Configuration Management Benchmarking Group
Presentation and Breakout Descriptions


Past Conferences

Steering Committee

IAEA Activities

CM Links

Papers & Publications

CMBG History


Contact db Form

Past Conference Attendees


CMBG Google Group

Search CMBG Web


2017 INFO

Conference Agenda

1st Announcement

2nd Announcement

Presentations and Breakout Descriptions

Registration - CLOSED

Hotel Reservations

Transportation Guide

List of Attendees

Group Picture






David Epperson, Ameren Missouri

Logistical information about conference activities will be provided



Stephanie Banker, Ameren Missouri

Opening remarks on the importance of Configuration Management (CM) in the industry, future challenges, and past learning experiences.


INPO- Perspectives on state of CM and Nuclear Promise status

Terry Schuster, INPO

INPO representative will present an INPO perspective on the overall state of engineering and configuration management across the nuclear industry.  Describe INPO's CM-related activities and current focus areas. An update of engineering Configuration Management activates related to the Industry’s Nuclear Promise Initiative will also be given.


Standard Design Process

Kevin Kuhn, Southern Nuclear Company

An overview of the Standard Design Process (IP-ENG-001). This presentation will focus on the concepts within the Standard Design Process that will be utilized by the industry. This will be a review of the elements that are completed in the SDP process and those that will utilize the site specific processes.


SDP Interface Procedures

Ashley Taylor, TVA

One of the key elements of the implementation of the Standard Design Process (SDP) is the use of Utility-specific interface procedures, which delineate those transition areas between the industry and utility processes, and provide clear guidance to users where necessary. This presentation and break-out will cover the following topics relative to Utility-specific SDP interface procedures:


         General requirements

         Identification of “primary” Utility procedure, including options and approaches

         Review of actual Utility procedures using the different approaches

         Lessons learned


SDP Change Management

Ashley Taylor, TVA

An essential element of the successful implementation of any process change, including the Standard Design Process (SDP), is the use of a structured approach to transition individuals, teams, and organizations from the current state to a desired future state using robust change management, including risk evaluation, planning and communication. This presentation and break-out will cover the following topics relative to change management associated with the SDP:


         Key elements of the plan

         Review of industry-developed Change management template

         Review of actual examples of utility-developed Change Management Plans

         Lessons learned


SDP Software

Bill Clover, Exelon, & Brad Diggans, Rolls Royce

The standard design change procedure (IP-ENG-001, Standard Design Process) will be supported by common software used across the industry.  The Standardized software streamlines the implementation of the new procedure.  Utilities will post their design change abstracts in the software tool located on shared electronic database that will facilitate sharing throughout the industry.  Each Company must develop a project plan that implements/adopts the new industry standard design software (i.e., base software package as a minimum) by July 2018.  This presentation and break-out will cover topics relative to the software and its implementation.




SDP Panel discussion (All attendees)

Ashley Taylor, TVA, Tom Musto, Sargent & Lundy, Kevin Kuhn, Southern Nuclear Company

Prior to the planned roll-out of the Standard Design Process (SDP) to the entire industry in 2017, a “pilot” phase was conducted starting in July 2016, whereby selected utilities voluntarily piloted the SDP at one or more of their nuclear plants. This breakout session will include a panel consisting of pilot utility and Engineering vendor representatives, who will answer questions and discuss their experiences relative to the SDP implementation, including key insights and lessons learned.  Participants planning to attend should identify and be prepared to ask any questions they may have regarding the implementation of the SDP.


SDP Interface Procedures

Facilitator-Mike Hayes, Exelon & Ashley Taylor, TVA

See Presentation description.  Participants planning to attend should be prepared to discuss how these procedures have been/are being applied at their respective sites and provide beneficial practices, challenges, and lessons learned.


SDP Change Management

Facilitator- Tom Czerniewski, Entergy

See Presentation description.  Participants planning to attend should be prepared to discuss how Change Management has been/is being applied at their respective sites and provide beneficial practices, challenges, and lessons learned.


SDP Software

Facilitators - Bill Clover, Exelon, & Brad Diggans, Rolls Royce

See Presentation description.  Participants planning to attend should be prepared to discuss how the software requirements and project plan that implements/adopts the new industry standard design software.




Design Owners Working Group (DOWG) – Next Steps

Tom Czerniewski, Entergy

As part of the implementation of the Nuclear Promise Standard Design Process (SDP) initiative, the industry team that developed the process determined that a structure was needed for sustained oversight of the SDP and to monitor effectiveness of the design change process.  As a result, the Design Oversight Working Group (DOWG) was established, which is comprised of a representative cross section of utility and industry personnel dedicated to maintaining effective configuration management of nuclear power plants by providing practices, related processes, or other tools that would assist stations in effective implementation of a design change process.  This presentation will cover the following topics relative to DOWG:


         Background and establishment

         Charter and role in the SDP

         Nuclear Community website

         Next Steps


Configuration Management Performance Indicators

Mike Hayes, Duke Energy

The Engineering VP working group has chartered the DOWG to maintain IP-ENG-001 and monitor SDP implementation effectiveness using industry standard performance indicators.  Detailed definitions of these indicators will be presented as well as mechanisms for data collection and reporting.


50.69 (Risk-informed categorization and treatment of SSCs)

Glen Schinzel, STPEG

10CFR 50.69, ‘Risk-informed categorization and treatment of structures, systems, and components for nuclear power reactors’, offers significant regulatory relief for licensees who choose to submit a License Amendment Request (LAR), categorize components within safety-related systems, and implement treatment reductions for SSCs categorized as Low Safety Significant.  While 10CFR 50.69 has not received much industry attention over the past 10 years, recent industry focus on Delivering the Nuclear Promise (DNP) has highlighted opportunities associated with this broad rule.  It is expected that at least two DNP Efficiency Bulletins will be issued in 2017 encouraging licensees to pursue 50.69 and implement its allowances.


The 50.69 presentation and break-out will cover the following topics:

·         Background and overview of the 10CFR 50.69 rule

·         Overview of 50.69 SSC categorization

·         Overview of 50.69 SSC treatment reduction allowances

·         Configuration Management considerations during 50.69 implementation activities


Equipment Vendor Oversight

Jesse Hutchison, Ameren

Overview of how Callaway responded to a WANO AFI around Vendor Oversight in 2015.  The presentation will cover actions taken, challenges and successes from both an Engineering Design and Project Management perspective.   The presentation will also cover the NRC Special Inspection results from the Callaway Auxiliary Feedwater System special inspection with respect to "reverse engineering" of circuit boards.


Nuclear Regulatory Commission (State of CM)

Tony Vegel, NRC

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to present their perspective of recent Configuration Management issues in the nuclear industry




Instructor – Mike Dickson, Duke Energy

This session is based on a 90 minute PowerPoint presentation that walks the audience through the fundamental concepts, terms, and examples of Configuration Management (CM), including design and operating margin management. The objective of this session is to engage new conference attendees in the CM process as presented at the conference and provide them with a capsule summary of the process. CM 101 should provide an understanding of how the different plant organizations contribute to and support configuration control of design, processes, and equipment. There will be a discussion of the industry three-ball process model for CM equilibrium, examples of how the equilibrium can be upset and recommended processes for restoring the equilibrium.


CM Performance Indicators

Facilitators- Mike Hayes, Exelon

See Presentation description.  Discussion will be on how these indicators will be implemented by replacing existing utility indicators as well as mechanisms for data collection and reporting.


50.69 (Risk-informed categorization and treatment of SSCs)

Facilitator- Glen Schinzel, STPEG

See Presentation description. 


Equipment Vendor Oversight

Facilitator -Jesse Hutchison, Ameren

See Presentation description.  Participants planning to attend should be prepared to discuss how Vendor Oversight is being applied at their respective sites and provide beneficial practices, challenges, and lessons learned.


Facility Configuration Information (FCI) 

Facilitator- John Parler, SCANA

Proper management of Facility Configuration Information (FCI) is vital to facility configuration management.  This breakout session is intended to provide a forum for attendee discussion on some basic CM concepts.  Provides opportunity to share input/good practices/lessons learned and suggestions from other participants. Potential areas of discussion include in the following areas:

  • Discuss and share ideas on fundamentals of Calculation Control and Calculation Integrity.
  • Methods of managing drawings and equipment information.
  • Discuss and share ideas on various ways to reduce FCI backlogs.
  • Participants planning to attend should be able to provide or discuss examples, of the discussion areas, at their respective sites.


Master Equipment List (MEL/Equipment Data)

Facilitators- Kent Freeland, PK-Energy & Laurent Perkins, Bentley

This is your opportunity to SHARE with and LEARN from your CM colleagues the WHAT, HOW and WHY pertaining to the potential role of the MEL in supporting the Nuclear Promise.


A discussion of the MEL development, maintenance and utilization as a key Configuration Management and Engineering Change Management tool.  Understanding the content of an effective MEL, including identification, relationships, determinant data, parts and BoM’s, and history is the heart of NPP history and knowledge.  Misidentified components and component installation errors cost utilities a great deal of time and money.  The ability to evaluate asset performance, reliability, condition and maintenance risk requirements also depends on a highly reliable MEL and content links to other plant data.  The ability to meet Nuclear Promise goals in cost reduction for Design Change, Maintenance Cost and Plant Reliability are 100% dependent upon an accurate, reliable and auditable MEL as the hub of the CM processes and technology solutions at the NPP.


Please bring any information that you are willing to share on how your organization is tackling Nuclear Promise focus areas, other than the standard Design process, to make this a worthwhile benchmarking opportunity.  Discuss topics such as:

·         Critical Component Classification Changes

·         Margin Management Program Elimination

·         Supply Chain Efficiency Improvement Opportunities

·         AP913 Reliability Process Information support

·         'Required' (Engineered) MEL values for Operational Analytics Calculations


CM Boundary

Facilitator- Dave Weber, Energy Northwest

CM is defined as the intersection where the applicable Physical Boundary (SSCs), the Information describing those SSCs, and the Processes that control the SSCs and the information overlaps. This definition provides the basis for a graded approach to managing company resources, in terms of physical assets, information/data, and manpower.  Configuration Information to support an SSC function is shown on drawings, vendor manuals, electronic databases, operating and maintenance procedures, specifications, etc.


Industry events over the past few years has forced challenges to the CM boundary beyond what has been primarily controlled within the controlled area of the nuclear facility.


This breakout session is intended to provide a forum for attendee discussion to share good practices/lessons learned and suggestions for defining the CM controls of the following:

  • FLEX strategies
  • Segregation of plant computer systems from corporate network
  • Cyber security defense in depth strategies
  • Wireless
  • Emergency preparedness


Participants planning to attend should be prepared to discuss how these CM controls are applied at their respective sites and provide any other CM boundary challenges.




2018 CMBG Conference Announcement

John Parler, SCANA


CM Outside of Nuclear

Tim Pettus, Ameren

This presentation will explain the root and contributing causes (from a Configuration Management perspective) of Ameren's Taum Sauk pumped storage reservoir failure event in December 2005. Details and pictures of the event, its impact on a family and a Missouri State Park will be presented, followed by a discussion of the mistakes that led to the overflowing of the upper reservoir, including the culture that contributed to the mistakes. The presentation will discuss Ameren's response to repair the state park and rebuild the upper reservoir as well as the corrective actions taken subsequent to the event to ensure such an event is not repeated. This includes improvements in corporate project management practices and culture.


Vogtle 3&4/VC Summer Update

Thomas Jackson, Southern Nuclear Co & John Parler, SCANA

A presentation update on the progress of construction at Vogtle 3&4 and VC Summer


CMIS for Korean NPP, Jungsup Oh


© 2002-2018 CMBG.ORG - All Rights Reserved
 Updated Monday, March 05, 2018 09:26