|
|
|
|
EFCOG Best Practice #81
(08/23/10)
PDF version
Title:
Elements of a Best-Practice Safety Equipment List
Facility: Multiple DOE Sites
Point of Contact:
Cherri DeFigh-Price, PE
(803-617-9101,
cherri.defigh-price@parsons.com)
Brief Description of Best Practice:
The Engineering Practices Working Group Configuration
Management subgroup conducted a survey in 2007 of its
members and obtained data on maintenance of Safety Equipment
Lists (SELs) from 8 different companies/DOE sites. Based on
this survey, the Working group then summarized the key
elements, best practices and approaches that the sites used.
These are summarized in this Best Practice.
Why the best practice was used:
SELs are a key item that each
of the member companies that have operating nuclear
facilities must develop and maintain. The Engineering
Practices Working Group identified this as an area that
would benefit from sharing best practices used at the
different sites. Having a correct, accessible SEL is a
component needed to performing work within Controls, as it
is the link between the safety basis and specific equipment
requirements.
What are the benefits of the best
practice:
SELs, when developed and controlled in an appropriate
manner, can provide a rapid, effective way for operating
staff, particularly cognizant system engineers assigned to
the Category II nuclear facility to better understand and
manage key equipment.
What problems/issues
were associated with the best practice:
Sites were at different levels of maturity (e.g.
new facilities, older facilities in cleanup mode) and had
different systems. These must be accounted for when
implementing this best practice.
How the success of the Best Practice was measured:
The best practice elements selected were used at more than
one site and had been successfully applied.
Description of process experience using the Best Practice:
|
Safety
Equipment Lists (SELs) are used to document
safety equipment components for safety class and
safety significant hardware at the Department of
Energy Category II nuclear facilities. These
lists can be hard copy (reports) or databases.
The DOE guidance that discusses SELs does not
provide specific guidance such as level of
detail, who should maintain the list, etc. The
Configuration Management subgroup of the
Engineering practices group conducted a survey
of different site practices and used the
resulting data to develop a white paper to
define the recommended elements to develop and
maintain SELs. This Best Practice summarizes
that paper. The full paper can be obtained from
the Configuration Management Subgroup documents
page:
http://efcog.org/wg/ep_cm/documents.htm.
Elements
of a good Safety Equipment List:
-
SELs, whether controlled by
document or database, should be strictly
controlled. Changes should be made by a
limited number of qualified engineers who
understand the controlling safety analysis
(documented safety analysis), particularly
the controlling accidents and how the safety
class or safety significant component will
focus.
-
Sites should have a procedure that
defines how to develop, control and change
the SEL.
-
SELs are useful in supporting
procurement actions, particularly in
establishing quality level and critical
attributes to be confirmed as part of
procurement. To support this end, the SEL
should break safety class and safety
significant components into the smallest
practical unit, to best align with the
procurement activity. As an example, if a
ventilation system is safety class/safety
significant, the SEL should break it into
meaningful (from a procurement, maintenance
and testing aspect) lowest level elements.
These would include fan, fan motor, duct
work, filter, filter housing, fan belts,
etc.
-
Unique numbers (e.g. equipment
identification numbers) would be beneficial
for an SEL. This makes the tool more
valuable for maintenance.
-
Hard copy (documents) can provide
a traceable record and make the process for
delivering a listing to the customer
(normally DOE field office). A controlled
database has the added advantage of being
quickly sorted, and linked. The most
effective databases are controlled
(development, changes and version controlled
by limited number of trained staff) while at
the same time, linked or part of a larger
system that is used by multiple groups,
particularly Cognizant system engineers,
maintenance and operations staff. For
example, Hanford Tank farms have built their
SEL as part of their work control software
with the added control on those fields to
control who can add or change the safety
designation.
-
Several sites have successfully
maintained both a hard copy (formal
document) and the same information on a
searchable web-accessed database. This can
be done effectively if the procedure links
the update of one to the other (e.g. assures
both the document and database are
maintained to the same level). With new
information technology, it is possible to
have the system set up such that updating
the record in one master system can
automatically update the document and
web-accessed system.
-
Whether in document or database,
the SEL should provide summarized
information regarding the safety function
each component must meet.
-
Normally the SEL would be a subset
of the Maintenance Equipment List. Where to
separate lists are maintained, there is
always the risk of disconnects
(inconsistencies) between the two).
-
Safety equipment lists can and
should cover hazards beyond nuclear, if
those other hazards present a co-located
worker or off site public hazard.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
