Office for Nuclear Regulation

This website uses non-intrusive cookies to improve your user experience. You can visit our cookie privacy page for more information.

BAE Systems Marine Limited (BAESML) – Devonshire Dock Complex – Planned Intervention

Executive summary

Purpose of intervention

This was a planned inspection at BAE Systems Marine Limited’s (BAESML’s) Devonshire Dock Complex (DDC) nuclear licensed site at Barrow, undertaken as part of the planned intervention strategy for the DDC site for 2015/16.

Interventions Carried Out by ONR

The Nominated Site Inspector together with an ONR Nuclear Safety Inspector (Quality Management) inspected Licence Condition 17 (LC17)/ Authorisation Condition 17 (AC17) “Management Systems” jointly with the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR).  The arrangements were deemed in May 2014 to be significantly below standard, leading to BAESML initiating an improvement programme and ONR raising a compliance issue to monitor improvements.  We selected this LC to monitor BAESML’s improvement programme, which ONR considers to be particularly important since improving LC17/AC17 compliance is likely to improve compliance for several other LCs/ACs since BAESML’s process for demonstrating compliance with the LCs/ACs is to use a “matrix” mapping LC/AC arrangements to management system documents.

We inspected Licence Condition 26 (LC26)/ Authorisation Condition 26 (AC26) “Control and Supervision of Operations” jointly with DNSR.  In January 2012 this LC was considered to be significantly below standard, leading to BAESML initiating an improvement programme and ONR raising a compliance issue to monitor improvements.  I selected this LC to monitor BAESML’s improvement programme.

Explanation of Judgement if Safety System Not Judged to be Adequate

Not applicable.

Key Findings, Inspector's Opinions and Reasons for Judgements Made

In relation to LC17 we concluded that BAESML’s proposed Project Management Plan should deliver a compliant Integrated Management System.  We further concluded that the plan was challenging and would require commitment from senior management to ensure that the programme of work was sufficiently resourced and that organisational obstacles and inertias would be overcome.  At the time of this inspection, we considered that sufficient progress with implementing the plan had not been made to support a different view, and we therefore judged the arrangements to still be significantly below standard.  A new regulatory issue was not raised since this matter is already being monitored by an existing ONR issue and associated actions.  This issue will continue to be regularly monitored by ONR as part of normal business to ensure that BAESML continue to make adequate progress in restoring compliance with LC17.

In relation to LC26 I concluded that measures are not yet in place to “ensure that no operations are carried out which may affect safety except under the control and supervision of suitably qualified and experience persons appointed for that purpose by the licensee”.  However, I examined aspects of control and supervision within the facility and considered it to be adequate.  Taking these factors into account overall the inspection assigned as below standard.  A new regulatory issue was not raised since this matter is already being monitored by an existing ONR issue.  This issue will then continue to be regularly monitored by ONR as part of normal business to ensure that BAESML continue to make adequate progress in restoring compliance with LC26.

In relation to the other activities undertaken in this intervention, no key findings arose.

Conclusion of Intervention

From the evidence gathered during this intervention, no matters have been identified that are likely to have a significant impact on nuclear safety on the site at this time. Therefore, no further regulatory action arising from this visit is considered necessary.