This report covers an inspection of Magnox Ltd's Harwell nuclear licensed site between 25 - 27 May 2016. This inspection was undertaken as part of a programme of planned interventions as outlined in the IIS plan for 2016/17.
During this intervention, I carried out a compliance inspection against the following licence conditions.
My inspections were carried out against the requirements of ONR's published inspection guidance associated with the above Licence Conditions. The inspection comprised plant inspection, office-based examination of procedures and records and interviews with staff.
Whilst on site I held meetings with the licensee to discuss and follow up on the status of actions and held meetings to discuss a number of routine matters.
The safety system inspected was judged to adequately meet the requirements of the safety case.
Magnox Ltd is undertaking a programme of work to implement common arrangements across all of its sites including Harwell. At the start of this inspection, the licensee told ONR that a new common waste process document had just been implemented at Harwell. During the course of the inspection the licensee identified that its statement was incorrect and that the common waste process document had not been implemented. I advised the licensee to ensure that when implementing new common arrangements that staff are clear about what written procedure they should work to at any point in time. The licensee accepted my advice.
I found that the licensee's common waste process document did not demonstrate compliance to LC34(2). I advised the licensee to revise this document prior to issue. This common waste process had been produced by a central Magnox Ltd function and the licensee was of the opinion that the central function was reluctant to correct this document. I have told the licensee that it is unacceptable for its arrangements to be produced centrally by Magnox Ltd if it is unable to influence the central process owner to make improvements to arrangements.
During this inspection I have reviewed the licensee's arrangements for LC32 and their implementation. I consider that the licensee has suitable arrangements for the management of radioactive waste. ONR has identified some areas for improvement with waste storage and licensee has agreed to make some improvements.
With regard to LC33, I found that the licensee was able to demonstrate compliance to LC 33 through its written arrangements.
With regard to LC34, the licensee has adequate arrangements for the storage of radioactive waste and is implementing these arrangements. I am satisfied that the licensee is monitoring the condition of its stored wastes to ensure that any leak or escape of radioactivity cannot occur without being detected.
The intervention was performed in line with ONR's guidance requirements (as described in our technical inspection guides) in the areas inspected.
From the evidence gathered during this intervention, I conclude that there are no matters that may impact significantly on nuclear safety. However a number of improvements have been identified that the licensee has agreed to implement.