UK submarine dismantling: A case study in programme management

UK Submarine Dismantling:

A Case Study in

Programme Management

John Davis SDP Programme Manager

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

SDP: A case study in programme management

Management of decommissioned

nuclear submarines in the UK

18 submarines held in afloat storage – rising to 27 as current classes are

decommissioned

A safe approach for

over 30 years.

UK policy is to progress

nuclear

decommissioning as

soon as is reasonably

practicable.

Costs are rising as the

submarines age and

increase in number

2


Use of good Project Management principles

• Management and controls developed to deliver specific objectives – the

Business Case for SDP (supported by options analysis) and a concept design

• Based on APM Body of Knowledge principles and the

MoD Acquisition Operating Framework

• Well defined objective and scope of work

• Provided sufficient control and monitoring and some flexibility to ensure

delivery

• Successful in execution and achievement of objective – the SDP Main Gate

Business Case was commended

• Use of ‘Workstreams’ to deliver core requirements during Assessment

Previous management

approach up to Main Gate

3


Why a different approach now?

• Now have an increased set of

challenges for the Demo &

Manufacture phases

• Increased volume and complexity of

integration between workstreams

• Multiple outputs across dispersed

team with increased supplier

involvement

• Greater exposure to complex,

diverse and influential stakeholders

• Need for consistent and co-ordinated

communications with stakeholders

• Uncertainty – need to maintain

flexibility and focus

• Long timescales for disposing of all

27 submarines

• Solution is to move to a

Programme Management

approach

• Use of MSP framework to deal with

uncertainty in the change programme

• Programme boundary to deal with

external environment, stakeholders &

comms

• Projects to focus on output delivery

• Interdependencies managed within

programme environment

• Programme intermediate steps aligned

with MOD approval requirements

• Can differentiate between ‘change’

and ‘steady-state business’


Identifying the change programme

Focus on what is required – bound the change

• The entire scope of the SDP challenge consists of several key elements

• The change programme is the change of state – not the disposal of the

submarines

• Approach provides focus and clarity on the new state

5

Medium-Term

Change Programme

Short-term

intermediate

step-changes in

capability

CURRENT STATE

(afloat storage)

FUTURE STATE

(planned disposal)

Long-Term Submarine Disposal

Steady State Programme (27 submarines)

Facility

Decommissioning

(dismantling

& storage)

ILW DISPOSAL

IN GDF


Defining a Blueprint for the future

Clarifying what is to be done

• Know what is done currently (current

state)

• Understand what is needed in the future

and why (future state)

• Define the gap

• Plan how that gap is to be filled

• Define the structure needed to execute

the plan

• Ensure the outputs, capabilities and

resulting outcomes match the

requirements and benefits expected

“A future where the means and

approvals to safely, securely and

sustainably dismantle nuclear powered

submarines have been established and

integrated into normal operating

practices”

This area is

set aside for

images,

diagrams,

charts etc.

6

From this…. … to this


Flexibility within a disciplined framework

7

Strategic

Programme boundaries and approvals

Influenced by/affect other PTs & key external stakeholders

L1

L0

L2

L3

Programme

Overall programme definition and inter-project boundary

management

Project

Focus on delivery of individual project outputs and

support to programme outcomes

Supplier

Specific project workpackages

Supplier activities


Programme assurance through systems thinking

An integrated approach

from objectives and

requirements

to outputs, outcomes

and benefits

Benefits underpin

multi-criteria decision

analysis for the

consultations

Please contact APM/ INCOSE WG for V diagram


Managing the interdependencies

Project A

Project B

Inte

rfa

ce

Activities

Interdependencies Programme-wide

Interdependencies

database Signed

“Handshake

Document”

(detailing AB

interdependencies)

Reference

Scope (details)

Agreed Dates Programme

Integrated

Master

Schedule

Safety & Integration

Review (e.g. changes or technical

ramifications of non-adherence)

Programme Review (e.g. schedule implications to

programme milestones)

Threats to interdependencies are

captured and categorised as

such within Programme Risk

Register (Programme risks)


Reducing the uncertainty

Uncertainty arises from different sources

• Options – have downselected the options for

dismantling approach (whole RPV removal) and

location (dockyards)

– But still need to select ILW storage site

– Opportunity to dispose of whole RPV ‘as is’

• Public consultation, regulators and other stakeholder

involvement

– Strong influences and potential for change

• Dependencies - final ILW disposal in GDF

– When available? Do we need to reduce the size of

the packaged waste?

• Pace of change & alignment with planned maintenance

• Long time periods – crystal ball gazing

10

Russian and US dismantling

A lot of this

uncertainty now

deferred to long-

term steady-state

planning


Engaging the public

A very public interaction for a typically silent area

• Independent advisory group

• Local representatives, authorities and committees

• Regulators & policy holders – ONR, EA & SEPA,

NDA, DECC, DfT, DNSR, CoRWM, DEFRA, HPA

• UK & Scottish governments

• Press coverage

• Wide ranging public consultations

– >3000 consultation documents distributed

– ~55,000 newsletters mailed

– 8 local exhibitions (>1,100 attendees)

– 2 national workshops

– Post-Consultation Report published July 2012

– MoD Response to Consultation published

March 2013

11


Lessons learnt so far and future aims

MSP is not for everything

Split change element from long-term business as usual

Bring clarity & focus

Projects know how they fit into ‘big change picture’

Get senior commitment

Approach endorsed by SDP Programme Board

Co-ordinate stakeholder engagement

Communications must be co-ordinated and consistent

Scale the management investment

Do not swamp with bureaucracy

Efficient pooling of resources

Small team benefits from common central activities

Cope with dispersed team

Programme Management approach is the glue to hold things together

12

UK submarine dismantling: A case study in programme management

Business

Transcript of UK submarine dismantling: A case study in programme management