- Site: Berkeley, Oldbury, Hinkley Point A
- IR number: 21-195
- Date: March 2022
- LC numbers: 10, 12, 26
Executive summary
Purpose of Intervention
I undertook this inspection to examine Magnox Ltd’s (ML) arrangements for compliance with three Licence Conditions (LCs) at Hinkley Point A, Oldbury and Berkeley sites. These were planned interventions as detailed in ONR’s plans for the sites, and in support of ONR’s Decommissioning Fuel and Waste programme strategy.
Interventions Carried Out by ONR
I inspected the following Licence Conditions at each of the three sites:
- LC10: Training
- LC12: Duly authorised and other suitably qualified and experienced persons
- LC 26: Control and supervision of operations.
Explanation of Judgement if Safety System Not Judged to be Adequate
Not Applicable
Key Findings, Inspector's Opinions and Reasons for Judgements Made
From inspection of ML, at the Hinkley Point A, Oldbury and Berkeley sites, I found that the licensee has in place adequate arrangements, constituting a systematic approach, for the provision of suitable training to facilitate staff in conducting safe operation of the sites. Across the three sites, I found the implementation of these arrangements to be well managed and sufficient in ensuring that staff receive training in the necessary range of knowledge, skills and abilities to perform their duties to the required standards for safe operation.
Across the three sites I found that there are adequate arrangements in place to ensure that only suitably qualified and experienced personnel perform any duties which may affect the safety of operations on the site, including the appointment, in appropriate cases, of duly authorised persons to control any operations which may affect safety. I found that the sites are following their arrangements and current operations are being controlled by a requisite complement of suitably qualified, experienced and, where required, authorised persons.
I also assessed how the licensee ensures that operations which may affect safety are carried out under the control and supervision of trained persons appointed for that purpose. I consider that the licensee has adequate arrangements in place for ensuring that operations are controlled and supervised, and that the level of control and supervision specified is commensurate with the level of risk. I found that duly authorised personnel maintain active control of operations and formalise this control with signed records and authorisations. I found that the channels of communication and reporting between the levels of the operational hierarchy from the duly authorised persons to the operators are clear. I found that operations are carried out in accordance with written instructions that specify the safety significant aspects of tasks within the operations to which the instructions apply.
Conclusion of Intervention
In my opinion, based on the information reviewed, responses provided and observations undertaken, the licensee is complying adequately with the requirements of the licence conditions inspected at the Hinkley Point A, Oldbury and Berkeley sites. No regulatory issues were raised from the findings of the inspection. A preliminary inspection rating and feedback were provided to the licensee at the end of each inspection day.