Date(s) of inspection:
- September 2022
Aim of inspection
The aim of this inspection is to seek confidence that BAE Systems Marine Limited (BAESML) has made and implemented adequate arrangements or provisions with respect to Licence Conditions 2, 8, 9 and 16. These licence conditions describe the extent and layout of the nuclear licensed site, the location of hazardous facilities, as well as provisions for the general safety of people on the nuclear licensed site. The inspection was undertaken jointly with the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator, who had planned the original inspection.
Subject(s) of inspection
- LC2 – Marking of the site boundary – Rating: Green
- LC8 – Warning notices – Rating: Green
- LC9 – Instructions to persons on the site – Rating: Green
- LC16 – Site plans, designs and specifications – Rating: Green
Key findings, inspector’s opinions and reasons for judgement made
This was a planned intervention to evaluate the adequacy of BAE Systems Marine Limited’s (BAESML) arrangements for, and implementation of, licence conditions 2 (Marking of the site boundary), 8 (Warning notices), 9 (Instructions to persons on the site) and 16 (Site plans, designs and specifications).
The intervention was conducted on-site by the ONR nominated site inspector for the Barrow nuclear licensed site, utilising relevant good practice from ONR’s licence condition inspection guides for licence conditions 2, 8, 9 and 16. The intervention was conducted jointly with an inspector from the MoD’s regulator, the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator.
BAESML was able to demonstrate that the nuclear licensed site is generally correctly physically marked, with the boundary inspected regularly and documented on relevant plans and schedules. Though some discrepancies were observed, these were not considered significant. ONR and DNSR consider that the use of a temporary signage plan in areas around temporary works would be beneficial. The site plans and schedules are updated as permanent changes are made via due process. A potential improvement to the arrangements was identified to clarify that changes to the nuclear site licensed boundary can only be undertaken through a formal relicensing process (or a licence variation).
ONR and DNSR found that on-plant emergency signage (fire, nuclear emergency) was in place, though some signs had issues with visibility owing to obstruction by vehicles and small structures, and in one area (found post inspection) an additional sign would be beneficial; BAESML should place additional signage and move other affected signs, where necessary. The emergency signage was supported by a register of controlled drawing noting the locations of the signage which was demonstrably checked on an annual basis. ONR noted a potential improvement to produce an instruction to ensure consistency in approach to the site boundary/emergency signage annual check.
BAESML’s arrangements for the suitable induction of personnel on to the site were clear, with the content delivered to inductees having recently been updated and improved. Elements of the induction represented good practice, such as use of technology allowing remote inductions prior to attendance at site.
In my opinion, BAESML has implemented adequate arrangements for licence conditions 2, 8, 9 and 16, meeting the regulatory expectations set out in the relevant inspection guides.
Based on the sample taken, I rate LC2, 8, 9 and 16 as GREEN. I have not identified any issues significant enough to warrant raising a regulatory issue.
- “Relevant good practice generally met, or minor shortfalls identified, when compared with appropriate benchmarks.”
- “No significant shortfalls identified in the delivery of safety, safeguards or security functions.”