Transcript Welcome to CCFE - NNUF | Homepage

National Nuclear User Facility
National Nuclear User Facility
•
In its March 2013 Nuclear Industrial Strategy, Government
announced the National Nuclear User Facility (NNUF) initiative
•
A multi-site facility to give academia and industry access to
experimental equipment for nuclear research on materials with
greater radioactivity than can be handled in universities
•
£15M over three years from 2012/13, from DECC and BIS via
EPSRC. For facilities at the Central Laboratory of NNL, CCFE and
the University of Manchester’s Dalton Cumbrian Facility
•
In late 2013 the ADRIANA nuclear instrumentation project was
funded (DECC via EPSRC) - £1M at Lancaster, Liverpool and
CCFE
•
NNUF Management Committee: members presently from Imperial
(R Grimes, chair), CCFE, Lancaster, Leeds, Manchester & DCF,
NNL, Oxford. Plus EPSRC (observer)
ToR of NNUF Steering Committee
Support Government in discharging the Nuclear Industrial Strategy, by
ensuring the R&D community have access to world-leading equipment
for conducting research on radioactive or activated materials.
•
•
•
•
•
•
R&D equipment across the full lifecycle for legacy, current, future reactors;
identify gaps in infrastructure, with reference to Nuclear Energy R&D Roadmap and
priorities agreed by the Nuclear Innovation and Research Advisory Board (NIRAB).
Establish portfolio of evaluated and prioritised proposals. Consult NIRAB on larger
proposals
Identify funding for NNUF, including training, access, operations and maintenance
Maintain awareness of international opportunities (e.g. Jules Horowitz Reactor)
Promote NNUF. Workshops to inform / consult researchers. Information on NNUF
and facilities via website, etc.
Representation from national labs, research councils, academia. Non-executive
members and/or observers where necessary
General Issues
1. Costing - “not for profit” for universities
– General facility running costs
– Job specific costs - will be very dependent on what you want done, so in
general can’t give a day rate for a piece of equipment
– ADRIANA usage may be free depending on requirements
2. Website www.nnuf.ac.uk – just launched
3. Today – we’re listening as well as telling! We’d like your views
on: support from the host sites, future NNUF spend and
procedure to assess proposals, etc.
Batting Order
1. Current NNUF status - equipment and access
– Culham Centre for Fusion Energy (CCFE) – Martin O’Brien
– Dalton Cumbrian Facility – Kevin Warren
– National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL) – Dominic Rhodes
– ADRIANA instrumentation – Malcolm Joyce (Lancaster)
2. Developing a national archive of irradiated and activated materials Steve Roberts (Oxford)/Peter Flewitt (Bristol)
3. Transporting irradiated/activated materials – Mike Angus (NNL)
4. New NNUF Proposals – Kevin Warren and Martin O’Brien
Lots of time for discussion
New NNUF Proposals
Martin O’Brien and Kevin Warren
New NNUF proposals
• Expansion of nuclear R&D is planned. We need more facilities!
• Anything for > 1 university should be under NNUF umbrella. But
for small facilities “light touch” and autonomy
• Not just for materials science (cf. ADRIANA) and not just at
current NNUF sites
• We need “oven ready” proposals - funding often available at
short notice and only if spend is rapid. We know of some
already.
• Adaptable process for proposals ranging from > ~£100k to
>£10M. Different application routes – standard EPSRC, capital
funding from EPSRC/DECC/BIS, etc.
• NIRAB/NIRO involved in - and may initiate - the biggest
Various categories – all require 2 page outlines
1a) EPSRC application for equipment to be sited at a university
Light touch, NNUF’s comments to help proposal – then leave to proponents
1b) EPSRC application for equipment to be sited at CCFE, DCF or NNL
As 1a), host has to be a proponent!
2) Projects of varying sizes for NNUF list of “oven ready” proposals in case
funding becomes available at short notice
NNUF committee will create ranked list of varying size proposals.
When a funding opportunity  proponents rapidly write fuller case (format
depends on funding source)
3) Big facilities, e.g. for BIS Large Scale Infrastructure Fund. Will require a
detailed business case. May be top-down request, e.g. from NIRAB
Discuss with NNUF first, who will usually seek NIRAB’s steer/blessing
Discussion with EPSRC may also be appropriate
NNUF Evaluation
Criteria
Criteria & Key Points (first 4 mandatory)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
aligns with Nuclear Industry Strategy
creates a true user facility (access arrangements available)
for use with irradiated or activated materials
predominantly for R&D
new capability (if duplication, need a justification)
capability likely to enhance UK's international engagement
multiple proponents?
anticipated level of usage of new facility? (state by whom)
infrastructure changes required? (if so what and how to be funded)
how will operating and maintenance costs be met?
how will the decommissioning costs be met?
previous/relevant experience of undertaking projects of this type
duration before operational (<3mths, <6mths, <1yr, >1yr?)