The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) undertakes all regulatory interaction with Sellafield Limited (SL, the site licensee) against a strategy defined by the ONR Sellafield Programme. Our inspection schedule for the current regulatory year (covering April 2014 – March 2015), the content of which is guided by that strategy, defines those Licence Conditions (LC) that will be inspected over this period.
This planned intervention was undertaken to determine if the site (Sellafield and Calder) has adequate arrangements for compliance with Licence Condition 2 (LC2), covering marking of the site boundary. This LC ensures that unauthorised access to the site is prevented, and that the licensed site boundary is effectively marked in support of such access control.
Licence Condition 2 (marking of the site boundary) requires that the licensee put in place adequate arrangements to ensure that unauthorised persons cannot gain access to the site, and that all the site’s boundaries are marked by appropriate means.
I carried out an inspection of the licensee’s arrangements for compliance with this Licence Condition, which included a sample of the implementation of those arrangements (i.e. walking parts of the site boundary). My inspection focussed on the licensee’s arrangements for compliance with LC 2(1) and LC2 (4), covering prevention of unauthorised entry onto site, and marking of the properly maintained licensed site boundary by fences or other appropriate means.
I was accompanied by ONR nuclear security specialist inspectors. Nuclear security aspects of this inspection are documented separately.
Not applicable; this was not a Safety System inspection.
I judged, from the evidence presented, that the site-wide arrangements for compliance with LC2 are adequate, and that where sampled, the implementation of those arrangements has been undertaken in accordance with SL’s defined processes and related roles and responsibilities.
I considered that the representatives of the licensee, specifically the LC2 process manager and supporting asset management staff, had an effective understanding of the requirements of this Licence Condition, and of the site arrangements for its implementation. Notably, I judged that they had a good understanding of the material condition of the licence site boundary markings, and of the associated security fence structures.
I identified a number of opportunities for minor improvement, all of which were shared with, and accepted by the licensee at the time of the inspection.
I consider that SL has adequate arrangements for compliance with LC2. Given that there were some areas of good practice, but also minor improvements that could be made, I have recorded an IIS rating of 3 (adequate) against Licence Condition 2 (marking of the site boundary).
No ONR Regulatory Issues were raised as a result of this inspection.