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.

Routine briefing meetings with licensee - AWE plc

Executive summary

Purpose of intervention

The purpose of this intervention was to attend routine briefing meetings with licensee (AWE plc) personnel, on progress with key safety related projects within the two AWE inspection portfolios for which I am the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) Site Inspector.  In addition, together with an ONR specialist mechanical engineering inspector, I conducted a planned Licence Condition (LC) 28 (“Examination, Inspection, Maintenance and Testing – EIMT”) compliance inspection, in accordance with the planned inspection programme contained in the AWE Integrated Intervention Strategy (IIS) and associated Intervention Plans.

Interventions Carried Out by ONR

The details of the individual meetings I conducted with key licensee personnel are provided in the body of this Intervention Report.  There were no matters requiring regulatory attention identified from these meetings.

In addition I conducted an LC 28 compliance inspection of the implementation of the licensee’s arrangements, made under LC 28, in the context of operations within the A** legacy facility.

The intervention was performed in line with ONR's guidance requirements (as described in our technical inspection guides) in the areas inspected.

Explanation of Judgement if Safety System Not Judged to be Adequate

N/A.

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

During my routine meetings with key licensee personnel useful information was provided, indicating that the licensee is making satisfactory progress on a number of important safety related projects within the AWE portfolios for which I am the ONR Site Inspector.  No matters were identified as requiring additional regulatory attention.

From the totality of the evidence sampled during the LC 28 inspection and from the visit to key areas of A** and our discussions with key plant personnel, it is the judgement of the ONR inspectors that the licensee has adequate arrangements in place, in line with ONR’s expectations.  The licensee demonstrated a ‘line of sight’ from the extant safety case functional requirements through to the EIMT Schedule, supported by appropriate maintenance instructions and delivery of tasks through work orders consistent with the schedule.  In-line with ONR’s usual compliance inspection approach, the adequacy of the safety case was not examined.

The inspection confirmed completion of EIMT activities consistent with the schedule, adequate implementation of reporting and oversight arrangements, satisfactory controls for variance and effective records supporting changes to the schedule.  Minor areas for improvement, identified during the inspection, are already planned to be undertaken and ONR will monitor these through to implementation as a part of normal regulatory business.

Conclusion of Intervention

From the routine meetings with key licensee personnel, no matters requiring additional regulatory attention were identified.

From the sample taken during our inspection, the licensee provided an adequate demonstration of the implementation of its LC 28 arrangements and that Examination, Inspection, Maintenance and Testing for Structures, Systems and Components (SSC) is undertaken consistent with the licensee’s Asset Management System structure.