In accordance with the Office for Nuclear Regulation’s (ONR’s) Sellafield Strategy, each year ONR performs a series of planned compliance inspections of selected licence conditions, targeted at those facilities with significant importance to nuclear safety.
Two such licence condition inspections were carried out to assess Sellafield Ltd.’s (SL’s) compliance with Licence Conditions (LC) 12 – Duly authorised and other suitably qualified and experienced persons and LC 26 – Control and supervision of operations, at the Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant (THORP) and the Oxide Fuel Storage Group (OFSG) at Sellafield.
ONR Inspectors carried out planned compliance inspections against licence conditions 12 and 26.
N/A as this was not a safety systems inspection.
From the inspection sample I found that THORP and OFSG are continuing the process of replacing a number of extant Duly Authorised Persons (DAPs) roles with Appointed Suitably Qualified and Experienced Persons (ASQEPs) roles. This is in line with the SL corporate requirements. THORP and OFSG expect to have completed this by the end of March 2019 and confirmed that no DAP roles will be revoked until the ASQEPs are in place. I sampled the records for the appointment/ reappointment of a number of DAPs and ASQEPs and judged there were compliant with SL corporate requirements.
From the inspection sample I found that THORP and OFSG were adequately maintaining a Control and Supervision baseline in line with SL corporate requirements. I observed an OFSG shift handover (from outgoing to incoming DAPs and the subsequent team shift brief) and from this gained confidence that operations that may affect safety are carried out under the control and supervision of Suitably Qualified and Experienced Persons (SQEPs). This was reinforced by observing two OFSG South Plant Operations Control Centre (POCC) daily meetings and by sampling Log Books and Compliance Record Sheets.
On the basis of the evidence gathered during the inspection, I judge that inspection ratings of GREEN – No formal action, are appropriate for compliance against both LCs. This is because I found SL to have adequately implemented its corporate arrangements for these LCs. Some minor compliance shortfalls were identified and their resolution will be managed via Regulatory Issues.