Executive summary
Date(s) of inspection:
June 2025
Executive summary
Aim of inspection
This compliance inspection focused on the effectiveness of Torness's implementation of maintenance and defect management arrangements. It focused mainly on matters related to ONR’s nuclear safety purpose (Licence Condition 28) at EDF Energy Nuclear Generation Ltd’s Torness power station. However, Engineers undertake work on assets which are categorised for importance based on Nuclear Site Health and Safety, therefore implementation of compliance arrangements with other health and safety legislation were also included.
Subject(s) of inspection
- LC 17 - Management systems - Rating: GREEN
- LC 28 - Examination, inspection, maintenance and testing - Rating: AMBER
Key findings, inspector's opinions and reasons for judgement made
The inspection involved discussions with relevant site personnel, review of records and information contained within the management system.
Overall, Torness was able to demonstrate that higher priority defects raised through the EDF management system were being managed in a timely manner, however there was an increasing number of low priority defects which required review and if necessary, actioned in a risk-based and timely manner.
During the inspection we identified some areas that require improvement including:
- Ensuring long-term defects are actioned and closed out in a timely manner as per EDF arrangements, and where this is not achieved, ensuring a clear auditable trail captures the risk informed decisions to support categorisation of defects within the EDF management system.
- Following a review of facility and other related defects, the plan to review the Low Priority and safety defects is undertaken to fully understand degradation, accumulative effect and safety and operational impact.
- Ensuring defects captured in statutory reports (Category C defects) have been appropriately risk assessed and actioned.
To support the areas above, EDF needs to ensure the appropriate governance and oversight is implemented when defects are being reviewed, re-categorised or updated.
I was reassured that the findings from this inspection will be incorporated into the improvements work streams established and intended to improve work management, driving defect numbers down to a manageable level. I will forward a letter to Torness and raise regulatory issues to track station's actions in implementing the required improvements.
Conclusion
In coming to a judgement on LC 28, I have considered the following factors:
- Regulatory issue 12276, which had been raised to capture the shortfalls in compliance related inspections remained un-resolved,
- there was ambiguity over the status of how work was initially categorised and categorised as it moved through the work management process,
- no clear and discernible view of the impact of defect aggregation on nuclear safety, and
- a lack of interface management between different groups involved in work management to enable delivery of defect reduction.
From the shortfalls identified in the inspection, I judge that a rating of AMBER, Seek Improvement, is merited for LC 28.
For LC 17, I found relevant good practice was generally met, and I did not identify any significant shortfalls against relevant standard. A rating of GREEN, no formal action, is merited for LC 17.