RWMAC report on MoD radioactive waste practices

5. CURRENT MoD OPERATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

Contractorisation and privatisation of MoD activities

5.1 The management of major MoD sites and facilities, including those where nuclear operations take place, has been, and seems likely to continue to be, subject to a process of contractorisation and privatisation. While MoD is the legal owner of all defence wastes, and has overall responsibility for ensuring that they are recorded in the UK Radioactive Waste Inventory⁴, the bulk of the wastes currently arising are produced by the activities of private companies engaged, as an outcome of contractorisation and privatisation, on defence work.

5.2 In this report, the term "contractorisation" is used in circumstances where a company is contracted by MoD to operate a site for a fixed term, but MoD retains ownership of the site, site assets, and most liabilities (except that some liabilities may be incurred by the contractor subsequent to appointment). "Privatisation" means that the site assets and facilities have been sold to a company, which then carries out the business associated with the site, with MoD as its main customer. (Ownership of historical liabilities is dealt with under the sale contract). AWE is contractorised; that is, wholly managed by the private company. The major parts of the Devonport and Rosyth dockyards have been privatised. An exception is the Rosyth solid LLW tip, which MoD continues to own and operate directly.

The current state of operation and regulation of MoD activities

5.3 The current state of operation and regulation of the main MoD activities involving the production and management of radioactive waste is summarised in Table 1, below.

Site Plant Waste & Liabilities On-site On-site

Notes to Table 1

1. NNRP is part of MoD and is therefore the Ministry's own regulator. However, it is independent of the Navy operational line. For those parts of the NNPP not subject to the civil provisions, NNRP may be described as an "external" regulator. Where the NNPP is subject to the civil provisions, NNRP provides MoD with assurance.

2. It is believed that some liabilities may attach to DRDL in respect of the decommissioning of plant developed since privatisation of the two dockyard sites.

3. The need for a central, unified, MoD "external" regulatory and assurance body is discussed in section 4, paragraphs 9-17 of this report.

4. A major role of NWIPT is management of the AWEML contract (see section 7). As part of this role, NWIPT provides MoD with some assurance of the adequacy of the contractor's waste management and decommissioning plans.

5. DSEF-Pol maintains oversight arrangements for nuclear safety, radiation protection, and radioactive waste management within MoD (see paragraph 6.16) and appears to have de-facto assurance responsibilities for the smaller defence sites. The various Health and Safety at Work Acts (HSWAs), and the Ionising Radiations Regulations (IRRs), apply to these, and all other, defence sites. The HSWAs and IRRs are regulated by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which has agreed a set of principles with MoD governing the interface between the organisations on defence sites not licensed under NIA65.

5.4 For those parts of NNPP support work which have been privatised, including the Devonport and Rosyth dockyards, site management of radioactive waste is subject to the provisions of NIA65 (since operations are not carried out by MoD) and, as a result, responsibility for regulation falls to NII. Similarly, the disposal of radioactive waste, including discharges, is within the ambit of RSA93 and regulated by the environment agencies. At Devonport dockyard, however, the situation is complicated by MoD's continuing ownership and operation of facilities contiguous with the privatised areas. These areas are subject to regulation by NNRP. NNRP also provides the MoD assurance function delivered by means of a process of "Authorisation" (see section 6, paragraph 11), for Devonport (extending to the privatised areas as well as those operated by MoD), Rosyth dockyard, and other sites where NNPP work is carried out.

5.5 At the AWE sites at Aldermaston and Burghfield, where all work is undertaken by the private sector under contract to MoD (that is, unlike the naval bases, there are no parallel MoD operations), all nuclear and radioactive waste operations fall within the ambits of NIA65 and RSA93 and thus regulation is undertaken by the NII and the environment agencies. The MoD assurance role at these sites is provided by the Ministry's Nuclear Weapons Integrated Project Team (NWIPT; formerly its AWE Compliance Office), the primary responsibility of which is running the MoD management contract.

5.6 Elsewhere, where site operations remain the direct responsibility of MoD, the accumulation and disposal of radioactive waste are regulated by the environment agencies under the pseudo-RSA93 arrangements. The main NNPP sites subject to this form of regulation are Faslane, the Royal Navy Armaments Depot (RNAD) Coulport and the Vulcan Naval Reactor Test Establishment (NRTE) at Dounreay. Nuclear operations at these sites are regulated by NNRP, except for work involving nuclear weapons at Coulport - which itself falls outside the NNPP. NNRP's possible future role in relation to the design and construction of submarine reactors, undertaken at Rolls-Royce, Derby and at BAE Systems Marine Limited, Barrow, is covered in section 6, paragraphs 20-22.

5.7 In addition, there are a large number of other sites subject to the pseudo-RSA93 arrangements where radioactive materials and wastes are managed directly by MoD and armed forces personnel. None of these sites involve nuclear work and there is, at present, no MoD regulator analogous to NNRP, although responsibility for the sites ultimately falls to the MoD Chief Environment and Safety Officer and his policy and working committees (see Annex 2). In addition, the radiation protection services arm of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA-RPS) carries out radiological protection advisory visits and is responsible for checking compliance with agreed procedures. Generic examples of these sites include Army Base Repair Organisation (ABRO) sites, infantry depots, and MoD hospitals. In addition, Annex 9 indicates a number of individual other MoD sites managing radioactive materials and dealing with radioactive wastes which are not recorded in the 1998 UK Radioactive Waste Inventory⁴.

5.8 At some of these sites, possibly most, MoD service units use significant numbers of small radioactive sources, such as rifle sights, which are, to some degree or another, currently subject to the pseudo-RSA93 arrangements. For the reasons outlined previously, RWMAC believes that a central MoD assurance and regulatory body might be better equipped to carry out the regulatory task.

5.9 During the course of its work, RWMAC visited MoD sites managed through a range of different structures, from "fully in-house" to "fully-privatised". RWMAC sees no problems with the concept of either contractorisation or privatisation provided only that accountabilities are clear, and suitable incentives for good waste management practice are in place. However, even where the work has been contractorised or privatised, the arrangements must address how compliance with MoD's radioactive waste strategy can be ensured and how MoD's responsibilities as the owner of the wastes can be properly discharged. In particular, the question of the allocation of responsibility for future site decommissioning and clean-up wastes from fully privatised sites needs to be fully allocated (see section 4, paragraphs 35-36).