BERR Consultation document

The Government published a White Paper on nuclear Power in January 2008. This said that energy companies should have the option of investing in new nuclear power stations and set out a programme of actions which need to be taken by Government to facilitate this investment. One of these actions relates to Justification.  This is based on EU legislation which requires that the Government must make an assessment to ensure that the benefits of a new practice involving ionising radiation outweigh any detriments to health.

The consultation seeks responses to an application submitted by the nuclear industry association (NIA), the representative body for the nuclear industry in the UK, for a Justification decision in relation to new nuclear power stations.

The consultation asks the following questions:

1. Do you agree with the Government’s preliminary view that, following the application submitted by the NIA, the decisions by the Secretary of State and the Justifying Authority should be by reference to four classes or types of practice, based on:

(a) The generation of electricity from nuclear energy using oxide fuel of low enrichment in fissile content in a light water cooled, water moderated thermal reactor known as ACR1000 designed by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.
(b) The generation of electricity from nuclear energy using oxide fuel of low enrichment in fissile content in a light water cooled, water moderated thermal reactor known as AP1000 designed by Westinghouse Electric Company LLC of the USA.
(c) The generation of electricity from nuclear energy using oxide fuel of low enrichment in fissile content in a light water cooled, water moderated thermal reactor known as EPR designed by AREVA NP of France and Germany.
(d) The generation of electricity from nuclear energy using oxide fuel of low enrichment in fissile content in a light water cooled, water moderated thermal reactor known as ESBWR designed by GE-Hitachi of the USA, and that these qualify as new classes or types of practice. If not, why not?

2. Does the NIA application contain sufficient information to enable the Justifying Authority to make an assessment of a) these classes or types of practice and b) the preferred class or type of practice in the NIA application? In either case, if not, what further information is needed?

3. Do you have any comments on the arguments or evidence in the NIA’s application? Are there any additional arguments or evidence which the Justifying Authority should consider?

4. Do you have any other comments on the Government’s preliminary view of the classes or types of practice, on the approach preferred by the NIA, or any other options?

5. Do you have any comments on how best the Government might accommodate changes or developments of the named reactors in its classes or types of practice?

6. Do you have any suggestions about the way in which the Government proposes to engage with the public in the later stage of the consultation process?

The closing date for responses is March 2009.