Improve Contractor Management Efficiency and Reporting using an Automated Contractor Spend Management Solution - MTA-WM-003
| Administrative Items | |
|---|---|
| Date | March 2023 |
| Functional Area Where Benefits Will Be Realized | Work Management
Maintenance Supply Chain |
| Reference Implementation Guidance | Please contact the EPRI SME for implementation guidance resources. |
| Industry SME | EPRI – Colton Smith
Contact: NuclearPlantMod@epri.com |
| Previous Implementation | This improvement has been implemented at a nuclear plant. Please contact the EPRI SME for additional information. |
| Implementation Enablers | N/A |
| SWEEP Score |
|
| Applicability | All reactor types
All geographic regions |
| Keywords | Contractor management, contractor spend, automated management, human performance tools, HU tools |
| Business Case Analysis Cross-Reference | N/A |
Description
When a utility contracts labor to perform work on site at a plant, the utility must ensure contractor compliance throughout service execution and validate contractor invoices against contractual obligations. Traditionally, site personnel are tasked with manually checking contractor‑submitted invoices for contractual compliance and accuracy and with prompt assembly of the data to support decision‑making (e.g., during outages). This process is an administrative burden that relies on the contractor submitting invoices in a timely manner. Furthermore, the contractor requirements are typically not standardized across all contracts, so the manual checks are not uniform.
The transition to an automated management solution streamlines and standardizes the contractor spend management process to improve timeliness and accuracy of submitted information. An automated contractor spend management solution captures the in‑and‑out badge events of contractors via the site’s existing Access Control System or a separately installed badging kiosk to track the gross contractor time on site. The contractor spend management software platform automatically prepares contractor timesheets based on the gross contractor time on site and the existing contractual service agreement terms, conditions, rates, and schedules. The generated timesheet can be used to streamline the invoice check process to support utility checking of contractor‑prepared invoices or be sent directly to the utility’s enterprise resource planning platform for billing. The automated contractor spend management solution also facilitates daily cost reporting, improving overall cost tracking and reporting efficiency.
Benefits
Benefits Estimate
Level 1 – Savings are less than $1 million. The example utility for this MTA implemented the technology at a single site with one operating unit and used the software to support its invoice checking process. The implementation primarily yielded benefits such as improved outage tracking capability and saving administrative time that are difficult to quantify financially (e.g., because they do not result in staffing reduction). Additional benefits may be possible with implementation of automated billing and/or with fleet‑wide implementation.
Benefits Description
- Increase in outage cost tracking and reporting efficiency through automation and standardization, allowing for improved management of contractor progress.
- Improved contractor attention and adherence to contractual obligations.
- Reduction in operational costs by saving time spent on processing and verifying contractor invoices and resolving invoice disputes.
- Reduction in operational costs associated with investigating and resolving unapproved contractor spend and invoice overbilling.
Costs and Schedule
Cost
Level 3 – Implementation cost is less than $1 million. Ongoing costs will vary based on extent of vendor support and software licensing agreements.
Schedule
Less than 6 months at a single unit. Initial implementation across a fleet may take longer, on the order of 6–12 months. Adding additional contractors to the management platform after initial implementation is relatively quick, on the order of hours.
Scope Context
Per site. Site evaluated had 1 operating unit. Benefit estimation will depend on implementation across total site contractors and across multiple sites. Fleet‑wide implementation could increase savings at a marginal additional cost. Benefit realization will also depend on site‑specific quantification of savings that do not produce direct cost savings (e.g., personnel time savings for report assembly does not likely equate to reduced staffing).
Risks
If the existing Access Control System is used for implementation, integration between the secure wireless network and the non-secure wireless network used for contractor management platform is necessary. Data transfer between these networks presents a cybersecurity IT risk. The IT risk can be mitigated through following the appropriate utility cybersecurity practices. For example, consider manually extracting data from the secure network using a portable USB or flash drive and uploading it to the non-secure network. Alternatively, a separate kiosk can be installed to track contractor entry and integrate with the technology platform entirely outside of the secure wireless network.
Inadequate server capacity to store additional Access Control System data presents a risk to successful implementation. This risk can be mitigated by working with the technology vendor throughout implementation to ensure the server capacity is adequate to handle increased data loads.