RWMAC report on MoD radioactive waste practices

Foreword

Although RWMAC's formal terms of reference relate to the provision of advice to Government on the management of civil radioactive wastes, the Committee is asked from time to time to review the management of radioactive wastes arising from Ministry of Defence activities. This report sets out the findings of RWMAC's latest study of defence wastes. We conclude that the standard of management of defence wastes is generally good, and comparable to that of the civil nuclear industry.

The range of MoD activities requiring the handling of radioactive materials and wastes is wide. This review has been a major undertaking for RWMAC, as the length of this report indicates. Accordingly, we have endeavoured to make it possible to read it at a number of levels, depending on the individual reader's depth of interest. The Committee's main findings, including 38 specific recommendations, are set out in the Executive Summary. This cross-references discussion in the main text. Section 10 - a synopsis of the report's major points - explains the derivation of the recommendations. The main body of the report - notably sections 4 to 9 - discusses our findings under a number of general headings. More detailed descriptions of MoD activities, mainly site related, are provided in a series of annexes.

RWMAC notes continued improvement in MoD's arrangements and standards for managing its radioactive wastes, examples of which are discussed. These include progressive extension of civil regulation (as a consequence of processes of contractorisation and privatisation), establishment of the Naval Nuclear Regulatory Panel, development of management systems and waste facilities at individual sites, and greater openness and transparency in the manner in which MoD carries out its work.

The key conceptual message of the report is relatively simple - MoD should formulate and publish a clear overall strategy for the management of defence wastes and ensure that its organisational structures can deliver the strategy's objectives. MoD also needs to develop further procedures for providing assurance that its responsibilities and accountabilities as owner of the wastes are being fully and properly met. There are a number of elements of the assurance approach already in place, so it is essentially further rationalisation and improvement that is being recommended. We believe that considerable conceptual and presentational, as well as operational, benefits can accrue to MoD in this way. More regular review by MoD of its arrangements, to check that provisions are working in practice, would also be beneficial.

The report reviews the key areas of MoD radioactive waste management practices at its major waste-producing sites. We have endeavoured to be constructive in both our criticisms and recommendations. They are made against the background of considerable achievement by MoD in recent years. Equally, further improvements are possible and should be made.

Professor Charles Curtis
Chairman of RWMAC