The Nuclear Directorate is currently advertising for a number of Nuclear Inspectors in a range of disciplines. Could you use your proven track record as a high quality professional to secure and improve nuclear safety through your expertise, experience and personal qualities? If so then visit the following website for more information about a fascinating, challenging and highly rewarding career as a nuclear inspector.
On 11 September 2008, GE-Hitachi wrote to both HSE/NII and the Environment agency requesting that the regulators temporarily suspend their assessment of the ESBWR nuclear power station design. As a result, both regulators have ceased all assessment work on the ESBWR until further notice.
The public involvement process, by which the public could view and comment on design information provided by GE-Hitachi, has therefore been suspended for the ESBWR.
Two updated guidance documents were published by the nuclear regulators on 30 August 2008:
On 1 August 2008, HSE published 'Applying for a nuclear site licence for new nuclear power stations: A step-by-step-guide'. Aimed primarily at organisations wishing to obtain a licence in order to construct a nuclear power station (many of which will be new to the UK's nuclear licensing regime), the guide sets out the actions required in preparing for a nuclear site licence.
The Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) has recently launched a Government consultation on a process for determining the strategic suitability of sites that may be proposed for the construction of new nuclear power stations.
One important factor affecting whether a potential site is suitable for a new power station is the density and distribution of the nearby population, and BERR has been developing proposals for this ‘demographic criterion’. Recently, BERR sought the views of HSE’s Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) on the suitability of the existing Government reactor siting policy which had been set out in a statement to Parliament in 1988. In providing its views to BERR, NII was able to draw on the results of a recent review which it had undertaken into its regulatory approach both to the siting of any new nuclear facility and to providing advice to local planning authorities regarding developments in the vicinity of existing nuclear licensed sites. NII advised BERR that in the light of world-wide experience in nuclear reactor operation, and allowing credit to be taken for robust safety features which are available in modern nuclear plant design:
In practice, however, the acceptability of any new build proposal would not be decided until NII has been able to consider the detailed design proposal and to assess the site-specific safety case.
NII has recently reviewed its regulatory approach both to the siting of any new nuclear facility and to providing advice to local planning authorities regarding developments in the vicinity of existing nuclear licensed sites. This has led us to adopt a goal-setting approach based upon the demonstration of achieving the risk targets specified within the HSE Safety Assessment Principles (SAPs). For new installations, including new reactors, this approach would be applied by NII once details of the proposed installation and its safety case had been submitted as part of a nuclear site licence application. Technical details of NII’s revised approach were given in a presentation by NII to the July 2008 meeting of HSE’s independent Nuclear Safety Advisory Committee (NuSAC). Because of the technical nature of the papers presented to NuSAC, NII intends shortly to describe its revised approach in a set of more accessible documents suitable for both the general public and for more specialist audiences.
Broadly, NII’s review recommends a two step process:
Step 1: Generic Screening: A design independent screening process to determine whether a site is automatically excluded (because the near site population density is too high), or included as a potentially suitable site. Where appropriate, this will take account of any relevant SSA assessment that the Government may have already undertaken for that site.
Step 2: Site and Design Specific For sites where Step 1 has identified them as potentially suitable, the viability of the site will be determined on the basis of the risk presented to persons off the site compared with the risk targets that NII applies in its SAPs. This assessment will be undertaken by NII specialists, taking fully into account the degree to which the application has demonstrated that the risk is both compliant with the risk targets in the SAPs and is as low as reasonably practicable.
In practice, if a design is shown to present a risk which is well below the NII’s risk target, then demographic restrictions are unlikely to be a factor in its siting - providing the population density is no higher than the recommended exclusionary limit (the “semi-urban” siting criterion).
The technical papers describing NII’s siting review and the NII presentation to the July 2008 NuSAC meeting are available on the NuSAC webpage:
On 12 June 2008, Mike Weightman (Chief Inspector of Nuclear Installations, HSE) announced that both HSE and the Environment Agency had written to the Government to confirm that they were now starting the next, more detailed stage of the Generic Design Assessment process (GDA) - referred to by HSE as Step 3.
The three designs being taken through the next stage of GDA are:
On 12 March HSE's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission signed an agreement to renew cooperation between the two countries. The 5 year agreement covers the exchange of technical information and the development of safety standards. It also allows the two organisations to exchange personnel, information and training.
Nb. Two of the three reactor designs currently being taken through the Generic Design Assessment (GDA) process are from the US (the GE ESBWR and Westinghouse AP 1000).
On 4 April 2008, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) announced that the company were withdrawing their ACR 1000 design from the GDA process.
Although the design had just successfully completed step 2 of GDA (the initial assessment carried out by HSE and the Environment Agency), the announcement stated that the decision to withdraw will allow the company to focus its marketing and licensing resources on the Canadian market.
The Department of Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) has since recommended to the nuclear regulators that all three remaining designs should continue through to the next stage of GDA.
On 18 March 2008, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Environment Agency (EA), announced that the first step of ‘Generic Design Assessment’ (GDA) carried out on four designs submitted for new nuclear power stations (the EDF/Areva UK EPR, AECL ACR-1000, GE ESBWR, and Westinghouse AP 1000) had found no safety shortfalls at this stage - in terms of safety, security or the environment - that would prevent any of them from ultimately being constructed on licensed sites in the UK.
These findings are based on the claims made by the vendors for the designs, the basis of which will be assessed during the next steps of GDA.
The nuclear regulators have published a series of reports on their findings so far, maintaining transparency and openness in the GDA process.
HSE and the Environmental Agency held a joint seminar for potential operators of new nuclear power stations at Aintree, Liverpool on 26 February 2008. The aim of the seminar was to help potential new nuclear power station operators and their industrial supporters understand the UK's nuclear regulatory system, and in particular the responsibilities of operators under the safety, security and environmental legislation applicable to nuclear generation.
The event was attended by representatives of 11 companies interested in either becoming nuclear generators in the UK, or forming business partnerships with such operators, and the 4 four organisations who have submitted nuclear power station designs to be assessed by the UK nuclear regulators.
On the 10 January 2008, the Secretary of State for BERR announced the Government’s conclusions following the latest public consultation on the future of nuclear power:
That the Government believes new nuclear power stations should have a role to play in this country’s future energy mix alongside other low-carbon sources; that it would be in the public interest to allow energy companies the option of investing in new nuclear power stations; and that the Government should take active steps to facilitate this.
The Government also announced that a prioritisation process would be carried out to select no more than three designs to proceed to the next, more detailed, stage of the Generic Design Assessment Process (GDA).
HSE’ Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) has recently set up an independent review board as part of its governance arrangements for the GDA process. The Board will carry out reviews of NII’s processes, practices and procedures at key points in the design assessment process, and will give advice to HM Chief Inspector of Nuclear Installations.
The 4 members of the board are:
The Board has recently completed a review of NII’s activities during its initial assessment of the above four designs, and concluded that HSE had adapted well to the new demands on it, and had developed its management and decision-making processes appropriately. The Board made a number of recommendations which should increase the robustness of HSE’s arrangements in the later stages of GDA.
The review board will not be looking at the Environment Agency's processes for GDA. The Environment Agency is relying on its own internal governance arrangements.
Protecting people, the environment, and society
