Do Naval and Civilian Waterfront Renewals Have Lessons to Teach Each Other?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Do Naval and Civilian Waterfront Renewals Have Lessons to Teach Each Other? Do naval and civilian waterfront renewals have lessons to teach each other? C. Clark University of Portsmouth, UK Abstract Naval and civilian waterfronts were once sharply differentiated, but there are signs of convergence in the process of their successor owners' search for new activities and in the eventual outcomes. Continued dock use may lead to the clearance of previous infrastructure in both types, for the vast acreages required for container handling. Location directly affects outcomes: container ports need close access to deep water and the sea, leaving inland ports vacant for the generation of new non-port uses. Proximity to water has important potential for the revitalisation of both naval and civilian waterfronts. It adds value to the adjoining land in two ways: as an amenity attraction for water-related leisure activities, and also from its ability to create value for developers and investors in abandoned waterfronts. But there are many ways in which naval waterfront renewals differ from the parallel process in commercial dock areas. In contrast to most of their civilian counterparts, naval waterfronts frequently have important historic architectural ensembles. These were built by national governments to reflect state power, constructed without reference from the operation of market forces which fuelled the development of civilian docks. This highly specialised townscape, when no longer required by the navy, has potential for development as heritage. However, extra layers of planning control may inhibit or delay reuse of historic naval docks, and inward investment may be hard to find. The surrounding communities are often excluded from decision-making about future uses for both kinds of site, but there are instances where they are creatively engaged in planning for their future. This paper examines whether the paradigms of commercial waterfront regeneration are appropriate models for naval waterfronts in different parts of the world, and the extent to which they have been applied to finding new roles for former navy bases. Brownfield Sites II, A. Donati, C. Rossi & C. A. Brebbia (Editors) © 2004 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-719-1 172 Brownfield Sites II 1 Introduction Waterfront research has long focussed on the regeneration of commercial waterfronts, rather than on the future of dockyards associated with national defence. Three explanations are advanced for this imbalance: because there are fewer naval ports; because the secrecy that has traditionally surrounded dockyards can make them more difficult to research than their civilian counterparts; or because of an assumption that naval waterfront decline poses opportunities and challenges essentially similar to those arising from the abandonment of commercial docks. However, in Pinder and Smith’s view [9] the regeneration of naval waterfronts is qualitatively different from those normally associated with the run-down of commercial docks, because naval sites have considerable resources offering scope for heritage exploitation. The challenge of their reuse may have far-reaching consequences for urban and coastal zone planning and management. This paper argues, however, that in a number of cases, there is a convergence between the futures of the two types of port. “This scepter'd isle, … This precious stone set in a silver sea…” Despite Shakespeare’s peerless words ... “psychologically, the British have been in retreat from the sea for generations…” (Meek [6]). They may have lost their connection with the sea, but they still like to live near water. “because water is a source of life, power, comfort, and delight - a symbol of purification and renewal” (Quartermaine [11]). Riley and Shurmer Smith [10] noted the channelling of leisure time into maritime activities and the emergence of considerable social cachet attaching to maritime living. Waterfront apartments - a lucrative new land use for former industrial maritime sites - are highly prized, and in many instances public access to the waterfront- often for the first time- is a condition of planning permission. In contrast, modern port use may preclude public access- to what were publicly owned naval dockyards, except for areas exploited as ‘heritage’. This paper examines whether the paradigms of renewal of civilian and naval docks have anything to learn from each other, or whether the course of their renewal is too different for common currents. “The oceans which once were our highways to the world, doors to adventure and wealth, have come to be associated with economic decline and restriction. The Royal Navy couldn’t stop the empire dissolving.”; Britain might soon have fewer surface ships than the French navy, according to James Meek [6]. Naval bases, too, once symbols of national pride, are being declared obsolete. In many countries defence cuts, new technologies of war and political change have combined to leave them redundant, as navies are reduced and defence funds diverted to smaller, rapid response teams with less need of large complex dockyards. Redundancy has also come to civilian ports, as the technology of goods handling has changed, and merchant ships have grown in size. Older dock Brownfield Sites II, A. Donati, C. Rossi & C. A. Brebbia (Editors) © 2004 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-719-1 Brownfield Sites II 173 infrastructures such as multi-storey warehouses have been demolished and dry docks and basins filled in, to create large flat areas suitable for the assembly, despatch and unloading of containers, often down river, nearer deep-water access to the sea. Docks upstream were abandoned. As a result of these pressures, both types of port are in need of new, sustainable futures. 2 Rundown and redundancy The process of redundancy and closure of government facilities has been going on for a long time. Sheerness Dockyard closed in 1960; Pembroke Dock at about the same time; Chatham naval base closed in 1984; Portsmouth was downgraded to a Fleet Maintenance and Repair base in 1982; victualling bases such as Stumholmen in Karlskrona, Sweden, Royal Clarence Yard in Gosport and Royal William Yard in Plymouth have been sold on to new uses; US forces are leaving Rota in south west Spain; the Turkish base on the Golden Horn is closing; rusting naval vessels lie tied up in Kronstadt and Vladivostok naval yards. Civilian ports, including very large complexes such as London docks, have contracted or closed since the 1970s, driven by technological change arising from economic imperatives: cost reduction and increased market share. Modernisation has also affected naval ports: in the late 1940s Den Helder’s Napoleonic Rijkswerf was abandoned in favour of a completely new dockyard nearby; FML's vast Submarine complex was added to Plymouth's North Yard in the 1970s; the top of the cast iron caisson to No. 2 Steam Basin opened by Queen Victoria in Portsmouth dockyard was cut off and docks filled in to provide extra car parking. The tallest structure in Portsmouth Dockyard is now Vosper Thornycroft’s 39m high ship assembly shed built in 2002–4 over several late nineteenth century docks. It symbolises a new fusion between the government and civilian dock enterprise. 3 Built infrastructure and conservation controls These specialised waterfronts have characteristics in common – for example, enclosing walls – in the interests of national security for naval bases, and for commercial security in civilian ones. But there has been convergence between the fortunes of two categories: as Quartermaine points out, ports were until the 1960s only one aspect of a complex urban transport and trading scene; but they are now often closed sites operating internationally according to priorities and methods that have no immediate connection with any centre of population; “indeed, they are typically privately operated, high-security areas with no public access”. Civilian ports, in this respect and in several others, resemble their military counterparts, whose orders came from national governments in reaction to events far over the horizon. In both cases, continued port use may value the utility of security provided by port walls, while leisure/shopping may demand breaches for greater accessibility. Traditional ports were places of human activity, where skilful crane operators, aided by innumerable dockers, swung bales and boxes and other large Brownfield Sites II, A. Donati, C. Rossi & C. A. Brebbia (Editors) © 2004 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISBN 1-85312-719-1 174 Brownfield Sites II objects between ship and shore. In modern ports, typical nineteenth century port architecture - covered dockside storage fireproof iron and brick warehouses, becomes unnecessary, since each container functions as a dedicated warehouse, with its separate owner, cargo and destination. A container port requires easy deep water access to the quayside from the sea, large areas of space rather than buildings to sort and stack the offloaded containers, and good road and rail links to the hinterland (Quartermaine [11]). Commercial docks sometimes also have substantial architectural legacies. As a result of technological change, historic ports, such as Liverpool, have a legacy of very large and impressive Victorian warehouses, protected as historic buildings, which may wait many years for new uses. A stagnant local economy has meant that they are only slowly being brought back to use. The giant warehouses at Stanley Dock still stand empty, while Albert Dock, the neoclassical complex has had mixed fortunes as an arts, residential, museum, leisure and retail complex. An inhibiting factor may be the extra controls on historic structures and buildings which may impose a kind of paralysis on regeneration initiative. Institutional inertia seems to hang over the historic Arsenale in Venice, though state funds are slowly restoring a few of the marvellous surviving buildings, such as the Gaggiandre, the wide covered wet dock (1568-73); the Biennale makes intermittent use of the magnificent Corderie de lla Tana (1577-83). Venice Arsenale is still in the hands of the Italian navy, though there has bee n little activity for about a hundred years.
Recommended publications
  • MOD Heritage Report 2011 to 2013
    MOD Heritage Report 2011-2013 Heritage in the Ministry of Defence Cover photograph Barrow Clump, Crown Copyright CONTENTS Introduction 4 Profile of the MOD Historic Estate 5 Case Study: RAF Spadeadam 6 World Heritage Sites 7 Condition of the MOD Historic Estate 8 Scheduled Monuments 8 Listed Buildings 9 Case Study: Sandhurst 10 Heritage at Risk 11 Case Study: Otterburn 12 Estate Development and Rationalisation 13 Disposals 13 Strategy, Policy and Governance 14 Management Plans, Heritage Assessments 14 Historic Crashed Aircraft 15 Case Study: Operation Nightingale 16 Conclusion 17 Annex A: New Listed Building Designations 19 New Scheduled Monument Designations 20 Annex B: Heritage at Risk on the MOD Estate 21 Annex C: Monuments at Risk Progress Report 24 MOD Heritage Report 2011-13 3 Introduction 1. The MOD has the largest historic estate within Government and this report provides commentary on its size, diversity, condition and management. This 5th biennial report covers the financial years 11/12 and 12/13 and fulfils the requirement under the DCMS/ English Heritage (EH) Protocol for the Care of the Government Estate 2009 and Scottish Ministers Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP). It summarises the work and issues arising in the past two years and progress achieved both in the UK and overseas. 2. As recognised in the 2011 English Heritage Biennial Conservation Report, the MOD has fully adopted the Protocol and the requirements outlined in the SHEP. The requirements for both standards have been embedded into MOD business and reflected within its strategies, policies, roles and responsibilities, governance, management systems and plans and finally data systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Part 4: Conclusions and Recommendations & Appendices
    Twentieth Century Naval Dockyards Devonport and Portsmouth: Characterisation Report PART FOUR CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The final focus of this report is to develop the local, national and international contexts of the two dockyards to highlight specific areas of future research. Future discussion of Devonport and Portsmouth as distinct designed landscapes would coherently organise the many strands identified in this report. The Museum of London Archaeology Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project carried out for Heritage England (2015) is a promising step in this direction. It is emphasised that this study is just a start. By delivering the aim and objectives, it has indicated areas of further fruitful research. Project aim: to characterise the development of the active naval dockyards at Devonport and Portsmouth, and the facilities within the dockyard boundaries at their maximum extent during the twentieth century, through library, archival and field surveys, presented and analysed in a published report, with a database of documentary and building reports. This has been delivered through Parts 1-4 and Appendices 2-4. Project objectives 1 To provide an overview of the twentieth century development of English naval dockyards, related to historical precedent, national foreign policy and naval strategy. 2 To address the main chronological development phases to accommodate new types of vessels and technologies of the naval dockyards at Devonport and Portsmouth. 3 To identify the major twentieth century naval technological revolutions which affected British naval dockyards. 4 To relate the main chronological phases to topographic development of the yards and changing technological and strategic needs, and identify other significant factors. 5 To distinguish which buildings are typical of the twentieth century naval dockyards and/or of unique interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Naval Dockyards Society
    20TH CENTURY NAVAL DOCKYARDS: DEVONPORT AND PORTSMOUTH CHARACTERISATION REPORT Naval Dockyards Society Devonport Dockyard Portsmouth Dockyard Title page picture acknowledgements Top left: Devonport HM Dockyard 1951 (TNA, WORK 69/19), courtesy The National Archives. Top right: J270/09/64. Photograph of Outmuster at Portsmouth Unicorn Gate (23 Oct 1964). Reproduced by permission of Historic England. Bottom left: Devonport NAAFI (TNA, CM 20/80 September 1979), courtesy The National Archives. Bottom right: Portsmouth Round Tower (1843–48, 1868, 3/262) from the north, with the adjoining rich red brick Offices (1979, 3/261). A. Coats 2013. Reproduced with the permission of the MoD. Commissioned by The Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England of 1 Waterhouse Square, 138-142 Holborn, London, EC1N 2ST, ‘English Heritage’, known after 1 April 2015 as Historic England. Part of the NATIONAL HERITAGE PROTECTION COMMISSIONS PROGRAMME PROJECT NAME: 20th Century Naval Dockyards Devonport and Portsmouth (4A3.203) Project Number 6265 dated 7 December 2012 Fund Name: ARCH Contractor: 9865 Naval Dockyards Society, 44 Lindley Avenue, Southsea, PO4 9NU Jonathan Coad Project adviser Dr Ann Coats Editor, project manager and Portsmouth researcher Dr David Davies Editor and reviewer, project executive and Portsmouth researcher Dr David Evans Devonport researcher David Jenkins Project finance officer Professor Ray Riley Portsmouth researcher Sponsored by the National Museum of the Royal Navy Published by The Naval Dockyards Society 44 Lindley Avenue, Portsmouth, Hampshire, PO4 9NU, England navaldockyards.org First published 2015 Copyright © The Naval Dockyards Society 2015 The Contractor grants to English Heritage a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, perpetual, irrevocable and royalty-free licence to use, copy, reproduce, adapt, modify, enhance, create derivative works and/or commercially exploit the Materials for any purpose required by Historic England.
    [Show full text]
  • Portsmouth Dockyard in the Twentieth Century1
    PART THREE PORTSMOUTH DOCKYARD IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY1 3.1 INTRODUCTION The twentieth century topography of Portsmouth Dockyard can be related first to the geology and geography of Portsea Island and secondly to the technological development of warships and their need for appropriately sized and furnished docks and basins. In 2013, Portsmouth Naval Base covered 300 acres of land, with 62 acres of basin, 17 dry docks and locks, 900 buildings and 3 miles of waterfront (Bannister, 10 June 2013a). The Portsmouth Naval Base Property Trust (Heritage Area) footprint is 11.25 acres (4.56 hectares) which equates to 4.23% of the land area of the Naval Base or 3.5% of the total Naval Base footprint including the Basins (Duncan, 2013). From 8 or 9 acres in 1520–40 (Oppenheim, 1988, pp. 88-9), the dockyard was increased to 10 acres in 1658, to 95 acres in 1790, and gained 20 acres in 1843 for the steam basin and 180 acres by 1865 for the 1867 extension (Colson, 1881, p. 118). Surveyor Sir Baldwin Wake Walker warned the Admiralty in 1855 and again in 1858 that the harbour mouth needed dredging, as those [ships] of the largest Class could not in the present state of its Channel go out of Harbour, even in the event of a Blockade, in a condition to meet the Enemy, inasmuch as the insufficiency of Water renders it impossible for them to go out of Harbour with all their Guns, Coals, Ammunition and Stores on board. He noted further in 1858 that the harbour itself “is so blocked up by mud that there is barely sufficient space to moor the comparatively small Force at present there,” urging annual dredging to allow the larger current ships to moor there.
    [Show full text]
  • Royal Navy Records
    -1- PLEASE ALWAYS QUOTE LIST NUMBER WHEN ORDERING. BOOK POST: From the 1st April 2014. Our postage charges will be as follows:- UK Customers: 0 to 1 Kilo - £3.50 1 to 2 Kilos - £4.50 2 to 30 Kilos - £8.50* * UK Mainland only (exceptions Scottish Highlands & Islands, Northern Ireland, Isle of Man and Isles of Scilly) Overseas customers: will be asked to pay the normal seamail, postage rates. Air Mail is available: extra charge on request. BOOK CARRIAGE: U.K. Parcels weighing less than 2kg are sent by 2nd class or Royal Mail standard parcel. Parcels weighing more than 2kg are sent via Parcel Force, 48 hour service. Books are sent at customers risk unless separately insured. The extra cost of insured carriage or ‘signed for’ delivery to customers is available on request. All orders are despatched promptly, usually next day. BOOK ORDERING: Books may be ordered by letter, phone, or e-mail or fax. Our e-mail is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Do not forget to look at the back-dated catalogues. Books are frequently unsold. BOOK PAYMENT: All customers may pay by Cash, Cheque and ALL Credit and Debit cards EXCEPT AMEX OR EUROCHEQUE. Please quote your card number, expiry date and security code (the last 3 digits on the signature strip) in separate emails if preferred for security reasons and the full address at which the card is registered when ordering. U.K and Overseas customers may also await our Proforma Invoice. Institutions will receive the books with an invoice plus postage or carriage charges.
    [Show full text]
  • General SOR Requirements
    ANNEX A TO DFG/6004 PART A - GENERAL STATEMENT OF REQUIREMENTS FOR GOSPORT SITE(S) SCOPE OF WORK 1. The Contractor is to provide all labour, management, supervision, tools equipment and vehicles to meet the security requirements specified in Parts B & C of this Annex. 2. Provide a trained guard force qualified and capable of executing the following tasks: a. Command and Control. Provide a Chain of Command within the contract guard force including qualified managers and supervisors as appropriate. b. Site and/or Building Control of Entry. Guards and supervisors for control of entry duties including arrest/detention/searching of individuals. Identification and issue of passes, dealing with visitors and deliveries. Traffic control and parking duties. Searching of vehicles, personnel and baggage. Responsibility for keys. c. Site Patrols. During and outside working hours with a suitable communications system to call out backup. The patrol routine is as directed by the GSSOR. d. Emergency Procedures. Reaction in the event of an actual attack, intrusion or attempted intrusion, discovery of a suspected Improvised Explosive Device (IED), bomb threat (direct or by telephone), fire, mains service failure or a change in the response level. e. General Responsibilities. CCTV and alarm monitoring, reporting of incidents, compliance with establishment orders, including security orders. Maintaining normal records such as an incident book, roster register, lost/found property book, local orders and instructions and others as required. f. Emergency Defects. Co-ordinate the response to emergency defects when they occur by informing the Establishment Works Liaison Officer (during working day) or Duty Officer (during silent hours), and if required arrange for the relevant contract engineers to be called out.
    [Show full text]
  • Author Title
    Volume.Page Author Title No Bagaeen, Samer and Sustainable Regeneration of Former Military Sites - reviewed by Ray 11.141 Clark, Celia, Eds Riley Black, Jack The Naval Defence Act 1889 & its effect on the construction of 2.65 Gibraltar HM Dockyard Blakemore, Richard Parliament, Royal Dockyards and the London maritime community: 8.31 the aftermath of the 1648 Naval Revolt Brabander, Richard Intersections of interest: a prosopographical analysis of restoration 8.87 privateering enterprise Breen, Ken Second relief of Gibraltar 1781, Gibraltar as a strategic pivot 2.47 Brown, Paul Docking the Dreadnoughts: Dockyard Activity in the Dreadnought 12.43 Era Buchet, Christian The development of Victualling Board bases in London, 4.53 Portsmouth, Plymouth, Chatham and Dover (1701–1763) Buxton, Ian Rosyth Dockyard, Battleships and Dry-docking 12.107 Clark, Celia Adaptive re-use and the Georgian storehouses of Portsmouth: 4.27 naval storage to museum Clark, Celia Dockyards in visual art, art in dockyards: celebrated as sites of 9.44 national pride expressing the ‘beauty of utility’, pride in craft skills and foci of new artistic activity Clark, Celia Naval hospitals: history and architectural overview 6.65 Clark, Celia Vintage ports: lessons in the renewal of historic dockyards: an 3.89 international perspective Clark, Celia Women at Work in Portsmouth Dockyard 1914–19 12.1 Coad, Jonathan “To serve the fleet in distant waters”: buildings of the Georgian 5.51 Royal Navy’s overseas bases Coats, Ann Bermuda Dockyard and the War of 1812: a conference and tour 10.13 Coats, Ann Building(7–12 June Victory 2012): bureaucracy,set in time and logistics place and the sinews of war 7.9 Coats, Ann English naval administration under Charles I – Top-down and 8.9 bottom-up – tracing continuities Coats, Ann Epilogue: Rosia Water Tanks, Gibraltar 2.81 Coats, Ann Five Hundred Years of Deptford and Woolwich Royal Dockyards 11.1 and counting .
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Futures: Solent Waterfront Sites Final Report September 2015
    Maritime Futures: Solent Waterfront Sites Final Report September 2015 Key Waterfront Employment Sites in the Solent Region Revision Schedule Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by 1 13 May 2015 Draft Report: Overview of Simon Thurley Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw Supply and Waterfront Gregory Openshaw Project Manager Project Manager Waterfront Sites Register 2 27 May 2015 Draft Report Simon Thurley Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw Project Manager Project Manager 3 03 June 2015 Draft Final Report Simon Thurley Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw Project Manager Project Manager 4 06 August Final Report Simon Thurley Gregory Openshaw Gregory Openshaw 2015 Gregory Openshaw Project Manager Project Manager AECOM Infrastructure and Environment UK Limited 6-8 Greencoat Place Victoria London SW1P 1PL United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)207 798 5000 www.aecom.com i Key Waterfront Employment Sites in the Solent Region Limitations AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“AECOM”) has prepared this Report for the sole use of Portsmouth City Council (“the Client”), in accordance with the Agreement dated the 11th of February 2015 under which our services were performed. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by AECOM. This Report is confidential and may not be disclosed nor relied upon by any other party without the prior and express written agreement of the Client. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate.
    [Show full text]
  • Officersgardens
    Officers Gardens WEEVIL LANE • GOSPORT • HAMPSHIRE WEEVIL LANE • GOSPORT • HAMPSHIRE Welcome It gives me great pleasure to introduce a new location centred on the South Coast of England, Sentera development set within the rich and Officers Gardens has direct access to numerous proud historical Naval setting of Royal Clarence world renowned attractions, world class marinas Marina. The successful encapsulation of modern and boating, iconic shopping and dining facilities living spaces that pay homage to the classic and offers a truly a unique homeowner architecture of Royal Clarence Marina has been experience. the result of meticulous planning and cooperation with local experts, custodians, and the Royal Thank you for taking the time to search into Clarence homeowner community. Officers Gardens. On behalf of the Sentera team, we would like to thank you for your interest in the The purchase of a home at Officers Gardens, will development and hope you enjoy the experience mean owning a house with the classical of these beautiful homes as much as we do. proportions of Georgian Period properties, combined with 21st century technology and Brian Nutley luxuries for easy and practical living. With it's Managing Director Sentera Homes A proud naval heritage Satisfying the naval appetite The land on which Officers Gardens sits was formerly known Portsmouth has been at the centre of the UK’s military shipbuilding industry for over 800 years. as the Weevil Depot and later renamed more elegantly, after The city was given its first royal charter by King Richard I but grew as a naval base during the reign of Henry VII the Duke of Clarence in 1828.
    [Show full text]
  • Rosyth Royal Dockyard Limited
    Rosyth Royal Dockyard Limited Annual report For the year ended 31 March 2020 Company registration number: SC101959 Rosyth Royal Dockyard Limited Directors and advisors Current Directors I S Urquhart D M Jones J A Donaldson J W Howie B R Alexander W R Watson Joint company secretaries J M Wood Babcock Corporate Secretaries Limited Registered office Babcock International Rosyth Business Park Rosyth Dunfermline Fife KY11 2YD Independent auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Chartered Accountants and Statutory Auditors 141 Bothwell Street Glasgow G2 7EQ Registered number SC101959 Page 1 Rosyth Royal Dockyard Limited Strategic report for the year ended 31 March 2020 The directors present their Strategic report on the Company for the year ended 31 March 2020. Principal activities The principal activities of the Company are the supply of employees and assets primarily to Babcock Marine Rosyth Limited, carrying out the Submarine Dismantling Project (SDP), leasing of surplus property to commercial tenants and cargo handling carried out by the commercial port business. On 1st April 2020, RRDL purchased the trade and assets of BMRL, its immediate parent, for consideration of £118,021,000 being the net book value of the assets, satisfied by the issue of 50 £1 ordinary shares at a premium of £118,020,950 or £2,360,419 per share. On 7th April 2020 a contract was novated to RRDL from Devonport Royal Dockyard Limited (DRDL), a sister company, for the Design & Build Contract relating to the Type 31e Programme for the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The contract duration extends through to 2030, at an initial value of £1,430m.
    [Show full text]
  • SUBMARINE DISMANTLING PROJECT COEIA MCDA Data Report
    XXXXXXXXXXX ISM SUBMARINE DISMANTLING PROJECT COEIA MCDA Data Report © Crown Copyright (2011) Issue 2.0 – Jun 2011 This document has been released as background information to support the Submarine Dismantling Consultation (28 Oct 2011 – 17 Feb 2012). It has been redacted in order to protect: • personal information; and • information that could compromise UK Defence or National Security. For further information about the Submarine Dismantling Project, please visit: www.mod.uk/submarinedismantling For information about Freedom of Information requests, please visit: www.mod.uk/defenceinternet/freedomofinformation XXXXXXXXXXX ISM COEIA MCDA Data Report Submarine Dismantling Project v2.0 Jun 2011 Document Information Project Name: Submarine Dismantling Project Document Title: COEIA MCDA Data Report Issue Status: Issue 2.0 Deliverable Reference: Produced By: ISM Level of This Document is controlled to Ash 1b Control: Level 2 iaw SDP PMP Defence Equipment & Support Document Quality MOD Abbey Wood Management Procedure. Bristol BS34 8JH Document Authorisation Owner: Peer Reviewer Author: Committee Endorsement: Editorial Technical Checker: Checker: Document Approver’s Approver: Signature: Document Authoriser’s Authoriser: Signature: Conditions of Use The material in this document is subject to Crown copyright protection unless otherwise indicated. The Crown copyright protected material (other than the Royal Arms and departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. Where any of the Crown copyright items in this document are being republished or copied to others, the source of the material must be identified and the copyright status acknowledged. The permission to reproduce Crown protected material does not extend to any material in this document which is identified as being the copyright of a third party.
    [Show full text]
  • The Semaphore Circular No 650 the Beating Heart of the RNA June 2015
    The Semaphore Circular No 650 The Beating Heart of the RNA June 2015 HMAS Anzac berthed alongside on Victory Jetty during her visit to Portsmouth. Sadly there is a NAAFI buzz that our antipodeans cousins got the dates for the visit wrong as their intention was to arrive in time for the Ashes. A spokesman was heard to say ... “ Look mate ..we always like to see the Pommies hammered, so we’ll cheer on the Kiwis in the first Test at Lords....but after Root’s 98 the only way we’ll see Pommies hammered this Summer is in Pompey Weatherspoons not in the Ashes! RNA members are reminded that hard-copies of the Circular are distributed to each branch via their Secretary, but “silver-surfers” can download their own copy from the RNA website at www.royal-naval-association.co.uk .(See below) 1 Daily Orders 1. HQ Open Day 2. Driving Licence Changes 3. Guess Where? 4. Symphony Joke 5. Finance Corner 6. Donations received 7. Assistance Please HMS Jervis 8. Aussie Farmer Joke 9. RN VC Series – L/S Mantle 10. Good Home required 11. More Phantom Stuff 12. RNRMC News 13. Nigel’s Clothing Extravaganza 14. More Model Ship Building 15. Pussers Rum 16. HMS Invincible Book 17. Rude Joke Alert 18. In Memory - Trincomalee 19. Lasting Power of Attorney 20. Discount Deal Lazy Days 21. Can you Assist 22. Book Sale – Attack at Dawn Longcast “D’ye hear there” (Branch news) Ship’s Office 1. Swinging the Lamp For the Branch Secretary and notice-board Glossary of terms NCM National Council Member NC National Council AMC Association Management Committee FAC Finance Administration
    [Show full text]