Naming Conventions for Drawings, Specifications, Manuals and
Facility: Salt Waste Processing Facility, Savannah River
Point of Contact: Cherri DeFigh-Price,
Brief Description of Best Practice: With careful and
consistent naming of the technical documents and references
used at a facility, the data can be successfully linked to
Enterprise-based computer systems, such as ASSET Suite,
CHAMPS or MAXIMO. This allows the end-user to link to the
latest released version of the technical information and
reduce the error of out-of-date information being accessed.
Why the best practice was used: It is important that
operating and maintenance staff get the latest technical
information available. It is also important not to have the
same data/information in two different spots. Originally
maintenance staff were anticipating physically attaching
documents (such as drawings, maintenance manuals,
procedures0 to their selected Computer Management
Maintenance System (CMMS). They
did not believe they could use the central document system
as every time a document was updated, the link was changed.
This was because the document control staff had implemented
a practice of including the revision and revision date in
the file names, as they believed that provided the improved
safety of not accidently loosing previous revisions.
What are the benefits of the best practice:
Changing the practice of how design documents, manuals and
procedures are named in the controlled document library
allows the key information to be linked, rather than
attached. To meet the ISMS principle of ‘identification of
hazards and controls’ it is imperative that the operations
and maintenance staff have ready access to the latest
technical information. Requiring them to go to multiple
locations to get the information often leads to staff
developing inappropriate work-arounds, such as maintaining
copies of key information at their desk rather than
confirming that they have the latest version. Having the
links contained within the CMMS substantially improves the
chances that the staff will obtain the latest information.
What problems/issues were associated with the best
practice: Different groups have different experiences in
the best way to name and file information. When they do not
have a common goal and vision on how the data should be
named and stored, it can inhibit electronically linking
information. The naming conventions should be set as early
as possible in a project with a goal to allow maximum
linkage to the new electronic systems at the end. This is
particularly important as often the electronic systems are
not selected (and often the groups are not even hired) when
the document control activities are started early in design.
The group performing the document collection and
control at that stage is often not exposed to other
potential uses of the data, particularly related to
electronic linking and can develop practices that are not
conducive to later implementation/ upgrades.
the success of the Best Practice was measured: A meeting
was held with the key individuals to agree on the most
effective naming convention that utilized maintaining ‘meta
data’ (e.g. additional electronic fields tied to the
document file) for revision number and dates.
This allowed the link to stay consistent and always
pull up the latest revision, while providing the electronic
history for those staff that needed it. Documents were
successfully linked to several different data systems,
eliminating the tendency of staff to physically attach files
that could become out of date. This process was also
implemented at the Hanford Site on another project and was
successfully maintained by the Document Control
professionals in a manner that allows new electronic systems
to access documents without actually attaching them. For
that site, the team went a step further with key information
(safety equipment list information), by breaking the large
Safety Equipment list document into subsections for posting.
This allowed the document experts to
link to specific sections for safety basis
information, making this key information very accessible to
the staff while assuring they had the latest revision.
This resulted in less time spent looking for
information during the planning stage, and therefore more
time for other ISMS functions, such as providing feedback.
Description of process experience using the Best
Practice: This is a lessons learned that has been
re-learned at several projects across the complex. This is
in part due to the complexity and size of most of the
facilities where the document control function has
historically been tasked with maintenance of lifetime
records and is not often involved in the implementation of
new software systems or in understanding information needs
of operations and maintenance staff. Therefore they do not
see the need or benefit of a naming convention that
encouraging linkage to the ‘latest version’ of the document.
Similarly documents are often generated and named by
different disciplines/organizations that have different
naming conventions. For example, the operating and
administrative procedures were generated by different staff
in different buildings and used very different naming
conventions until a standard format was required.
system must also allow for the archiving and retrieval of
older versions when required. However, this normally is not
something that is needed by the majority of operations and
maintenance staff who need to have timely access to the
latest information. When data is not named in a manner that
allows this common linkage, then the implementation of new
data access systems is hampered. This often requires files
to be renamed later in the project, which might disrupt
earlier systems that had used data linkage.