Nuclear Submarines (Hansard, 5 December 1990)

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will detail the dates when the nuclear reactor systems of each submarine of the Valiant-Churchill and Polaris classes, together with the dates for the first two boats commissioned in the Swiftsure class, were last examined; and if any defects were found in the reactor system;
(2) if he will provide an estimated cost of the repairs and/or modifications required to correct the defects in any Polaris class submarines;
(3) if he will detail the nature of the nuclear reactor system defect in HMS Warspite, together with any findings or recommendations made at that time by or to his Department;
(4) when the defect of the pressurised water reactor coolant system in HMS Valiant was discovered;
(5) if he will detail the nuclear submarines in which the same type of reactor system defect exists as is present in HMS Warspite;
(6) when the nuclear safety certificate, or similar document, for HMS Conqueror was last issued; and what was the date on which this certificate ceased to be effective.

§ Mr. Andrew F. Bennett
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what was the last date on which a letter of authorisation was issued for the operation of the nuclear propulsion plant of(a) HMS Renown, (b) HMS Resolution, (c) HMS Repulse and (d) HMS Revenge; and if authorisation has since been rescinded;
(2) whether his Department is to seek financial compensation from Rolls-Royce for the generic nuclear reactor fault on submarines powered by the Rolls-Royce P1 nuclear reactor.

§ Mr. Archie Hamilton
It is not the practice to comment on matters relating to the design of nuclear-powered submarines or on their material state. I can, however, confirm that our nuclear submarines operate in accordance with rigorous safety standards and with the endorsement of our independent safety advisers.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if work on the refitting of HMS Warspite and HMS Churchill extended beyond the date when the defect in the nuclear reactor system of each boat became known;
(2) if he will provide the overall cost of refitting (a) HMS Warspite and (b) HMS Churchill and list the cost of that section of the refit programme in both (a) and (b) completed after knowledge of the defect in the nuclear reactors came to light.

§ Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
It is not our practice to publish details of nuclear submarine refits. However, in a typical nuclear submarine refit the majority of the spend is incurred in the earlier stages, with relatively little incurred in the final stages. At termination in September 1990, Warspite's refit was substantially complete and Churchill was two thirds finished.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make public the findings of the nuclear warship safety committee that reviewed the safety of operation of the nuclear propulsion systems of the Valiant-Churchill and Polaris class submarines.

§ Mr. Archie Hamilton
No. The committee's advice is provided in confidence to the Secretary of State. I can158W confirm that the Ministry of Defence has acted fully in accordance with nuclear-powered warship safety committee advice regarding the operation and inspection of our nuclear submarines.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will provide the estimated and actual radiation dose equivalent uptake resulting from the current inspection programme of the nuclear reactor systems of the Valiant-Churchill and Polaris class submarines.

§ Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
It is not the Department's policy to comment on matters relating to the design of our nuclear-powered submarines or on their material state. The hon. Gentleman may be assured, however, that our stringent policy on radiological protection, which was commended by the House of Commons Defence Committee recently, is applied throughout the Department. Rigorous steps are being taken to keep all doses as low as reasonably practicable.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will list the number of weeks that each of the Valiant-Churchill and Polaris class submarine boats have put to sea under their own nuclear power propulsion during the last three years;
(2) if he will specify the last date when HMS Valiant put to sea under its own nuclear power propulsion system.

§ Mr. Archie Hamilton
It is not our general practice to disclose such details of the operational movements of Royal Navy submarines.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will detail the stages and time scales involved in the decommissioning of nuclear-powered submarines;
(2) if he will provide an estimate of the number of civilian employees engaged at each stage of the decommissioning of each nuclear-powered submarine;
(3) if he will provide details of the decommissioning programmes for the HMS submarines Warspite, Churchill and Conqueror, stating when and at which royal dockyard each submarine is to be decommissioned; when, where and to what extent each submarine reactor compartment and its machinery is to be dismantled; when and where the radioactive components are to be stored or disposed of; when the remainder of each submarine is to be entirely dismantled and disposed of; when and where the submarines are to be laid up; and what is the anticipated cost for each submarine and the total costs of the entire decommissioning programme.

§ Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
The first stage of the decommissioning programmes for each submarine will be a package of work contracted to Devonport Management Ltd. or Babcock Thorn Ltd. as appropriate in the royal dockyards, to defuel, de-equip and prepare each boat for a period of storage afloat. Detailed specifications for this work are being prepared and it is too early to determine time scale and cost. The manpower input, and hence employment consequences, are primarily a matter for the contractor. The subject of disposal of nuclear submarines is under active consideration but no final decision has yet been made.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if his Department is undertaking discussions with the Nuclear Industry Radioactive Waste Executive Ltd. with 159W regard to securing a means of storage and/or disposal of radioactive materials and components removed from nuclear-powered submarines during decommissioning.

§ Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
NIREX is aware, through routine contacts, of the MOD's potential requirements arising from the disposal of nuclear-powered submarines.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence under whose military command the Polaris class submarine comes.

§ Mr. Archie Hamilton
The Commander-in-Chief Fleet.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many individual Polaris class submarines have failed to undertake a scheduled patrol at any time during each of the last three years.

§ Mr. Archie Hamilton
It is not our general practice to disclose such details of Royal Navy submarine deployments. I can confirm, however, that Polaris submarine deterrent patrols have been, and continue to be, carried out in accordance with our policy to keep at least one such boat at sea at all times.

§ Mr. McFall
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when it was announced to the ship's company of HMS Valiant that the boat was to be withdrawn from active service.

§ Mr. Archie Hamilton
No such announcement has been made.