A Framework for Identifying Causal Factors of Delay ... - Science Direct

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Procedia Engineering 145 (2016) 1486 – 1492

International Conference on Sustainable Design, Engineering and Construction

A Framework for Identifying Causal Factors of Delay in Nuclear Power Plant Projects Samer Alsharif ¹, Aslihan Karatas ²* ¹ PhD Candidate, Dept. of Civil & Architectural Engineering, Lawrence Technological University, MI, 48075; email: [email protected] ² Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil & Architectural Engineering, Lawrence Technological University, MI, 48075; PH (248)204-2598; email: [email protected]

Abstract Nuclear power plant projects have unique characteristics (e.g., variability of projects portfolio, processes and procedures, security and safety requirements) that affect precise estimation of project schedule and cost. Inaccurate estimation may result in delay and cost overrun, and accordingly jeopardizing the nuclear power plant’s operating license. To reliably estimate projects schedule and cost, the causal factors of delay in nuclear power plant projects need to be carefully investigated and analyzed. This study presents a framework for identifying causal factors of delay for operable nuclear power plants projects. This framework is designed in three main stages: (1) collecting data on projects that experienced delay for various reasons (e.g., missing schedule updates, design errors, scope change); (2) identifying the reasons for delay into standard common causal factors; and (3) analyzing the identified causal factors of delay and their impact on projects schedule and cost performance. This framework will assist decision-makers (e.g., nuclear project managers and project controllers) in identifying and evaluating the nuclear projects causal factors of delay to improve the reliability of projects schedule and cost estimation. © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. ThisLtd. is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of organizing committee of the International Conference on Sustainable Design, Peer-review the organizing committee of ICSDEC 2016 Engineeringunder and responsibility Construction of 2015. Keywords: Nuclear power plants; delays in construction projects; schedule; construction planning

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1(248)204-2598; E-mail address: [email protected]

1877-7058 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of ICSDEC 2016

doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2016.04.187

Samer Alsharif and Aslihan Karatas / Procedia Engineering 145 (2016) 1486 – 1492

1.

1487

Introduction

In the U.S., there are 61 licensed nuclear power plants in service that are operated by 100 commercial reactors (EIA, 2015). The average age of all U.S. commercial reactors is about 33 years, and the operating licenses of these reactors should be extended and/or renewed by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to maintain their operations (NRC, 2015). An operable nuclear power plant, which has nuclear reactor(s) that is in service, must comply with the NRC requirements such as safe management, operation, maintenance, refuelling, and waste disposal to obtain license renewal (NRC, 2015). All nuclear power plants have a project portfolio with capital and maintenance projects to demonstrate compliance with NRC requirements (PEA, 2015). Project portfolios of nuclear power plants have distinctive characteristics that are different than projects in other industries (Devgun, 2013). One of the unique characteristics is the variability of the projects portfolio due to reprioritization and emergency. Typically, the plant’s planning department develops a long term and a short term plan for projects that need to be completed to maintain safe operation and compliance to NRC requirements. Deliberative planning can provide stability in the project portfolio to some extent, but it is tentative due to emergent maintenance, regulatory upgrades, and recommendations upon inspections. This portfolio variability brings along more fast-track projects, a tight portfolio budget, and more risk (Jung, 2012). Another unique characteristic of nuclear power plant project portfolio is the types of projects implemented in these plants to maintain the license and meet regulatory requirements. These projects are categorized as modifications, maintenance, engineering, and facilities (PEA, 2015). Moreover, nuclear power plants have also special security and safety procedures and requirements that require special in-processing and out-processing for all personnel working inside the plant (NRC, 2015). Additionally, materials and equipment staging and storage have special procedures and requirements as well. In order to develop a reliable plan and performance measurement baseline for making accurate schedule and cost estimation, the causal factors of delay needs to be identified, analyzed, and considered as risk in the project plan. Many studies have been conducted to identify and analyze the reasons of delay in regular construction projects such as highway construction, and residential and commercial building construction (Ellis & Thomas, 2002; Gollapudi, Azhar, & Ahmed, 2003); Moosa, 2005). They highlighted that productivity and design errors are one of the major reasons for delay that have impact on projects. Even if these studies have great contribution on identifying the reason for delay in regular construction projects, they did not address the causal reasons in nuclear power plan construction which requires special reviews and approval by qualified personnel. Therefore, causal factors in delay should be monitored and controlled effectively and efficiently to assure ontime and within budget completion for nuclear power plant projects. Otherwise, the operating license of nuclear power plants may be in jeopardy. To address this research gap, this study focuses on developing a framework that identifies and analyzes the causal factors of delay in nuclear power plant projects. 2.

Objective

The objective of this paper is to design a framework that identifies and evaluates the major causal factors of delay for nuclear projects implemented in operable nuclear power plants. This evaluation consists of three main stages: (1) gathering weekly data on projects that experienced delay for various reasons (e.g., missing schedule updates, design errors, scope change, and contractor poor performance); (2) identifying the reasons for delay into causal factors; and (3) analyzing identified causal factors of delay and their impact on projects schedule and cost performance. The following sections present a brief description of these stages. 3.

Causal factors of delay

Delay in any project is a major source of risk that can lead to inaccurate schedule and cost estimation (Kim, 2007). In operable nuclear power plants, delay in projects can also have impact on maintaining the plant license (NRC, 2015). Therefore, nuclear power plant projects require an advanced integrated project controls system, with attendant policies and procedures for effectively measuring project performance, and forecasting time and cost (Jung, Moon, & Kim, 2011). This integrated system provides enhanced management decisions to meet projects objectives. In order to make the integrated project controls system effective for nuclear power plant projects, it is important to systematically identify, evaluate, and address the causal factors of delay in projects. In order to achieve

1488


that, causal factors of delay in nuclear power plant projects were captured, recorded, and categorized weekly, and subsequently modified and customized based on the weekly input from the project managers. The framework for identifying and analyzing the causal factors of delay has been developed as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Framework for Identifying Causal Factors of Delay

This framework has been implemented on nuclear power plants projects and a list of common causal factors of delay in nuclear projects has been developed as shown in Table 1. Table 1: Standard list of Reasons for Delay Reason for Delay Missing Schedule Updates Design Error/ECRs Scope Change Contractor

Materials/Vendor

Funding Schedule Productivity

Resources Productivity

Main Causal Factors a. No schedule updates were received b. Not all activities requiring an update were updated a. Design omissions and/or error b. Engineering Change Request (ECR) / Engineering Operability Constraint (EOC) c. Inaccurate drawings or specifications a. Scope increase b. Altering scope a. Missed milestone/deliverable b. Late proposal from contractor c. Late decision from owner a. Contractor/vendor committed to meeting dates and not producing the work to meet the dates b. Materials not ordered with enough lead time c. Vendor materials do not meet specifications d. Materials damaged a. Appropriation is not granted b. Purchase orders were not written a. Inaccurate duration estimate b. Inaccurate schedule logic c. No enough details a. Inaccurate manpower estimate b. Resource skills level c. Inaccurate resource levelling d. Delay in resource mobilization


Plant Support Engineering (PSE) Rework Owner decision Weather Other/Delays

1489

a. Activities that were scheduled to be completed by plant support are not being completed b. Document delivered late to the Plant Support Engineering a. Faulty design b. Faulty implementation a. Plant Support Engineering /Security/Maintenance/Operations b. Online/outage management c. Project Evaluation Review Committee a. Severe weather that resulted in stopping work in the field. a. Tools/Equipment b. Poor coordination c. Differing site conditions

Thirteen major causal factors of delay have been identified for nuclear power plant projects. First, missing schedule updates is one of the reasons for delay as it impacts the accuracy of the reports, interfaces, and hands off of tasks. It can be a result of not receiving schedule updates at all or partial updates by the owner(s) of the activities. The second reason for delay in nuclear projects is identified as design deficiency. This includes design omission/error, design change that results in engineering change request, or design constraint that needs be resolved. Usually, operable nuclear power plants have complex process and procedures for these types of changes. This causal factor is very critical as it can significantly impact field work. The third reason is scope change. If scope is not fully defined early in the planning phase can result in scope increase or altering scope, which is usually the case for fast track projects. The fourth factor is the performance of contractors which is critical to meet projects schedule and cost objectives. This category includes poor contractor performance that causes a delay by not meeting milestones or deliverables. It can also include the timeliness of the bidding process whether a late proposal from the contractor or a late decision from the owner. The fifth factor is the delay in ordering and staging materials on site, especially, long lead materials. Nuclear projects usually have long lead procurement items that require weeks and sometimes months to be delivered. Materials vendor’s commitment, specifications, lead time, and delivery can have major impact on nuclear projects schedule and cost performance. The sixth factor is funding which can significantly impact project schedule performance as without secured funding, no work can be performed. The seventh factor is identified as productivity. In order to capture the root cause of productivity it has been broken down into two categories. The first category is called schedule productivity. This category includes inaccurate duration estimate, inaccurate schedule logic, and no enough details in the schedule. The second category, which is the eighth factor, is called resources productivity. This category includes inaccurate manpower estimate, resource skills level, inaccurate resource levelling, and delay in resource mobilization. The ninth factor is the Plant Support Engineering (PSE). Nuclear projects require special design reviews and approvals that are performed by qualified engineers called Plant Support Engineers (PSE). This organization normally has other duties that can impact the timely reviews and approvals of the design products which cause delay. The tenth factor is the rework. Like any project in any industry, rework resulted by faulty design or fault implementation impact the projects schedule and cost performance. The eleventh factor is related to owner decisions. In nuclear power plants, owner may take decisions due to regulatory updates or conflict in priorities that can delay projects significantly. The twelfth factor is the weather. Severe weather can basically stop field work or at least impact workers productivity. The thirteenth factor is related to other minor reasons for delay such as tools, equipment, and poor coordination. 4.

Case study

In order to validate the framework presented in the previous section, data have been collected and recorded weekly for projects at Fermi 2, a nuclear power plant in Michigan USA. The data have been collected for 51 projects; 9 engineering projects, 37 modification and maintenance projects, and 5 facility projects. The durations of these projects range from 6 months to 105 months, and the cost range from $200,000 to $52,000,000. An example of the data collected is shown in Table 2. The first column represents the project name. The projects have been grouped into two major categories; capital projects which have capitalization basis, and Maintenance projects which considered regular operation and maintenance (O&M) projects. Under each of these major categories, subcategories have been developed based on the project type; modifications, maintenance, engineering, and facilities. Programs have been also grouped together in Table 2. The second column represents the number of activities behind schedule for each project for the current reporting period. The third column represents the number of critical

1490


activities behind schedule for the current reporting period. Critical activities here are defined as activities that are on the longest path which is determined through Critical Path Method (CPM). The fourth column represents the total number of activities in progress or scheduled to start in the current reporting period. The fifth column is used to record the reason for having activities behind schedule which is the state of schedule delay. The roll up for the second, third, and fourth columns have been calculated to provide slippage percentages for each category and for the overall projects portfolio. Upon data collection, two graphs have been developed to capture the behaviour and trend of causal factors of delay (see Figure 2 and Figure 3). Figure 2 shows the causal factors of delay for a specific week. The purpose of this graph is to provide the main causal factors of delay for a specific week so countermeasure can be taken to address them immediately. Figure 3 shows the average of causal factors of delay for all data collected in 2015. The purpose of this graph is to provide common causal factors of delay for all projects implemented in 2015 so further analysis can be performed to identify root causes and determine proper countermeasures to strategically address them. Accordingly, Figure 2 and Figure 3 show that productivity category is one of the major causal factors of delay. This category can include several factors presented in Table 1; resources skill level, inaccurate manpower estimate, inaccurate duration estimate, inaccurate schedule logic, inaccurate resource levelling. Furthermore, in order to understand the greatest potential for improvements, more in depth analysis has been performed to depict which causal factors have major on projects schedule performance. The greatest potentials for improvements are found as; productivity (29%), plant engineering (19%), and design issues (14%). Moreover, the relationships between the causal factors of delay have been also investigated. The analysis concluded that many of these causal factors of delay are inter-related. For example if there is a productivity issue due to the skill level of resources, this may lead to design error and engineering change request. Inaccurate schedule update will result in inaccurate forecast which may significantly impact resource levelling and manpower estimate. Project team should consider the concurrent impact of one causal factor and address the real root cause. Table 2: Example of Weekly Data Collection Project Name

Activities behind Schedule

Critical Activities behind Schedule

Total # of Activities

Reason for Delay

Total

196

92

993

Capital Projects

185

89

901

Sponsored Projects

110

54

418

Design Basis Optimization (DBO)

23

16

101

DBO Mechanical Group I Calculation Revision

0

0

25

Design Basis Optimization (DBO) Program

0

0

1

DBO HVAC Calculation Upgrade Evaluation

6

2

14

DBO High Energy Line Breaks (HELB) / (MELB)

0

0

4

DBO Resolution of Structural Extent of Condition

1

1

22

Schedule Updates

DBO Task 0312 Pipe Stress Analysis

4

2

22

Scope Change

DBO Ultimate Heat Sink

12

11

13

Productivity

Fukushima

71

26

250

37084 Fukushima Mitigating Strategies Flex Mod

7

4

43

Plant Engineering

37114 Fukushima Hardened Vent Mod

33

5

44

Schedule Updates

Common Fukushima Hardened Vent Mod

0

0

0


9

0

23

Schedule Updates


22

17

140

Productivity

Plant Engineering


1491

Figure 2: Reasons for Delay for a Specific Week

Figure 3: Cumulative Average of Reasons for Delay

5.

Conclusion

Nuclear power plant projects have unique characteristics and requirements that have major impact on their schedule and cost performance. Therefore, reasons that cause schedule delay and cost overruns need to be carefully investigated and analyzed. This paper presents a framework that identifies the causal factors of delay in nuclear projects. To validate this framework, a case study was conducted at Fermi 2, an operable nuclear power plant in Michigan – USA, involved weekly data collection of causal factors of delay for in progress projects. Upon data collection, a more in depth analysis was performed to understand the causal factors of delay that have major impact on schedule and cost performances of nuclear projects. As a result, three causal factors of delay have been identified

1492


as major causal factors of delay for nuclear projects: Productivity, Plant Support Engineering, and Design Errors/Engineering Change Requests. These three factors need immediate attention by the project management organization to put in place the effective and efficient countermeasure. The framework presented in this study will help decision-makers identifying the impacts of the causal factors of delay to provide more realistic project estimation in terms of schedule and cost. Further analysis is needed to investigate the best solutions for these factors. References [1] Abdulhamid, T. (2005). Six-Sigma in Lean Construction Systems Opportunities and Challenges. http://leanconstruction.org [2] Ambituuni, A. (2006). Causes of Project Delay and Cost Overrun, and Mitigation Approach. http://www.academia.edu [3] Al-Aomar, R. (2012). "Analysis of lean construction practices at Abu Dhabi construction industry". Construction Journal 2012 pp 105-121. [4] Aliabadizadeh, Y. (2009). Evaluation of Ways to Recover Late Construction Projects. University of Maryland. [5] Ballard, G. (1994). The Last Planner. Northern California Construction Institute. Retrieved from http://www.leanconstruction.org [6] Chen, S., & Zhang, X. (2012). An Analytic Review of Earned Value Management Studies in the Construction Industry. Construction Research Congress 2012 © ASCE 2012. [7] Deng, M. Z. M, and Hung, Y. E. (1998). “Integrated cost and schedule control: Hong Kong perspective.” Project Mgmt. J., Project Management Institute (PMI). [8] Devgun, J. (2013). "Managing Nuclear Projects". EconomicsReport08_2: http://www.world-nuclear.org [9] Ellis, R., & Thomas, R. (2002). Investigation of Root Causes of Delays in Highway Construction. http://www.ltrc.lsu.edu [10] Flaherty, T. (2008). “Navigating Nuclear Risks: New Approaches to Contracting in a Post-Turnkey World,” Public Utilities Fortnightly. [11] Gollapudi, D., Azhar, S., & Ahmed, S. (2003). Delays in Construction: A Brief Study of the Florida Construction Industry. [12] González, P., González, V., Molenaar, K., & Orozco, F. (2013). Analysis of Causes of Delay and Time Performance in Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(1). [13] U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). (2015). https://www.eia.gov/ [14] INPO: Principles for Managing Nuclear Projects. (2015). Institute of Nuclear Power Operations. https://web.inpo.org [15] Jung, Y., Moon, B., & Kim, J. (2011). EVMS for Nuclear Power Plant Construction: Variables for Theory and Implementation. In computing in Civil Engineering (2011) (Vols. 1–0, pp. 728–735). American Society of Civil Engineers. [16] Kaplan, S. (2008). Power Plants: Characteristics and Costs - CRS Report for Congress. https://www.fas.org. [17] Kim, B. (2007). "Forecasting Project and Early Warning of Project Overruns with Probabilistic Methods". [18] Kim, B., & Reinschmidt, K. (2011). "Combination of Project Cost Forecasts in Earned Value Management". [19] Moosa, T. (2005). "Assessment of Prodution Planning Process in residential Construction Using Lean Construction and Six Sigma". [20] Mulholland, B., & Christian, J. (1999). "Risk Assessment in Construction Schedules". Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(1), 8–15. [21] Nassar, K., Gunnarsson, H., & Hegab, M. (2005). "Using Weibull Analysis for Evaluation of Cost and Schedule Performance". [22] Patel, A. (2011). "The Last Planner System for reliable Project Delivery". The University of Texas at Arlington. [23] PEA, (2015). "Types of Nuclear Projects Performed by Process Engineering Associates". Process Engineering Associates. http://www.processengr.com/nuclear/ [24] Ralph D. Ellis, Jr. (2002). "Investigation of Root Causes of Delays in Highway Construction". University of Florida. [25] Syed, A., Castillo, M., & Kappagantula, P. (2003). Construction Delays in Florida: An Empirical Study. [26] U.S.NRC Nuclear Reactors Webpage, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report 99-4279, http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/power.html (October 30, 2015) [27] Wambeke, B., Hsiang, S., & Liu, M. (2011). Causes of Variation in Construction Project Task Starting Times and Duration. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(9), 663–677.