para 1.4.6.595 of the SI report states, "During the elevation to SDH, further mitigation measures were suggested and discounted due to their severe impact. There is no record of the SDH actively considering futher measures and accepting responsiblity for not taking them. It was this view that nothing more could be done, that supported the belief that the current mitigation was "fit for purpose" and therefore was ALARP".
The SI panel concludes at para 1.4.6.605. a. (5) that the MAC risk mitigations fell short of what is considered Reasonably Practicable, and therefore not ALARP.
Question: Where is the recommendation to put that right, or did the DG disagree with that finding?
DV