regarding disquiet expressed by the management of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority Dounreay nuclear establishment over the mislabelling of consignments of fast reactor fuel pins by British Nuclear Fuels plc staff at Sellafield and sent to Dounreay for reprocessing.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerNo consignments of fuel pins have been sent from Sellafield to Dounreay for reprocessing. The hon. Member may have in mind shipments of residues containing plutonium from Sellafield to Dounreay and I refer him to the answer given in the other place by Lord Gray of Contin in response to a question from Lord Brockway on 17 June 1986, at column 727.
§ Mr. Mullinasked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will list each occasion since April on which a Minister in his Department has made a statement encouraging members of the public to visit British Nuclear Fuels plc's Sellafield nuclear complex.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerMy colleagues and I are always happy to encourage the public to visit the Sellafield site and exhibition centre, as my hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad) did in the Second Standing Committee on Statutory Instruments, etc., on 5 May 1987, at column 6.
522W
§ Mr. Mullinasked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will publish all evidence or papers submitted by his Department to the Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerI shall reply to the hon. Member as soon as possible.
§ Mr. Morleyasked the Secretary of State for Energy what steps he has taken to satisfy himself' that the Central Electricity Generating Board has published all relevant information about construction difficulties at the Heysham 2 nuclear power station; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerGeneral information about the progress of construction at the station is a matter for the CEGB.
Allegations about standards of workmanship and working practices at Heysham 2 made by former construction workers at the site have been thoroughly investigated by the independent Nuclear Installations Inspectorate. The NII confirms that none of the allegations provides a cause for concern about the safety of Heysham 2. The NII's report will he published in due course.
§ Mr. Chris Smithasked the Secretary of State for Energy (1) if he will publish a weekly input/output from 1 January of spent magnox fuel arising from civil magnox reactors, together with the arisings of resulting depleted uranium and plutonium stocks for the throughput at the Windscale B205 reprocessing plant at British Nuclear Fuels plc, Sellafield;
(2) why he will not publish input/output details of spent magnox reactor fuel and depleted uranium/plutonium stocks at Sellafield.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerI shall reply to the hon. Member as soon as possible.
§ Mr. Mullinasked the Secretary of State for Energy what is the latest information he has on the final estimated cost for the Sizewell B pressurised water reactor.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerI refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad) to the right hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Orme) on 27 April at column16.
Mr. Thomasasked the Secretary of State for Energy what information he has about progress by British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. in carrying out safety improvements at Sellafield stipulated in the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate's audit reports.
§ Mr. Michael Spicer[pursuant to his reply, 23 July 1987]: I have not yet received the progress report.