The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) undertakes all regulatory interactions with Sellafield Limited (SL), the site licensee, against a strategy defined by the ONR Sellafield, Decommissioning, Fuel and Waste (SDFW) Programme. The planned inspection schedule for the current regulatory year (covering April 2016 - March 2017), the content of which is guided by that strategy, identifies the Licence Conditions (LCs) that will be inspected over this period.
This planned intervention was undertaken to determine if the Infrastructure organisation is adequately implementing SL's site-wide arrangements for compliance with Licence Conditions 10 (training), 12 (duly authorised and other suitably qualified and experienced persons), and 26 (control and supervision of operations). The intervention targeted the implementation of Sellafield Ltd.'s arrangements within the Analytical Services Laboratory on the Sellafield site. This laboratory provides analytical services to other facilities across the site, receiving samples for assessment and characterisation on a routine basis. The work of the facility is important to ensuring that these other facilities remain within their safe operating envelopes, as well as characterising waste associated with hazard and risk reduction across the site. In addition, the Analytical Services facility, which comprises a number of laboratories, contains a significant radioactive inventory within its cells, gloveboxes, and fumehoods. The facility also contains legacy waste which is subject to a disposal programme under regulatory oversight. The adequacy of the facility's implementation of these licence condition arrangements is therefore important to ensuring nuclear safety on the licensed site.
This inspection has targeted the implementation of Sellafield Ltd.'s site-wide arrangements for Licence Conditions 10, 12, and 26 by the Infrastructure organisation. The adequacy of the licensee's site-wide arrangements more generally is considered in other inspections.
My inspection, which comprised discussions with SL staff, examination of plant documentation and inspection of facilities, focussed on the following areas:
Not applicable; this was not a Safety System inspection.
I consider the facility's implementation of the site's arrangements for LC10, LC12 and LC26 is good in many areas. For instance, there was good evidence in relation to improvements underway regarding the provision of training within the facility, using the Systematic Approach to Training approach. There was also some good evidence in relation to the provision of situational awareness within the facility; by the use of a Mission Control office as well as the Plant Operations Control Room. However, the licensee should continue to maintain the momentum and its focus on the improvements they have underway in order to ensure these are delivered to appropriate timescales. For these reasons, on balance, I consider inspection ratings of Green (No Formal Action) are merited against LC10, LC12 and LC26 as a result of this inspection.
My findings were shared with, and accepted by, the licensee as part of normal inspection feedback. I have raised no Regulatory Issues as a result of this inspection.