The purpose was to meet with the licensee’s safety representatives, followed by a reactive meeting to discuss a recent incident on the site.
Meetings are routinely held with the licensee’s team of safety representatives and during plant inspections by ONR inspectors, to support their function of representing employees and receiving information on matters affecting their health, safety and welfare at work. Two ONR inspectors participated in a very constructive meeting with the licensee’s safety representatives and others. A reactive meeting was then held to discuss a recent incident on the Tails Management Facility construction site, part of the licensed site.
A very constructive periodic meeting was held with the licensee’s safety representatives. There was a very good exchange of information, across a broad range of topics of regulatory interest. I provided information on the recent ONR interventions at the licensed site. A specialist inspector provided details of a forthcoming intervention, to inspect aspects of the safety culture, of the licensee and contractors working on the Capenhurst site. The licensee and the safety representatives were supportive, the safety representatives agreeing to work with the specialist inspector when meeting with staff on the site, as part of the planned safety culture intervention. The only shortfall was that the tenant organisation’s safety representatives were not available to participate in the meeting.
A reactive meeting was held with the licensee’ Head of Tenant Operations Control, to receive information regarding an injury to a person working on the Tails Management Facility construction site, the afternoon prior to this intervention. Useful preliminary information was provided by the licensee and I considered the licensee‘s approach to the prompt investigation of the incident to be acceptable.
In my judgement, an intervention rating of 2, good, was appropriate for this intervention. The licensee’s safety representative community was well represented at the meeting and clearly very knowledgeable and enthusiastic about participating in making improvements to safety. There was a very good exchange of information with the safety representatives. The only shortfall was that the tenant organisation’s safety representatives did not participate in this meeting, despite an invitation having been issued by the licensee’s lead safety representative.
The licensee was duly monitoring the adequacy of the prompt local investigations, by the two contractor organisations, into the injury incurred the previous day, which had happened on the Tails Management Facility construction site. I therefore concluded that an intervention rating of “3”, adequate, was warranted for the licensee’s initial implementation of licence condition 7 arrangements.