• The SFP inventory consists of documenting fuel locations in thousands of pool storage cells.  The SFP at Byron is nearly full, and the monotonous task requires repeated counting of rows and columns in the racks.  A loss of focus resulted in mismarking two locations.

• The error originated with the performer in the field.  The error was not detected during the Review step of STAR or during comparison of the field result with the expected TracWorks configuration.  The large number of assemblies (>2400) made the task susceptible to recording errors and also made errors difficult to detect.

• The peer check in the field failed to detect the error for likely the same reason as STAR.  A peer check of the comparison with TracWorks was not performed because it was procedurally not required, and the peer was not available following the field activity.

• Do you markup blank maps or printouts from an Inventory Control program? Response - markup blank SFP maps
• If using blank maps, do you mark every SFP location, or just the exceptions? (e.g. Only marking empty cell locations in a mostly full SFP) Response - We mark all locations as either having a fuel assembly, debris canisters, surveillance coupon, empty, etc.  This is because we also have a requirement at the site to maintain non-SNM inventory so all cells are mapped.

• Are both a Performer and Reviewer (Peer Checker) required for the field activity? Response - We have two personnel complete mapping.
  • Do they perform the task Concurrently or Independently? Response - Concurrently
• Or is a review only conducted outside of the RCA? Response - Review completed prior to leaving RCA between the two individuals.
• Is a copy of the expected configuration available to the Performer/Reviewer during the field activity? Response - Expected is available in the field but not used until mapping is completed for final comparison.
  • Or is the inventoried reconciled with the expected configuration only after the field activity? Response - In field
  • Is the reconciliation also reviewed (peer checked)? Response - Both personnel compare to expected map.

************************************************** 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. **************************************************_______________________________________________
PWRRM mailing list
PWRRM@retaqs.com
http://www.keffective.com/mailman/listinfo/pwrrm

----------------------------------------- The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original message.