Executive summary
Date(s) of inspection:
June 2023Aim of inspection
To examine the adequacy of radioactive material transport (RMT) emergency arrangements (S-463), including Oldbury RMT L2 response and L3 recovery by road, as described in ONRW-932509302-6073.
Subject(s) of inspection
- Transport (Nuclear) 11 Emergency Planning and Testing - Rating: AMBER
Key findings, inspector's opinions and reasons for judgement made
Magnox Oldbury (consignor and carrier) undertook a radioactive material transport emergency exercise “Vulcan” for a UN 2916, hazard identification number 70/2916, GB/4122/type B(U) package, MOSAIK®2 with maximum activity 1.762 TBq, from Oldbury station to Berkeley station.
The incident scene took place in Hamsfield leisure centre, near Berkeley station and simulated to be the A38 road.
The purpose of exercise Vulcan was to test the effectiveness of Magnox's radioactive material transport (RMT) emergency arrangements (S-463), as defined in CDG 2009 schedule 2 part 1 paragraph 5 (1)(b) “each dutyholder, must review, revise and test an emergency plan at suitable intervals not exceeding three years, taking reasonable steps to arrange for all those with a role in the emergency plan to participate in the test to such extent necessary to ensure that the test is effective.”
Based on the inspection on the day, I judge the test was non-compliant with CDG 2009 schedule 2 part 1 paragraph 5 (1)(b) as the dutyholder did not appear to have taken all reasonable steps to arrange for all those with a role in the emergency plan to participate in the test as described in the radiation risk assessment (RRA) scenario 3.
Conclusion
Based on the demonstration on the day, I considered that the dutyholder did not take reasonable steps to arrange for all those with a role in the emergency plan to participate in the test to such an extent necessary to ensure the test is effective, as required in CDG 2009 schedule 2 part 1 paragraph 5(1)(b). I have used the ONR Enforcement Management model to determine the regulatory/enforcement action, which resulted in a BEL of "Regulatory Advice" that is given in this Inspection Report. In order to track adequate progress is being made to resolve the advice I raised a Level 3 regulatory issue. Therefore, I judge the overall IIS rating “Amber” and will be seeking improvements.