ML20023B921
| ML20023B921 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/04/1983 |
| From: | Bangart R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Mattson R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8305090209 | |
| Download: ML20023B921 (3) | |
Text
s gg 0 41933 MEMORANDUM FOR:
R. J. Mattson, Director, Division of Systems Integration, NRR FROM:
R. L. Bangart, Director, Division of Vendor and Technical Programs, Region IV
SUBJECT:
SURVEY OF COMPUTER CODE QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES APPLIED BY THE NATIONAL LABORATORIES
Reference:
1.
Memo from Mattson to Collins, dated December 3, 1982,
" Quality Assurance Procedures" 2.
Memo from Bangart to Mattson, dated December 27, 1982,
" National Laboratory QA Programs" Mr. R. H. Brickley of this office has completed his survey of QA procedures applied by the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory to computer code activities relating to NRC funded programs. The results of this survey are contained in the " REPORT OF SURVEY" attached with this memo.
If you have any questions regarding this survey, please contact Mr. Brickley at FTS 728-8167.
wast sisnad by:
- u. POTAPOVS**
Richard L. Bangart, Director Division of Vendor and Technical Programs
Attachment:
As Stated cc:
D. Ross, RES L. Shotkin, RES S. Boyd, DSI E. Marinos, DSI J. T. Collins, RIV U. Potapovs, RIV C. J. Hale, RIV R. H. Brickley, RIV 1 7. # M SC:RSS BC:V D:V TP RHBrickley/rc CJHale UPotapovs LBangart
- /N/83
.JB/J /83 f/q/83 (7y/83 E/3
/
/
B305090209 830504 i
PDR ORG EX IIPEL
/
REPORT OF SURVEY IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY APRIL 12-13, 1983 OBJECTIVES:
The objectives of this survey were: (1) ascertain that Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) has established QA procedures controlling computer code activities, (2) evaluate these procedures with respect to the applicable sections of ANSI N45.2.11-1974, and (3) verify that they are properly implemented.
The survey was confined to those computer code activities performed by INEL on NRC funded programs.
(NOTE:
NRC has not imposed any QA requirements on l
INEL).
IMPLEMENTATION:
The preceding objectives were accomplished by an examination of procedures and I
representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the survey team.
The documents examined consisted of:
(1) Procedure QP-3, " Design Control"; (2) Procedure QP-3.1, " Design Analysis"; (3) Procedure QP-3.2, " Design Planning Tabulation"; (4) Procedure QP-3.3, " Design Review"; (5) Procedure QP-6.1,
" Computer Code Configuration Management"; (6) Procedure QP-6.2, " Control of j
Computer Code Analysis"; (7) Procedure RS-07-83, " Scientific Computer Configura-tion Management Committee Policies and Procedures"; (8) Procedure (unnumbered),
"CDAP Software Quality Assurance"; (9) Procedure PN-87-80, " TRAC-BWR Development and Code Change Procedure"; (10) Report No. EGG-CDD-5776, "RELAP 5 Development Project Code Development and Configuration / Quality Control Procedures";
(11) Notegram, " Action Plan for Implementation of Draft SCAP Quality Assurance Program"; (12) Procedure NTAP 2.1, " Procedure for Quality Assuring Thermal-Hydraulic and Fuel Rod Thermal Mechanical Behavior Computer Code Input Decks";
(13) Procedure NTAP 2.2, " Thermal-Hydraulic and Fuel Rod Thermal Mechanical Behavior Analysis Consistency Procedures"; (14) Draft Report No. EGG-NTAP-6082,
" Audit Calculations for a Main Steam Line Break in North Anna, Unit 2 using the RELAP 5 Computer Code"; (15) TRAC-PD2 files (notebooks) consisting of:
(a) Westinghouse Library Reactor Vessel Data-Seabrook, (b) TRAC Reactor Vessel Nodalization, and (c) Calculational Worksheets for TRAC-PD2 Model of RESAR-3S; (16) TRAC-BWR files consisting of: (a) TRAC-BWR Version A-15 Notebook, (b) computer printout "A Computer Program for Documentation of CDC Update Changes",
(c) report No. WR-NSMD-82-082, " TRAC-BD1 Loss Coefficient and Two Phase Friction Model", and (d) TRAC-BWR Development Forms file; (17) RELAP 5 assessment files consisting of the Cognizant Engineers notebook " ROSA-III Run 912"; and (18) RELAP 5 1
development files (notebooks) consisting of: (a) RELAP 5 Configuration Control, (b) RELAP 5-FY83 Completion Reports, and (c) RELAP 5-Mod 1 Checkout Problems.
+ RESULTS:
The examination of these documents disclosed: (1) INEL, on their own, has developed and imposed procedures (items 5 through 14 above) to govern NRC computer code activities; (2) procedures presently exist in the EG&G Quality Manual that address the requirements of ANSI N45.2.11-1975 (e.g., items 1 through 4 above);
(3) existing applicable procedures should be revised to: (a) expand independent verification activities to more areas and axclude the supervisor from performing the independent verification, (b) require that code errors detected during development activities be evaluated for impact on analysis, applicability to publicly released and NRC assessment versions, the results documented, and applicable users notified, and (c) eliminate misleading statements; and (4) the records of code activities should: (a) contain an explanation of the resolution of all errors detected during verification, (b) more adequately define the source of all references, (c) contain completely filed out forms (no blanks), and (d) address in the Design Review Report the acceptability of the results of the analysis.
-