1 Nuclear Legacy Advisory Forum NuLeaf Presentation NDA Strategy II 20 th April 2010 NDA Programme Manager Richard Arnott NDA Head of Strategy Clive Nixon NDA Head of CommunicationsBill Hamilton

NDA Strategy I Background NDA established in April 2005 (recent 5 th birthday) NDA Strategy I published April 2006 Energy Act 2004 requires revision at least every 5 years Strategy II publication date 31 st March 2011

Scope of NDA Strategy

NDA Strategic Themes Site Restoration Strategy for the remediation activities required to deliver a site or facility that has ceased operations through to the Site End State Return our designated sites to societal use Nuclear Materials Management Strategy for the safe management and ultimate disposition of UK owned Plutonium arisen from reprocessing spent fuel Uranicsarisen from UK civil nuclear fuel cycle operations Spent Fuels Management Strategy to ensure all spent fuels are managed in a safe and secure way for the lifecycle Magnoxoutput from 26 Magnox reactors, electricity generation Oxide AGR operated by BE, LWR operated by foreign utilities Exotics Non-standard fuels, legacy from industry activities

NDA Strategic Themes Integrated Waste Management Strategy to optimise waste management solutions for Lower & Higher activity wastes, and Non-Radiological wastes Business Optimisation Maximise value from our assets - including land and property – To maximise net benefit to the taxpayer Enabling Strategies (13) Supporting NDA strategies required to enable delivery of the above : Health, safety, security, safeguards and environment Transport and Logistics, Asset Management Research and Development, Supply chain development Skills, Socio-economics, Competitions, etc

Strategy Management System (SMS)

Strategy II Energy Act 2004: Revise & publish NDA Strategy at least every 5 years …. therefore it’s a snap-shot in time

Strategy II Approach to Consultation / Publication

Key Programme Dates

10 Consultation starts1 September 2010 Mid Consultation NSG21/22 September 2010 Consultation Ends24 November 2010 Strategy published31 March 2011 Key NuLeaf dates

Planned Stakeholder Engagement All key stakeholders12week consultation period Two NSG meetings Nuclear RegulatorsSDDG monthly meetings Local AuthoritiesNuLeaf meeting 20 th April, London SCCORS late May &/or Early Oct Site Stakeholder GroupsUK Roadshow during Sept / Oct Trade UnionsStrategic Forum 3 rd June 2010 SLCs / PBOsPartnering events Input to the “UK Decommissioning & Waste Management” conference Rheged, Penrith, 2 nd & 3 rd November 2010

12 Clive Nixon NDA Head of Strategy

Recap - Scope of NDA Strategy

NDA STRATEGY Critical Enablers 14 NDA Strategy Integrity Business Optmisation Integrated Waste Management Nuclear Materials Spent Fuel Site Restoration time

15 Review of progress since Strategy I Successes –Competition Programme –Strategy development –New future for Springfields –Extended generation –Industry restructuring –Lifetime plans Challenges –Progress on risk reduction in Legacy ponds and silos –Accelerated Magnox decommissioning –Reprocessing dates moving to the right

16 Strategic Issues Affordability Interaction with New Build –Materials management and national nuclear infrastructure –Skills and workforce alignment –End states Changing policy positions –Scottish Higher Activity Waste –Pu Disposition Managing Radioactive Waste Safely process

17 Strategic Issues Aging plant and asset management Best use of estate wide assets –Co-location Approach to next societal use –“End States” and “Interim States” Information and knowledge management Through life management of 3 rd party liabilities

18 Site Restoration

Site Restoration - Objective To return our designated sites to societal use NDA’s main function is to carry out decommissioning and clean-up Site Restoration is the driving strategy the other strategies provide support

Site Restoration Scope Site Restoration covers three key activities required to deliver a site or facility through to a planned Site End State –Decommissioning and Clean-Up Cleaning out, dismantling and demolishing redundant facilities (from cessation of operations to demolition) –Land Quality Management Managing contaminated ground and groundwater –Site End States Providing credible objectives for the restoration of each site; defining the physical condition of a site when NDA has completed its mission

Site Restoration 2006 Strategy attempted to identify the main elements in the lifecycle scope Strategy II tries to focus more on the near term and saturates those projects where the risks are high Resources are constrained

Site Restoration - Challenge Restoration of the UK’s nuclear legacy presents a major and time critical challenge; in 2009/10 the discounted future cost estimate amounts to £40.8 billion –Legacy plants dating from late 1940’s and 1950’s –Large quantities of old corroding radioactive waste –Degrading infrastructure –Contaminated ground and / or groundwater at every NDA site as a result of various land uses (not all nuclear) –Volume of ground estimated to be radioactively contaminated exceeds (~x4) current UK low level waste disposal capacity.

Site Restoration – Key Messages Undertake Site Restoration as soon as reasonably practicable, taking account of all relevant factors Focus resource on reducing high risks to people and the environment Utilise Interim States for timely achievement of objectives Employ fit-for-purpose restoration objectives Ensure Site Restoration encourages the highest standards in health, safety, security and environmental performance, offers value for money and employs good practice

Question The NDA believes that our focus should be on Interim States and our decision on site end states should be made closer to the time when the next planned use is apparent –What are your views on the NDA’s position? –What attributes should any Interim State have, and which are particularly important to you and why? –Does a focus on interim states raise any concerns? –To what extent should local authorities be engaged in identifying interim states at sites?

Integrated Waste Management

Strategic objectives in waste management Our goals: –implement Government policies for radioactive waste and decommissioning and comply with the requirements of the Energy Act 2004 –deliver effective waste management solutions to support the cleanup mission We have taken on wider responsibilities since Strategy 1: –UK-wide responsibility for Low Level Waste strategy and implementation; –responsibility for implementing the UK Geological Disposal Facility; and –responsibilities under Scottish policy to produce a higher activity waste management strategy for Scotland

Risk reduction – legacy facilities We will continue to prioritise risk reduction by waste retrieval Earliest waste retrieval is paramount – the need for subsequent waste treatment and packaging in some instances is accepted The door is open for innovative waste treatment and packaging technology

Strategic points Diversified waste disposal Other Intermediate Level Waste opportunities Solid Low Level Waste Strategy Scottish policy for Higher Activity Waste

Diversified waste disposal Pursuing flexibility, value for money and fit-for-purpose disposal solutions: moving away from the old UK waste disposal paradigm Optimising the use of LLWR –Landfill-type disposal of VLLW, on-, near- and off-site –Incineration for volume reduction –Waste hierarchy opportunities Optimising the use of the Geological Disposal Facility –Near surface disposal opportunities for Reactor Decommissioning Waste (ILW) Implications –More locations –Earlier –Transport

Other Intermediate Level Waste opportunities Challenging the old ideas Develop the opportunities to treat and store ILW in fewer locations New waste package concepts Thermal waste treatment: volume reduction, value for money, early immobilisation and fit-for-purpose wasteforms Waste transport infrastructure is the catalyst

Solid Low Level Waste strategy We consulted upon UK Nuclear industry strategy for solid LLW in What did we learn? Respondents endorsed key themes of the strategy – eg waste hierarchy Early dialogue with stakeholders and local communities is essential to successful implementation Good waste management solutions consider local issues as well as national

Question What does the Integrated Waste Management Strategy mean for you in your area? What are the opportunities and/or the main hurdles to implementation and how they might be overcome (eg on ‘other ILW opportunities’)?

Spent Fuel Management

Magnox Context Current Inventory: Magnox fuel : 4500 te to be reprocessed, of which –Wetted fuel ~500 te (Mostly at Sellafield) –Dry Fuel ~ 4000 te (at Reactor Sites, e.g. in cores) It is important to control the amount of Magnox fuel stored in Ponds: –Magnox Fuel can start to corrode after approximately 5 years in fuel ponds Example of potential additions to inventory: –Dounreay Fast Reactor Breeder: < 45 te (i.e. 1% extra) –Wylfa and Oldbury extension : < 20 te (i.e. 0.5% extra)

Magnox – Main Issues Magnox Reprocessing uses oldest facilities –Increasingly expensive to maintain Risk of Early Plant Failure –Reprocessing process operates in series Single plant failure can slow / stop the whole process –Contingency work progressing but still immature –NDA has now set Failure Criteria / Strategic Tolerances for the MOP associated with plant longevity, e.g. Dissolver Life Avoidance of new plant requiring major investment

Current Magnox Strategy Deliver Magnox Operating Plan (MOP) –Extend power generation as far as possible –Predicted finish 2016 Maximise opportunities to incorporate other materials in reprocessing stream –For some spent metal type fuels this is the only technically underpinned management option Develop Contingency Options in event of plant failure –Fuel Drying and long term Dry Storage –Alternative options

Magnox Drying and Dry Storage Significant Investment in Fuel Drying and Dry Fuel Storage Project –Commenced during last half of 2007 –Investment increased 2009/10 –Further increase in investment planned for 2010/11 Loosely based on metal fuel drying project completed at Hanford, USA. –Dried and dry stored 2100 te of pond stored metal fuel. Now incorporating the options to dry and dry store other fuel types, such as oxide and exotics

Current reference oxide strategy –Reprocess contracted “Overseas” LWR fuel –Receive and manage AGR fuel ~3000te Historic Fuel will be reprocessed ~3100 te Future Fuel will be stored and may be reprocessed Need to keep extra space available if BE extend AGR station lifetimes –Very small amount of corroded fuel – priority reprocessing Aim to achieve fuel management to maximise the cost benefit –E.g. by develop optimised lifecycle for AGR fuel Oxide Reference Strategy

Oxide Fuel Credible Options 1.Reprocess minimum contracted fuel and stop –no new plant 2.Reprocess until the end-of-life of the existing plant 3.Reprocess all UK & Overseas fuel –Refurbish & replace plant as required –Eventually throughput circa 250 te p.a. from UK AGRs 4.Reprocess all UK & Overseas fuel –Consider extra business to offset costs and optimise use of the assets –Refurbish & replace plant as required 5.Stop Repro – store, immobilise and dispose NOTE: Current reference strategy placed between 1 & 2

PFR fuel Exotics Inventory DFR Zebra MOD fuels HEU & Research Thorp ‘Non-Standard’ WAGR Fuels MOX Fuels & PIE Cans ‘Legacy Metals’ Carbide fuels

Exotics Strategy / Issues Total Inventory liability (circa 500te) Outside standard arrangements: –transport, storage, reprocessing and disposal Unique challenges –Bespoke solutions required for some exotic fuels TREAT – Could be reprocess or immobilise

Exotic Fuels Risks & Opportunities Multi-Track Plans for Fuels Needs to be Optimised for all fuel types: –Reprocess some fuels (e.g. Thorp Non-Standard) –Immobilise, Store and Dispose (e.g. PFR Fuels) Significant part of the inventory has technically immature solutions at present NDA wants to consider reprocessing exotic fuels using the existing NDA estate wide infrastructure –Where technology and logistics (timings) allow

Question Magnox Given we have a mature strategy that is clear and embedded in policy, but delivery is at risk due to ageing assets, what are your views on NDA’s proposed approach? Oxide Are the identified options the right ones to be assessing? What will be the most important factors when assessing the strategic options?