Search Results

1-3 of 3 results for subject:Storage

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if she will list the occasions on which sections of uranium nuclear reactor fuel rods have been discovered outside the area where special nuclear materials are required to be held, with particular reference to Pelham House, Calderbridge.

Asked by

Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of Trade and Industry

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

10 March 2005

For answer on

7 April 2005

Answered on

7 April 2005

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will list the occasions on which sections of uranium nuclear reactor fuel rods have been discovered outside the area where special nuclear materials are required to be held, with particular reference to Pelham House, Calderbridge. [221679] Mr. Mike O'Brien: On 24 March 2000 the Environment Agency were notified of the discovery of a radioactive rod at Mormet Alloys in Tamworth. The Environment Agency reported that there was no indication of any hazard to members of the public and that no radioactive contamination had been found at the site. This rod would appear to have been one of two produced in the early 1960s by UKAEA Springfields (now BNFL) for engineering testing purposes. The rod was provided on loan to CA Parsons Ltd in Newcastle. This company was involved with construction consortia involved in the building of nuclear power stations. Because of the destruction of advice and delivery notes under the 30 year rule and the loss of the Parsons files it is impossible to establish if the rod was ever returned to Springfields by Parsons. The rod had been extensively damaged including the removal of both ends which would have had stamped identification numbers. The rod was taken to Winfrith (and subsequently NNC at Risley) for analysis and then to Springfields for storage. I understand from BNFL, British Energy and UKAEA that their current records show no other occasions on which sections of uranium nuclear reactor fuels rods have been discovered outside the areas where special nuclear materials are required to be held.

Date

7 April 2005

Reference

432 c1635-6W;432 c1631W; 221679

House

House of Commons

Dept of Trade and Industry

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, how many drums of plutonium-contaminated processing waste are held at Sellafield; and what the (a) maximum and (b) average plutonium content of each drum is.

Asked by

Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of Trade and Industry

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

22 March 2005

Reference

432 c678W; 221567

House

House of Commons

Dept of Trade and Industry

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if she will make a statement on the storage of chocolate radioactively contaminated following the fire at Windscale in 1957.

Asked by

Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Department of Trade and Industry

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

26 November 2004

For answer on

8 December 2004

Answered on

8 December 2004

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will make a statement on the storage of chocolate radioactively contaminated following the fire at Windscale in 1957. [200708] Mr. Mike O'Brien: A fire broke out in Pile 1 on 10 October 1957, and was extinguished on 11 October. Radioactivity was released to the environment. The main public health concern was the contamination of locally produced milk by the short-lived isotope iodine 131. Milk produced within 80 square miles of the site was banned from 12 October, and the ban was extended to 200 square miles on 15 October. At that time, the chocolate manufacturer Rowntree ran a factory in Egremont, close to the Windscale site. Records in one UKAEA file show that on 8 November 1957 Rowntree wrote to seek compensation for 90 tons of chocolate milk crumb manufactured between 11 and 15 October, which they believed to have been contaminated as a result of the Windscale fire. UKAEA contested this claim on the grounds that "the crumb is completely safe for consumption owing to the short half- life of the radioactive iodine which was the sole source of contamination". The correspondence continued for some months, culminating in an exchange of letters between the Chairman of Rowntree and Sir Donald Perrott of UKAEA. Rowntree acknowledged "we fully accept your advice that, as a matter of scientific fact, the 90 tons of crumb do not represent a radioactive hazard", but stated that in the interest of customer relations and commercial prudence, they wished to have the crumb destroyed or disposed of. They sought the UKAEA's help to do so, and offered to meet the costs incurred. UKAEA agreed "to accept responsibility for destroying this material" on Rowntree's behalf.

Date

8 December 2004

Reference

200708; 428 c596W

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher