PWR RE's, please see the below email I sent to the BWROG RCRC distribution list. It recently came to my attention that many plants in the industry are not reporting information on the RM Performance Indicator properly. According to the data request (see below), you are required to report the values in accordance PWROG document PA-PSC-0578 dated September 2009. If you are not reporting in accordance with that document, you are hurting us all as the changes were made in an attempt to be able to identify the superior RM programs out there, programs that we could use to benchmark to. In the new PI, I would have to say that it would be very difficult for a plant to have above 99 much less perfect score of 100, yet there are more than 30 PWR's above 99 and 10 at 99.9 or above.
There is a joint meeting in late July between BWROG/PWROG and probably INPO to look closely at the new PI and its implementation.
If you have any questions about this, please feel free to give me a call at 630-657-2185. I would appreciate any feedback on what may be causing your plant to not implement the PI as requested by INPO or what confusion you might have on its implementation.
Thanks.
Ed McVey <<Industry RM Performance.pdf>> _____________________________________________ From: McVey, Edward A.:(GenCo-Nuc) Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:16 PM To: 'rcrc@retaqs.com' Subject: RE: Industry RM Comparison
Folks, I am including the data entry requirements specified by INPO for the RM PI below. There is obviously much confusion about this (not sure why). This is taken off the INPO website. If you go to the button on the left of the INPO homepage called "Consolidated data entry" and then on the right hand side under "Documents and Publications" look for "CDE Data Element Manual" you will find the below information in that huge document. INPO asks you for the information below. Most importantly is 7.2.18 which is the value of the RM PI calculated for the given month. That DOES NOT mean you take your numbers of events and their multipliers and subtract them from 100 for that month. That represents absolutely nothing with respect to the RM PI. It means you give them the actual number for that month. Therefore, you should not be coming up with numbers like 99.7, etc. Also, it does require you and your utility to report it in accordance with the RCRC guideline dated July 13, 2009 (Rev 13) or for the PWR to report in accordance with the PWROG document PA-PSC-0578. If you are not doing that, then you need to start because you're not providing the info that INPO has requested. There is no such thing as a monthly RM PI. Likewise, there is no such thing as an annual number. The number is, what it is, at any given time based on RCRC or PWROG Guidelines where you take all the current hits to your PI that are currently being counted and subtract them from 100. If you have any questions about this, please call me. 630-657-2185 or 815-370-9855
Ed McVey
Reactivity Management Events - Unit Level Guidance for reporting these data elements is provided in the following:
* BWROG-TP-09-025, Reactivity Controls Review Committee (RCRC), Guidelines for Excellence, Section 5.0, Monitoring of Reactivity Management Issues, July 13, 2009
* PWR Reactivity Management Performance Indicator, PA-PSC-0578
Reactivity Management Performance Indicator 7.2.18 The value of the Reactivity Management Performance Indicator calculated for the given month. Reactivity Management Events Significance Level 1 7.2.5 Severe Reactivity Events: A Reactivity Management Event that results in a severe adverse effect on plant safety or indicates a high potential for future significant events. In either case, the event was caused by or aggravated by a fundamental organizational breakdown. In addition to the failure of multiple barriers, the event indicates a broader problem over multiple work groups and/or processes. These issues normally require a Root Cause to identify Corrective Actions and to resolve the organizational issues. Reactivity Management Events Significance Level 2 7.2.6 Major Reactivity Management Events: A Reactivity Management Event that places the plant outside of the Design or Licensing Basis or significant events that compromise fuel-related limits, or directly result in fuel failure.
Reactivity Management Events Significance Level 3 7.2.7 Minor Reactivity Management Events: A Reactivity Management Event that represents a violation of process or procedures. Reactivity Management Events Significance Level 4 7.2.8 Reactivity Management Precursors: A Reactivity Management Issue that indicates degradation of a barrier to proper Reactivity Management or creates an elevated potential for the occurrence of a Reactivity Management Event. Reactivity Management Events Significance Level 5 7.2.9 Reactivity Management Concerns: A Reactivity Management Issue that indicates less than optimal Reactivity Management but does not classify as a SL 1 through SL 4 issue.
----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. **************************************************