SMF Operations & Maintenance

OUR SOLUTION

Our team were responsible for:

Carrying out a Reliability Centred Maintenance (RCM) review process of the identified sub-systems to include:

• Facilitation of RCM2 review workshops utilising Sellafield Limited (SL) RCM software.
• Production of the RCM report.
• Production of Technical Basis of Maintenance (TBoM) documents.

Producing the Master Equipment List (MEL) and all necessary documentation for the successful upload of asset data to the SL Computerised Maintenance Management System (CMMS) database, Movex, including:

• Production of the MEL in spreadsheet format.
• A visual representation of the asset hierarchy in Visio format.
• All required SL asset registration documentation.

Producing Operation & Maintenance (O&M) manuals – volumes A, B, C & D to include:

• 1 x Plant Overview Manual
• 1 x Operating & Maintenance Strategy
• 7 x Operating & Maintenance Manuals (Plant Systems)
• 187 x Operator Instructions
• 246 x Maintenance Instructions
• 3 x Proof Test Instructions
• 5 x Alarm Response Instructions
• 2 x Emergency Operating Instructions
• 3 x Emergency Instructions
• 91 x TBoMs (RCM scope)

All documentation produced was presented in an agreed format for each package. This was in the form of a System Maintenance Review Manual. The manual was divided into chapters for the various maintenance support activities and included a traffic light compliance status schedule. The System Maintenance Review Manual was a live document which was managed by the client on completion of the contract.

Systems:

• 000 General – Plant Wide Systems, 12 sub-systems
• 200 SP/0255 Package EIM&T & Loading, 6 sub-systems
• 400 Decontamination & C3 Area, 6 sub-systems
• 700 Ventilation Systems,7 sub-systems
• 800 CE&I, 20 sub-systems
• 900 Plant Services, 9 sub-systems
• 1200 CS&A, 1 sub-systems
• A total of 61 sub-systems were identified, although not all contained scope deliverables.

RCM Review:

Morson Projects organised and conducted the reviews in the B170.1 conference room and in SL conference facilities. Full document security procedures were followed throughout the review regardless of location. Documents were transported or stored securely, they were uniquely identified, contained an appropriate security rating and were subjected to a document tally and signing procedure.

All documents were tracked to ensure their location remained appropriate and secure, documents were shredded to the required standard when no longer required and the tracking details updated.

The identified assets were sub-divided into functional systems in accordance with SLSP 1.06.04.01, RCM Review. Each functional system identified underwent a maintenance review; each element of the review was uniquely reported in RCM Desktop and collectively underpinned the maintenance support strategy for that system.

The RCM Review provided the technical basis to underpin the maintenance and asset management regimes proposed for the system under review. The review sought to optimise the maintenance tasks whilst ensuring compliance with safety related and regulatory maintenance requirements. The process utilised RCM2 tools to ensure a consistent and systematic approach to the creation of maintenance regimes. The RCM process considered the EIM&T requirements throughout the system lifecycle including contributing factors to plant ageing. Morson Projects provided all supporting information to underpin the proposed task, periodicity and task owner decisions. The completed Maintenance Review was presented to the client for approval/update.

Technical Basis of Maintenance (TBoM) Summary Report:

The TBoM Summary Report was produced in accordance with SLP 1.06.04.01, how to develop, gain approval and implement a TBoM and to the most recent version of SLF 1.06.04.01; it included the output from the RCM2 processes along with a justification for each task derived. A TBoM summary was produced and presented for each RCM study conducted and was subject to approval/change by the nominated System Engineer before submission to the site Equipment Reliability Team for endorsement.

Master Equipment List (MEL) and Computerised Maintenance Management System (CMMS)

Morson Projects produced all necessary documentation to prompt changes to the Movex Database to include:

• Identification and production of all new asset tags on spreadsheet format.
• Creation of the Asset Structural Hierarchy depicted on a Visio diagram.
• Liaisons with SMF support personnel where appropriate to identify all required technical detail and to support all updates via existing processes.

The client mandatory required data entries for each asset included:

• Building Number
• Functional Area
• Tag Number
• Tag Description
• Next Highest Position (NHP)
• Engineering Support Function (ESP)
• Equipment Type
• Safety Category
• Physical Location
• Loop Prefix
• Functional Description

Updating of the SAMdb or Movex M3 Databases to accommodate these data inputs were restricted and controlled by client central teams. Asset Data was provided in electronic format appropriate for direct upload to Movex or other computerised maintenance management systems.

Updates were in accordance with:

• SLP 1.02.19 – How do I develop, implement and control the Master Equipment List.
• SLSP 1.06.03.01 – Guidance for Structuring the MEL
• SLP 1.06.03.02 – How do I register an asset.
• SLSP 1.06.03.02 – Registration of assets in the CMMS.

Output:

• Master Equipment List for the identified systems.
• Visual representation of the physical asset structural hierarchy.
• All required Movex documentation to support new or updated asset tag data and service prompts.
• All relevant assets were linked by association, providing structure to the relationships between assets, and giving optimum efficiency to the planned maintenance schedule.
• Updating of Movex M3 Database to accommodate these associations was restricted and controlled by SL central teams. Asset Data was provided in electronic format appropriate for direct upload to Movex or other computerised maintenance management systems.

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Manual Standards

The Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008 and the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) 1998, outline the legal obligations to provide fit for purpose documentation for personnel who interface with machinery/ plant.

BS EN 82079-1:2012 and Sellafield Limited O&M standards define the structure, format and content to ensure that their plants are operated and maintained in a safe, correct and consistent manner in compliance with the Sellafield Nuclear Site Licence and plant safety case.

Sellafield standards

• 70PS001_A Preparation of Operation and Maintenance, spares, lifetime quality records and works test documents.
• 73P001_D Preparation of operation and maintenance manuals 73PS001_A Preparation of system operation manuals
• 73PS002_A Preparation of Mechanical Maintenance Manuals
• 73PS003_A Preparation of C, E&I Maintenance Manuals
• SLSP 1.02.07.04 Preparation of O&M Manuals.

O&M structure:

Volume A provides a high level introduction to the plant, and a reference guide in tabular form to the suite of documents supporting the operation and maintenance of the plant.

Volume B is divided into three sub volumes: Operation, Mechanical Maintenance and Control, Electrical & Instrumentation (C, E&I) Maintenance.

The operation volumes define the purpose of the system, its location and interfaces and identify and describe the procedures associated with the individual modes of operation: the manual intervention required to set the plant functions in motion and their subsequent control. Risk Assessments and safety case information are embedded throughout the manuals.

The maintenance volumes define the procedures for condition monitoring, corrective and preventative maintenance and provide supporting information e.g. critical spares. Risk Assessments and safety case information are embedded throughout the manuals.

Volume C Operating Instructions are the suite of working instructions comprising: Operator instructions (OIs), Maintenance Instructions (MIs) – scheduled and breakdown, Proof Tests (PTs), Emergency Operator Instructions (EOIs) and Alarm Response Instructions (ARIs).

Volume C Operating instructions take the form of A4 single sided documents; the prescriptive amendments to the generic template SLF 2.13.10.01 are supplied by the Operating Unit.

Volume D is a structured vendor library comprising: manufacturers’ O&M manuals, information and technical data sheets referenced from the volume B maintenance manuals.

Format and Delivery:

Volumes A, B and D manuals take the form of reference books supplied in ring binders: monochrome with some colour drawings/photographs. The O&M manual templates are provided by Morson Projects and approved by the Operating Unit prior to document production.

Volume C Operating instructions take the form of A4 single sided documents; the prescriptive amendments to the generic template SLF 2.13.10.01 are supplied by the Operating Unit.

Electronic versions are delivered to the client for progression or using Morson Projects trained and experienced resource delivered directly to Sellafield Document Control for issue in accordance with SLSP 4.05.06, Operation of the Document Control system DAISY and user guidance on electronic publication.

Document Production & Reporting:

To identify and quantify the O&M requirements in line with the above structure, stakeholder meetings were arranged. Representatives from Design, Pre- Operations, Maintenance, Safety Case, Radiological and Conventional Safety, System Engineers and Authors were asked to attend.

Primary task analysis was undertaken with reference to baseline information e.g. Mechanical Sequence Diagrams (MSDs), Technical Basis of Maintenance (TBoM).

During the stakeholder meetings, Morson Projects engaged with Design, Operation and Maintenance resource to promote an understanding of the information required to deliver a high standard of fit for purpose documentation. An agreement was sought to set up a line of communication to ensure that modifications to the initial source information was made available to the authors.

A definitive list of required documentation was compiled and their scope authorised by the relevant stakeholder. Full traceability of this process and agreed deliveries was maintained by the Morson Projects Document Controller.

A generic P6 programme fragnet was compiled which aligned to the client’s deliverables. Each activity on the work breakdown structure was communicated and explained to the assigned Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to ensure that they had an understanding of their review role and the timescales involved.

All documentation was tracked through the Morson Projects Work Flow Processing Database, which was updated daily. The database was designed to have the flexibility to track all types of work flows and was supported by Morson Projects IT Department.

An initial project start-up meeting was arranged by the Morson Projects Project Manager to ensure that the author team understood:

• The authorised task risk assessment.
• The authorised templates to be used.
• The authorised writing standard.
• The location of source information.
• The Subject Matter Expert’s (SME’s) contact list and acceptable lines of communication.
• The scope of work, production process and associated timescales.

Regular weekly production meetings were attended by authors to discuss progress, items recorded on the production issues and technical queries tracker and updates to plant/system information.

Morson Projects ensured consistency of information throughout the documentation by maintaining the information files to ensure the latest version of information was available, using an approved MEL/Asset List to ensure plant item nomenclature and numbers were used consistently.

All authors were security cleared and able to access client controlled areas as classified or monitored workers, thus facilitating plant walk downs for information gathering and liaison with appropriate SMEs. The production process was defined as follows:

• Initial production of draft document (Author)
• Initial SME review (Author and SME)
• Incorporate modifications (Author)

Full traceability of the process was maintained by the authors and the Morson Projects Document Controller as follows:

• All documents had a transmittal note to ensure an auditable trail of document movements.
• All draft iterations were archived throughout the production process.
• All SME review comments were archived throughout the production process.

Where inconsistent review comments occurred, a review stakeholder meeting was arranged to resolve the issues and agree an acceptable way forward.

The documentation approval process was controlled as follows:

• PDF copies of documents to be validated by nominated SMEs were made available.
• Post SME review, all documentation underwent an internal Quality Control check by the Morson Projects Quality Controller.

Full traceability of the process was maintained by the Morson Projects Document Controller as follows:

• All documents had a transmittal note to ensure an auditable trail of document movements.
• All validation comments were archived throughout the validation process.

Where inconsistent review comments occurred, a review stakeholder meeting was arranged to resolve the issues and agree an acceptable way forward. A final draft was be produced by the document author.

Progress Reporting:

A progress report was issued monthly prior to the monthly progress meeting. The report and subsequent meeting were in a format consistent with Schedule 12 of the ITT documentation and included the following agenda items:

• Future Outlook and Key Interfaces.
• Issues and Risks.
• Cost Performance.
• Lessons Learnt.

To support the monthly progress report a downloadable report was issued monthly, or on request, and contained the following graphics:

• Pie Chart showing percentage completed
• Pie Chart showing percentage liabilities
• Production Status
• Production Rate Graph

Efficiencies:

Morson Projects promoted the delivery of high level RCM reviews at the start of the project’s design stage to allow all parties to contribute to the maintainability and operability of the plant before the final design was fixed. This underpinned the design, from an O&M perspective, with a recognised site process and input from the eventual plant user group. The review only considered operating context, functions and potential functional failures, from which design considerations or changes could be made. The majority of information captured supported the full RCM process at design maturity at a reduced cost.

A review of the Volume C Instructions reduced the total document numbers by:

• Incorporating a range of periodicities, such as monthly, quarterly, annual etc. into one instruction rather than multiple.
• Rationalising the number of instructions required for the same activity in multiple sub-systems.

Project Title: Sellafield Silo Maintenance Facility (SMF)

Client: Cavendish Nuclear

Markets:

• Nuclear

Services Provided:

• Asset Care & Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Documentation

The scope of work included:

Carry out a Reliability Centred Maintenance (RCM) review of the 61 identified sub-systems to include the facilitation of RCM2 review workshops, the production of an RCM report and the production of Technical Basis of Maintenance (TBoM) documents.

Produce a Master Equipment List (MEL) and all necessary documentation for the successful upload of asset data to the Sellafield Computerised Maintenance Management System (CMMS) database, including the production of the MEL in spreadsheet format, a visual representation of the asset hierarchy in Visio format and all required Sellafield asset registration documentation.

Produce an O&M manual to include a Plant Overview Manual, an Operating & Maintenance Strategy, 7 x Operating & Maintenance Manuals (Plant Systems), 187 x Operator Instructions, 246 x Maintenance Instructions, 3 x Proof Test Instructions, 5 x Alarm Response Instructions, 2 x Emergency Operating Instructions, 3 x Emergency Instructions and 91 x TBoMs (RCM scope).

All documentation produced was in the form of a System Maintenance Review Manual (SMRM). The manual was divided into chapters for the various maintenance support activities and included a traffic light compliance status schedule. The SMRM was a live document which was managed by the client on completion of the contract.

RCM Review:

Morson Projects organised and conducted the reviews in Morson Projects and Sellafield offices. Full document security procedures were followed throughout the review, regardless of location. Documents were transported or stored securely, they were uniquely identified, contained an appropriate security rating and were subjected to a document tally and signing procedure. All documents were tracked to ensure their location remained appropriate and secure, documents were shredded to the required standard when no longer required and the tracking details updated.

The identified assets were sub-divided into the following functional systems in accordance with Sellafield standards;

• 000 General – Plant Wide Systems, 12 sub-systems
• 200 SP/0255 Package EIM&T & Loading, 6 sub-systems
• 400 Decontamination & C3 Area, 6 sub-systems
• 700 Ventilation Systems,7 sub-systems
• 800 CE&I, 20 sub-systems
• 900 Plant Services, 9 sub-systems
• 1200 CS&A, 1 sub-system

Each functional system underwent a maintenance review; each element of the review was uniquely reported in RCM Desktop and collectively underpinned the maintenance support strategy for that system.

The RCM Review provided the technical basis to underpin the maintenance and asset management regimes proposed for the system under review. The review sought to optimise the maintenance tasks whilst ensuring compliance with safety related and regulatory maintenance requirements. The process utilised RCM2 tools to ensure a consistent and systematic approach to the creation of maintenance regimes. The RCM process considered the Examination, Inspection, Maintenance and Testing (EIM&T) requirements throughout the system lifecycle including contributing factors to plant ageing. Morson Projects provided all supporting information to underpin the proposed task, periodicity and task owner decisions.

TBoM Summary Report:

The TBoM Summary Report was produced and included the output from the RCM2 processes along with a justification for each task derived. A TBoM summary was produced and presented for each RCM study and was subject to approval/change by the nominated Sellafield System Engineer before submission to the site Equipment Reliability Team for endorsement.

MEL and CMMS

Morson Projects produced all necessary documentation to prompt changes to the CMMS Database to include the identification and production of all new asset tags in spreadsheet format and the creation of the Asset Structural Hierarchy depicted on a Visio diagram. The client mandatory required data entries for each asset included;

• Building Number
• Functional Area
• Tag Number
• Tag Description
• Next Highest Position (NHP)
• Engineering Support Function (ESP)
• Equipment Type
• Safety Category
• Physical Location
• Loop Prefix
• Functional Description

O&M Manual

British and Sellafield standards defined the O&M manual structure, format and content to ensure that plants are operated and maintained in a safe, correct and consistent manner.

O&M structure:

Volume A provided a high level introduction to the plant and a reference guide to the suite of documents supporting the operation and maintenance of the plant.

Volume B was divided into three sub volumes: Operation, Mechanical Maintenance and Control, Electrical & Instrumentation (CE&I) Maintenance.

The operation volumes defined the purpose of the system, its location and interfaces and identified and described the procedures associated with the individual modes of operation: the manual intervention required to set the plant functions in motion and their subsequent control. Risk Assessments and safety case information were embedded throughout the manuals.

The maintenance volumes defined the procedures for condition monitoring, corrective and preventative maintenance and provided supporting information e.g. critical spares. Risk Assessments and safety case information were embedded throughout the manuals.

Volume C was the suite of working instructions comprising: Operator instructions, Maintenance Instructions (scheduled and breakdown), Proof Tests, Emergency Operator Instructions and Alarm Response Instructions.

Volume D was a structured vendor library comprising manufacturers’ O&M manuals, information and technical data sheets referenced from the volume B maintenance manuals.

The O&M manual templates were provided by Morson Projects and approved by the Operating Unit prior to document production. Electronic versions were delivered to the client for progression or delivered directly to Sellafield Document Control

Document Production & Reporting:

To identify and quantify the O&M requirements in line with the above structure, stakeholder meetings were arranged with representatives from Design, Pre-Operations, Maintenance, Safety Case, Radiological and Conventional Safety. Sellafield System Engineers and Morson Projects Technical Authors also attended. During the stakeholder meetings, Morson Projects engaged with Design, Operation and Maintenance resource to promote an understanding of the information required to deliver a high standard of fit for purpose documentation. An agreement was sought to set up a line of communication to ensure that modifications to the initial source information was made available to the authors.

A definitive list of required documentation was compiled and their scope authorised by the relevant stakeholder. Full traceability of this process and agreed deliveries were maintained by the Morson Projects Document Controller. A generic P6 programme fragnet was compiled which aligned with the client’s deliverables. Each activity on the work breakdown structure was communicated and explained to the assigned Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to ensure that they had an understanding of their review role and the timescales involved.

All documentation was tracked through the Morson Projects Work Flow Processing Database which was updated daily. An initial project start-up meeting was arranged by the Morson Projects Project Manager to ensure that the author team understood:

• The authorised task risk assessment
• The authorised templates to be used
• The authorised writing standard
• The location of source information
• The SME contact list and acceptable lines of communication
• The scope of work, production process and associated timescales

Regular weekly production meetings were attended by authors to discuss progress, items recorded on the production issues and technical queries tracker and updates to plant/system information. Morson Projects ensured consistency of information throughout the documentation by maintaining the information files to ensure the latest version of information was available, using an approved MEL/Asset List to ensure plant item nomenclature and numbers were used consistently.

All authors were security cleared and able to access client controlled areas as classified or monitored workers, thus facilitating plant walk downs for information gathering and liaison with appropriate SMEs.

Full traceability of the process was maintained by the authors and the Morson Projects Document Controller. Where inconsistent review comments occurred a review stakeholder meeting was arranged to resolve the issues and agree an acceptable way forward. All documents had a transmittal note to ensure an auditable trail of document movements. All validation comments were archived throughout the validation process.

Progress Reporting:

A progress report was issued monthly (prior to the monthly progress meeting) or on request. The report and subsequent meeting included the following agenda items:

• Safety
• Progress
• Future Outlook and Key Interfaces
• Issues and Risks
• Cost Performance
• Quality
• Commercial
• Lessons Learnt

Efficiencies:

Morson Projects promoted the delivery of high level RCM reviews at the start of the project’s design stage to allow all parties to contribute to the maintainability and operability of the plant before the final design was fixed. This underpinned the design, from an O&M perspective, with a recognised site process and input from the eventual plant user group. The review only considered operating context, functions and potential functional failures from which design considerations or changes could be made. The majority of information captured supported the full RCM process at design maturity at a reduced cost.

A review of the Volume C Instructions reduced the total document numbers by incorporating a range of periodicities, such as monthly, quarterly, annual etc. into one instruction rather than multiples. In addition the number of instructions required for the same activity in multiple sub-systems were rationalised.

Our services

Delivering the project requirements to an agreed Statement of Work (SOW), the Morson Projects team carried out services to include:

• Asset Care & Technical Documentation