1. 2006 CMBG Conference BREAKOUT 6: Master Equipment List & Data Base Management Facilitator: Tom Czerniewski Entergy June 11-14, 2006 Richmond, VA

2. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Methods of managing equipment information  Master Equipment List  Equipment list required by Licensing docs  Was FSAR requirement, now part of CDB, Q-list – Calloway  Component Data Base  Q-List data + equipment database info

3. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  What information should be maintained?  Electronic, all equipment information, range/setpoints,, program info, serial numbers, reporting info  Q-list (safety class) info  EQ, Programs (i.e. SBO, Appx. R), Maintenance Rule, Tag #, Quality Class / Seismic, Software, spare parts, safety functions  May need to go into the skid and identify subcomponents (per Ops, Equipment reliability program, etc)

4. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Efforts to consolidate equipment information  Consolidate databases… Approach:  Identify the equipment information (including other databases) to be consolidated  Identify Key Stakeholders in the process  Data cleanup and migration  Data validation (up front or prior to first use)  St. Lucie did a design change to migrate info into passport (100,000 line items validated, took 6 months, A/E tasked)

5. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Efforts to consolidate equipment information (cont’d)  Consolidate databases… Challenges:  Problem to justify cost of migrating to single database (e.g., SAP for Dominion)  Previous “uncontrolled” info must now be controlled and validated in the equipment database or access provided to program owner to update  Issue with inconsistency of data, cleaning up database fields etc.  Difficulty getting reports from database, used Access – Millstone

6. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Efforts to consolidate equipment information (cont’d)  Consolidate databases… Challenges:  Need to train users on consolidated databases  Preventing return of adhoc “rogue” databases – CM, IT need to police  Desire to keep old historical information  For databases that are not migrated… how do you control?

7. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Database Ownership and Control  In general centrally controlled by database owner  May delegate update of certain fields to others (“field owners”)  AOV, MOV data etc belong to program owner.  Validation of data entry (2 nd person)  Ft. Calhoun - DB coordinator (within CM group) controls all changes  Total Equipment Database change package – Document Change Request process initiates change following mod– all done within Passport – St. Lucie

8. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Database Ownership and Control (cont’d)  Equipment database is changed by mod process… treated like drawing  Up-front database “pending”changes - Diablo Canyon, Calloway, NMC, SONGS  Approved Alternates List for equivalencies (Verified? Y/N Installed? Y/N)  Planner / Maint updates after installation (directly or using form to Engineering)

9. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Other Database Issues  SQA issues, Database access controls, security qualification, NMC, Calloway, Dominion  Archive “record” of database? (periodic, Hard copy, electronic, optical disc, etc.)  Difficulty to get reports from SAP/INDUS… need training  Training (initial and continuing), “train the trainer”  Resistance to change  Software vendors do not have nuclear experience to help users – NMC

10. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Master Equipment List Tools Used  SAP: FENOC, Cooper, SONGS (future), Diablo Canyon (future)  Passport: NMC, FPL, Progress, Dominion South, Ft. Calhoun, Entergy South, St. Lucie (Version 10 – future), Entergy Northeast (future)  Oracle: Palo Verde, PPL, SONGS, Millstone

11. 2006 CMBG Conference Topics for Discussion  Take Away Points  Single source of data is the “ideal”  MEL and BOM is a challenge everywhere  Database consolidation effort requires detailed planning  No one is happy with the current software products available  SAP is primarily a financial tool… not user friendly for nuclear purposes  Big issue is data validation … data not always maintained