Programme Management challenges on the UK Governments Geological Disposal Facility programme as the long term solution for the management of radioactive waste in the UK - James White, Radioactive Waste Management Ltd
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•261 views
- RWM's vision is to safely manage radioactive waste to protect people and the environment. Its mission is to deliver a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) and provide radioactive waste management. - The UK currently stores over 750,000 cubic meters of higher activity radioactive waste at over 30 sites around the country. A GDF is needed to permanently dispose of this waste. - RWM is working to site a GDF through a consent-based process. A GDF will require underground storage and disposal facilities, as well as surface buildings and infrastructure, to safely isolate radioactive waste for generations.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Programme Management challenges on the UK Governments Geological Disposal Facility programme as the long term solution for the management of radioactive waste in the UK - James White, Radioactive Waste Management Ltd
Similar to Programme Management challenges on the UK Governments Geological Disposal Facility programme as the long term solution for the management of radioactive waste in the UK - James White, Radioactive Waste Management Ltd (20)
More from Association for Project Management
More from Association for Project Management (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Programme Management challenges on the UK Governments Geological Disposal Facility programme as the long term solution for the management of radioactive waste in the UK - James White, Radioactive Waste Management Ltd
- 1. Major Programme Delivery - Geological Disposal James White
- 2. 2 Our vision and mission Our vision is to create a safer future by managing radioactive waste effectively, to protect people and the environment. Our mission is to deliver a Geological Disposal Facility and provide radioactive waste management.
- 3. 3 Current UK policies Local community consent is at the heart of this process and is written into Government policy: UK Government policy published 19 December 2018 Welsh Government policy published 16 January 2019
- 4. 4 Public perception in the UK • Latest insights show us that there is generally low awareness amongst the public of geological disposal • In fact, only 4% of the general public know a lot about Geological Disposal Facilities 37%knew that there was an urgent need to find a safe way to permanently dispose of radioactive waste. 40%knew the UK produced radioactive waste 25%knew radioactive waste was being stored in the UK RWM’s main challenge is social and not technical
- 5. 5 What will go into a GDF? • Higher activity radioactive waste destined for a GDF already exists and is currently being stored at over twenty above- ground nuclear sites around the UK. The majority, by volume, has already been created • More will be produced, mainly through the operation of existing and planned nuclear power stations, but also from uses of radioactive materials in medicine, industry, research and defence Source: Sources and management of radioactive waste in the UK
- 6. 6 Where is the waste stored? 30+ sites around the UK 6
- 7. 7 Waste Management Solutions • GDF required to accommodate circa 750,000 m3 packaged Higher Activity Waste (HAW) • ~ 90% of the waste inventory yet to be packaged • RWM • supports waste strategy and decision making; • packaging proposals; managing the risk waste won’t be disposable in the future; • builds confidence that waste remains disposable • RWM supports NDA Estate Site Licence Companies, wider industry, including Ministry of Defence, Nuclear New Build, and Scottish Government 7
- 8. 8 What will a GDF look like? A GDF will be a highly engineered facility and a significant piece of UK infrastructure, with both surface and underground areas. Let’s take a look
- 10. 10 Finding a willing community with a suitable site • Consent-based, voluntary approach • To deliver a GDF, we will work in partnership with communities • We will always be open and transparent, with flexible processes as we adapt to the community’s needs over time • Traditional FOAK nuclear related infrastructure issues all need to be addressed Initial discussions Working group Community partnership Site characterisation Test of public support Time Right of withdrawal
- 11. 11 Community investment Initially up to £1 million a year per community involved in the process This will rise up to £2.5 million a year per community where detailed site characterisation has taken place
- 12. 12 The six siting factors Safety & Security Community Environment Engineering Feasibility Transport Value for Money
- 13. 13 Economic and community benefits of hosting a GDF Jobs and skills There will be thousands of well-paid jobs for over a century Community support Local projects will benefit from Community Investment Funding, and public facilities and infrastructure will be improved over the long term Infrastructure investment Investment will flow into a community that hosts a GDF
- 14. 14
- 16. 16 Programme Management Project Management Past Future BAU? Project Admin? Proactive Project Management Baseline / Change Control New skills Programme Management
- 17. 17 Programme challenges: uncertainties, assumptions and requirements A significant narrowing of the estimate can only be achieved by actively removing uncertainty. This is what the next phase of “Community Engagement and Site Evaluation” is designed to do… Onshore / Offshore Community requirements Site constraints Optimising concepts Long & Slow vs. Short & fast Legacy Waste Nuclear Materials New Build Programme Site Characterisation / Geological environment Level of inherent safety vs engineered safety Priority - Initial Operating Capability? Transport Site Location Inventory Subsurface complexity and uncertainty Programme Timeline/ Duration Technical Solution 17
- 18. 18 Reducing uncertainty • Progressing siting - establishing the constraints • Establishing the big ‘R’s: - Improved enterprise modelling; communicating the options and impact of decisions - Inventory; Right underpinning available to decision makers at the right time. - Clarity on GDF Initial Operating Capability and strategic priorities • Big role for Integrated Waste Programme 18
- 20. 20 20 RWM P3M in FY20/21
- 21. 21 RWM Digital Programme & Project Management (PPM) System • Cora PPM is the most appropriate solution for our requirements I. Modern, digital system for programme and project management II. Delivered as cloud based software as a service (SaaS). III. Inherently scalable and flexible and the naturally intuitive technology - ramp up the P3M capability.
- 22. Find out more To learn more about the UK’s mission to deal with radioactive waste Visit the website geologicaldisposal.campaign.gov.uk Email: gdfenquiries@nda.gov.uk Follow us on Twitter @rwm_gdf_uk View our latest videos on YouTube rwm_gdf_uk
Editor's Notes
- Radioactive waste is a devolved matter. This means that different policies apply in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. The UK government favours an approach based on working with communities that are willing to potentially host a GDF in their area. In December 2018, UK government published its new policy called ‘Implementing Geological Disposal – Working with Communities’. This policy covers England and Northern Ireland. In January 2019, the Welsh Government published their policy adopting a similar approach for the geological disposal of higher activity radioactive waste. The Scottish Government is not a sponsor of the programme for implementing geological disposal, but remains committed to dealing responsibly with radioactive waste arising in Scotland. Their policy is that long-term management of higher activity radioactive waste should be in near-surface facilities
- 4
- The amount of packaged higher activity waste requiring geological disposal will depend on: 1. How we use radioactive materials in the future and how much more waste this produces. 2. Whether existing radioactive materials such as plutonium are declared as waste. 3. How the waste is treated and packaged, ready for disposal. Our latest estimate is that around 750,000 cubic metres of higher activity waste and nuclear materials will be sent to a GDF, but this may change. That’s roughly ¾ of the size of Wembley stadium. Most of this volume is ILW and LLW. Government policy is that this is a facility for UK wastes only; we would not be an importer or exporter of radioactive wastes.
- Blue is all LLW so not for us today. Only really interested in the yellow and the purple, which is all at nuclear sites. Vast bulk of waste by volume is LLW but this is a very small fraction of the radioactivity. The opposite is true for HLW. Inventory numbers change with time as they will remain estimates until all the facilities are closed, decommissioned and waste packaged for disposal. Latest update was published this year with a “stock date” in 2013. Available online. Headline numbers from our recent policy document are 650,000m3 or 57% of Wembley Stadium.
- Text for notes/script – AUDIENCE – LESS KNOWLEDGE: GDF surface facilities will look like a secure industrial complex and will occupy about one square kilometre of land. The surface facilities will receive different types of radioactive waste packages from across England and Wales and make them ready for their journey underground. The exact layout of the GDF surface facilities will depend on the geography of the particular site. We will work with local communities to develop the design and layout to ensure they are sympathetic to the local environment. The underground areas do not need to be located directly below the surface site. They could be separated by several kilometres. This means a surface facility on the coast could provide access to a disposal area under the sea bed. Access to the underground areas of a GDF will be via several vertical shafts and possibly a sloping tunnel, called a ‘drift’. Underground, the facility will cover an area of approximately 10-20 square kilometres. At the planned disposal depth, a network of tunnels will lead to the locations where waste packages will be placed. After the waste has been placed into a GDF, deep underground and away from people and the environment, it will eventually be permanently sealed. The surface facilities can be removed and the surface site restored for further use. Text for notes/script – AUDIENCE – MORE KNOWLEDGE: Surface facility: Currently assumed to be located directly above the disposal horizon. However could in practice be located up to 10km away. Single surface site. Illustrative design surface footprint of approximately 1.5km2 (size of a business park). Includes all radioactive waste handling, construction and associated infrastructure (electrical and utilities). Underground footprint: Underground will be a system of tunnels and vaults. Construction over an initial 10 year period prior to first waste emplacement. Operational period up to 150 years. Closure period assumed 10 years. Currently assumed to be a single disposal horizon. Footprints range from 7.6km2 up to 16.5km2(depending on host rock and layout). (e.g. 700-2000 football pitches). Up to 10 million m3 of excavated spoil. The project itself would take a 100+ years to complete. The GDF would be constructed in a modular/adaptive approach, i.e. sequentially vaults and tunnels would be excavated, filled and closed. There is therefore flexibility for future generations to adapt the design/operation to new technologies or learning from operating the facility.
- A consent-based process means we put communities at the heart of all we do. Here is an overview of how we will work with communities. Initial discussions – these can be initiated by anyone or any group of people with an interest in the siting of a GDF and who wish to propose an area for consideration. Working Group – this group will be formed to help start a dialogue with the community, identify a Search Area, and start to form a Community Partnership. Community Partnership – the Community Partnership will be the key liaison group for a dialogue between the community and RWM. Site Characterisation – a process that could last 10-15 years, as we gain more detailed information about a site’s suitability for a GDF. Right of Withdrawal – a community can withdraw from the siting process right up until the point of the test of Public Support. Test of Public Support – a potential Host Community needs to demonstrate it has given its consent to hosting a GDF prior to Government making its final decision to proceed with the development of a GDF at that site. This will be done through the Test of Public Support.
- Community Vision – the community’s vision for its future will inform investment in the communities that engage with us. This project could support local and regional visions as part of a community’s plan for achieving the future it desires. Community Investment – as well as the significant additional investment that will come with the development of the GDF, communities will have funding available whilst they participate in the siting process. Initially there will be up to £1million per community per year. This will rise to up to £2.5million per community where detailed Site Characterisation takes place. Projects could include improvements to community wellbeing, opportunities to develop new skills and enhancements to the environment and public spaces
- These six Siting Factors are proposed for use in RWM’s evaluations. They encompass broad areas for evaluation, and will be used to help guide and shape RWM’s site evaluations and discussions with communities. To provide as much clarity as possible to communities, the six Siting Factors are then broken down further into a series of ‘Evaluation Considerations’. Siting Factors and Evaluation Considerations are designed to be used holistically throughout the Siting Process. This will enable RWM to form a qualitative view, based on the information available and acquired, of a prospective areas potential to host a GDF. If the presenter is not planning on delving too deep into the considerations (slides 4-9): Safety – the characteristics of both the surface environment and sub-surface geological environment at any given geographical location and the safety implications on construction, operation, closure and post-closure of a GDF at that location. Community – the potential socio-economic implications of constructing, operating and closing a GDF at any given geographical location, including potential opportunities to enhance the wellbeing of the Potential Host Community. Environment – the characteristics of both the surface environment and sub-surface geological environment at any given geographical location, and the potential environmental impacts of constructing, operating and closing a GDF at that location and the ability to mitigate those potential impacts. Engineering Feasibility – the characteristics of both the surface environment and sub-surface geological environment at any given geographical location, and the feasibility of constructing, operating and closing a GDF at that location. Transport – the potential implications for national and local transport networks of constructing, operating and closing a GDF at any given geographical location, including any enhancements to local networks that may be required at that location and the ability to mitigate those potential impacts. Cost – the characteristics of both the surface environment and sub-surface geological environment at any given geographical location and the implications of those characteristics on the potential cost (including value for money assessment) of implementing a facility at that location.
- Jobs and skills – hundreds of people will construct and operate a GDF. The vast majority of these people will be in skilled roles, and therefore higher paid than the average wage in the UK. With support to establish a local skills base, many of those jobs could be drawn from the local community. These could be in areas such as safety and security, radiation protection, engineering design, scientific and technical support, construction and operations. Infrastructure investment – the development, construction, operation and closure of a GDF will be a multi-billion pound undertaking, and there will be significant investment in local infrastructure. Improvements could include developing road and rail networks, new housing, schools and libraries, improved internet access, developing community facilities like sports centres and village halls and environmental spaces like parks, footpaths and cycle routes. Community support – opportunities for the community exist from the moment the siting process is launched, through to closure. Very few developments have this potential across such a long timeline. RWM will work with the community that hosts a GDF, to help it achieve its own vision for social and economic wellbeing.