News story

Derived inventory published

We have updated our estimates on types of radioactive waste materials needing geological disposal (the Derived Inventory)

Based on changes to this data, there are no required revisions to our generic design plans and safety case for a geological disposal facility (GDF).

We regularly update the data on the radioactive waste materials which are designated for geological disposal, so that we can assess whether our generic design plans and safety case for a GDF need revision.

We have published the 2013 Derived Inventory reports which indicate that the findings of the generic safety case remain valid and suggests that a GDF could be designed to suit a variety of UK geological settings given a suitable site.

The 2014 white paper ‘Implementing Geological Disposal’ confirmed the types of waste designated for geological disposal. We had previously taken into account such anticipated changes in the 2010 Upper Inventory, which was published as part of the 2010 Derived Inventory. The 2013 Derived Inventory simply clarifies the situation.

The 2010 Derived Inventory updated data in relation to the previous 2007 Derived Inventory. However, the 2010 Upper Inventory offered a bridge to a future enlarged inventory and supported the GDF generic safety case and design parameters issued by RWM in 2010.

We are currently updating its generic Disposal System Safety Case (gDSSC), will publish it at the end of 2016.

Derived Inventory data is drawn from the UK Radioactive Waste Inventory (UKRWI), which is periodically published by the Government and NDA as an inventory of all radioactive waste in the UK. The last version of the UK Radioactive Waste Inventory (UKRWI) was published in 2013. Only a small proportion of the waste reported in the UKRWI (about 6% by volume) is designated for geological disposal.

Much of the analysis and information we publish is based on certain planning assumptions, and is often caveated. In providing the latest information on materials designated for geological disposal, it is important to us to ensure consistency in the way in which the data is presented. It would not be appropriate to simply extrapolate data by, for instance, making different assumptions, e.g. for different new nuclear build scenarios.