ML20031A821
| ML20031A821 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/11/1981 |
| From: | Mattia M NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Allen R AIR FORCE, DEPT. OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031A819 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-B-8014, CON-NRC-03-81-138, CON-NRC-3-81-138 NUDOCS 8109250529 | |
| Download: ML20031A821 (30) | |
Text
f. "
4 UNITED STATE!
tA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-j j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 e
,g,,,
SEP 11 lE United States Air Force Rome Air Development Center / DOT ATTN: Mr. Ray Allen Griffiss Air Force Base Rome, NY 13441
Dear Mr. Allen:
Subject:
Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-81-138 Entitled "NRC Reliability Program Plan" Pursuant to the authority contained in the Ecanomy Act of 1932, cs amended,
^1 USC 686, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) and the United States Air Force, Rome Air Development Center u Griffiss Air Force Base desire to enter into an interagency agreement whereby Rome Air Development Center /D0T will conduct a thorough survey and evaluation of reliability programs cur-rently being implemented in nuclear and nonnuclear fields.
Accordingly, the above parties hereto mutually agree to the following terms of this agreement as follows and in accordance with additional terms and conditions listed under AFSC Form 607 (Order of Precedence for conflicts which may arise as a result of the above, the interagency agreement will have precedence).
I.
Period of Performance The period of performance shall be from the effective date of the agreement through eighteen (18) months thereafter.
II.
Statement of Work Work performed under this agreement shall be in accordance with Rome Air Development Center / DOT's proposal which is attached and made a part hereof as Attachment I.
III Estimated Cost and Cbligation of Funds A.
The estimateJ cost of the work to be performed under this agree-ment is $172,300.00.
B The amount presently obligated for the performance of work under this agreement is $100,000.00.
[0109250529 810914 PDR CONTR 4
NRC-03-et-138 PDR
,l t
m-
~,
C.
Funds obligated to this agreement are chargeable to the following appropriation data:
B&R Symbol: 20-19-09-39 FIN No.:
88014 D.
Additional obligation of funds will be made for Fiscal Year 1982, subject to availability of funds, by unilateral modification to this agreement, until obligations for the period of agreement reach $172,300.00.
IV Billing Instructions Rome Air Development Center /D0T, to receive reimbursen.ent for costs incurred, shell submit inv61ces in accordance with Attachment II Billing Instructions for NRC/RADC Interagency Agreement, which is attached and made a part hereof.
V Advanced Notification It is estimated that the total cost to the NRC for the performance of this agreement shall not exceed the estimated cost set forth in Article III and Rome Air Development Center / DOT agrees to use its best efforts to perform the work specified in Article II and all obligations under this contract within such estimated costs.
If, at any time, Rome Air Development Center /D0T has reason to believe that.the costs which it expects to incur in the performance of this contract in the next succeeding 60 days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75 percent of the estimated cost then set forth in Article III, or if at any time, Rome Air Development Center / DOT has reason to believe that the total cost to the NRC for the performnce of this contract will be greater or substantially less than the then estimated cost hereof, Rome Air Development Center / DOT shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing to that effect, giving the revised estimate of such total cost for the performance of this contract.
VI Project Officer The following individual will represent the Government as the Project Of ficer for this contract:
Ashok Thadani (301) 492-8090 J
~
0' n:
3-The Project 0fficer is responsible for:
(1) lionitoring the Contractor's technical progress, including the surveillance and assessment of performance and recommending to the Contracting Officer changes in requirements; (2) interpreting the statement of work; (3) performing technical evaluation as required; (4) performing technical inspections and acceptances required by this contract; and (5) assisting the Contractor in the i
resolution of technical problems encountered during performance.
Within the preview of this authority, the representative is authorized to approve payment vouchers for supplies / services requir-d ur. der the contract.
The Contracting Officer is responsible for directing or negotiating any changes in terms, conditions, or amounts cited in the contract.
For guidance from the Project Officer to the Contractor to be valid, it must:
(1) be consistent with the description of work set forth in this contract; (2) not constitute new assignment of work or change to the n
expressed terms, conditions, or specifications incorporated into this contract; (3) not constitute a basis for an extension to the period of performance or contract delivery schedule; (4) not constitute a basis for any increase in the contract price.
If the Contractor receives guidance from the Project Officer which the Contractor feels is not valid under the criteria cited aoove, the Contractor shall icmediately notify the Project Officer.
If the two are not able l
to resoive the question within 5 days, the Contractcr shall notify the Contracting Of ficer.
ARTICLE VII TECHNICAL DIRECTION A.
Performance of the work under this agreement shall be subject to the l
technical. direction of the NRC Project Officer named in Article VI.
of this agreement. The term " Technical Direction" is defined to include the following:
1.
Technical direction to the contractor which shifts work emphasis between areas of work or tasks, requires pursuit of certain lines of inquiry, fills in details or otherwise serves to accomplish the contractual scope of work.
2.
Providing assistance to the Contractor ir the preparation of drawings, specifications or technical portions of the work description.
3.
P.eview and where r aquu ed by the agreement approval of technical reports, drawir gs, specifications and te. hnical informa' tion to he delivered of the Contractor to the Gc.ernment under the contract.
2.-
3 c
1.
-g.
x 1
B.
Technical direction must be within the general scope of work stated in the agreement.
The Project Officer does not have the authority g
to and rnay not issue any technical direction which:
1.
Constitutes an assignment of additional work outside the general scope of the contract.
2.
Constitutes a change as defined in the clause of the General Provisions, enti,tl ed " Changes."
'3.
In any way causes an increase or decrease in the total estimated agreement cost, the fixed fee, if any, or the time required for contract performance.
4.
Changes any of the expressed ' terms, conditions or specifications of the agreement.
C.
ALL T2CHNICAL DIRECTIONS SHALL BE ISSUED Ill WRITING BY THE PROJECT OFFICER OP. SHALL BE CONFIRMED BY SUCH PERSON IN WRITING WITHIN TEN (10) WORKING,
DAYS AFTER VERBAL ISSUAtlCE.
A copy of said written direction shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer.
~
The Centractor shall proceed promptly with the perforr 2nce of technical directions duly issued by the Project Officer in the manner prescribed by this article and within such person's authority under the provisions of this article.
VIII NRC Contacts
' Contracts
Contact:
The NRC contact is Ann Amberger, telephone number (301) 492-4294. Ms. Amberger will handle all contractual / administrative actions.
4
e
, -o-
-If this agreement is acceptable to Rome Air Development Center / DOT, please so indicate by signing in the space below and returning three (3) copies to me.
The fourth signed copy is for your records.
Sincerely, Mary Jo Mattia, Chief Technical Assistance Contracts Branch Division of Contracts Office of Administration U.S. Air Force Rome Air Development Center / DOT Griffiss Air Force Base U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission R} /[/
EP K jl ACCEPTE :
7 BY:
h b
d BY:
r
\\l Mary J PNattia, Chief kebM \\~ /g DM TITLE:
Technical Assistance Contracts Br.
^
M Division of Contracts DATE: \\
t k
/
n f,/# Y N
DATE:
PTTaruurnT T
' ~
MEM3RANDUM CF AGREEMENT (CD%T Ur TEST AND CVALUA TION (1&l:) $UI'I* ORT OR OTilLR IN il0U5F TECilNICAL TITORT)
T a (orcerms A s er ystr>
F IOM: (s'.utormeros A r##v#ry; Nuclear Regulatory Cormiission (NRC)
Rome Air Development Center (RADC)
Wash DC 20555 Griffiss AFB NY 13441
PROGR AM E L EME N T NUMBER B.
P 8t O G H A M ELEMENT 7tTLE C.
PROGR AM / PROJ E C T NUMDER O.
P ROG N AM'Ph0JE C T TITLE R2580000 NRC Reliability Program
- 3. DE SC RIPT ION (fortel dess rsprion el TAE suo> port or other in-hous, t. chute.1.Ilort to be perform.d.r'd.n. atom.t. of p.riod at
.,aomous.sm.na....ru.nd aome.oton d.....
cen a a n.. o.,...r... o r,,. c....,r.)
r This M0A will not be used as a financial document for obligation of any estimated dollar amounts mentioned herein.
An appropriate obligation document should be forwarded to RADC/D0 at the earliest date. Actual support costs will be billed on the basis of the Job Order Cost Accounting System (J0CAS) for costs which are the ordering activity responsibility in accordance with this agreement. The Comptrol-ler organization servicing the ordering activity will determine the appropriate type of obligation document. Such documentation should specify the project number, the RADC project angineer and the RADC M0A Number so.afo I.
PURPOSE:
This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is to define the relationship between the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Rome Air Development Center (RADC) in support of the NRC Reliability Program Plan Interagency Agreement No.
NRC-03-81-138.
- 3. E STiunf E D C097 0F E FFORT 70 BL
,?-
N^+
- a,
g,+ 1
- 4. AM0dN T TO BE REiW9U RSED OY e
PERFORM E D (Ef r COST CA TE GORY) afa
- p' <' l # f 14 '
YE AR Fy CRDERahG ACTivlTY FOR SUDGET
A.
Dl".E CT L A DOR - MILIT ARY g
6.3K (0.1 M/Y) 8-o' a r c T ' ^ 8 o" - c 'v^ "
gw 1.0K RADC Travel 1.0K C, oy,C,o,,ECr Cosy, 5.0K ComDater Reimb arsemer t 5.0K D.
INDIRECT /OVE RHE AD - MILIT ARY E. 4NDIRECT/OVERHE AD - NONMILIT ARY
"- " " c " ' " ? ' 5 rd '" ' -*>
160.0K 160.0K R AC Femdinn 5 172.3K
' Y^t s
172.3K I11 L N AML AND GR AUL OF COMM ANDEN OR SIGN ATURE DATE AUTHORIZED HEPRESE NT ATIVE DE PE R F O R M IN G
~ /Q3bbb d OWEN R. LAWTER, Col, USAF
^
Vise Commander T YPE N AME AND GR ADE OF PHCGRAM/ PROJECT
,$ 1 G M URE DATE M A N AGER OR A *J T HORIZ ED RE PRc SEN T A TIVE OF 7
((
/
/
g //
- /
[
ORDERING ACTIVITV fj
,fzthisd AFSC fu."", 607 PRE VIOUS E DIT ON l$ OBSOLE TE.
,gg r,1rd,. s....
e
. /x
(
11 DEL <tlP110N OF EFFORT:
.This.prograa is c:ncerned with 'the reliability efforts to enhance power plant
. safety systems' through their total life cycle, f rom concept through the design, i:plementation and operation. RADC will provide technical support, consultation and contract supervision of the Reliability Analysis Center (RAC) as appropriate to n
the specific tasks.
The basic program direction is contained in the Interagency Agreement No. IRC-03-81-138 i:RC Reliability Program Plan dated 28 Jul,
81.
III.. SPECIFIC RESP 0HSIBILITIES:
A.~
IRC Program Office will:
~ - 1.
Provide overall Progra'm Direction and Guidelines for conducting
. tasks.
..v>
2, Provide a schedule of significant program cctivities with specific milestone' dates f or any products /inp 1', f or which RADC shall be responsible.
3.
Coordinate program actions affecting RADC contractual obligations and defined tasks with RADC Pogram 11anager(s)..
4.
Provide all program documentation and revisions cppropriate to the conduct of RADC efforts.
4 5.
Authorize direct RADC/RAC technical and systems engineering informa.-
~
tion exchanges with applicable contractors and/or power plant operators, upon request from RADC/RBE.
6.
Obtain authorization / access for RADC/RAC personnel to visit power plants, contractor's sites, etc.
7.
Provide funds to RADC which are require'd to carry out the requested efforts including reimbursement for direct support costs.
8.
Designate primary and alternate individual' in !!RC to act as contcct point f or IRC/RADC interf ace (names, symbols, telephone numbers to be maintained current).
B.
1.
Designate a lead system engineer responsible to the liRC program management office for all RADC cngineering tasks in support of the IRC Reliability.
Program Plan.
2.
Be responsible to IRC guidanc'e and direction'to produce the appro-priate contractual documentation to meet the overall objectives of the IRC efforts assigned to RADC for management and contractual responsibility.
3.
Provide an adequate staffing level to insure successful management and engineering eff ort required within the time constraints of the M0A.
4.
Provide l'RC program mancger with formal impact assessmcats of all
. a m__.
.2..
m.
RNIC cinitractual or tasking ch'abges considered by f4RC for implementation.
0 h'
s?
Advisc the faC project officer of significant events,' schedules and 5.
chedule changes, :najor problem arebs and other pertinent interf ace activities, f,
6.
Provide the IRC Pro.iect Officer with names, symbols and telephone numbers -of individuals'-and alternates who will act as contact points for the NRC/RAOC. interface.
7.
Provide contractor reports to the h'RC project officer.
8.
Prepare program / contractual program / contracting activity procedures.
documentation in accordance v.ith RAL 9.
Supply timely and meaningful input to the liRC reliability program and mai-ntain an awareness of the overall program progress.
.IV.
COM!iUlilCAT10'lS:
The primary point of contact within the respective organizations shahl be:
Program Office Primary - fir. Ashok C. Thedani Project Officer l'RC, Wash DC 20555 (301) 492-8090 Alternate - l'r.
Charles itorris Technical lionitor liRC, Wash DC 20555 (301) 492-8090 RADC/ Lead Engineer lir. Charles F. Bough RADC/RDE Grif.fiss /EB !!Y 13441 S.
',,l.
,'(31.5) 330-4921 RADC/ Technical fianagem2nt Branch fir. Ray Allen RADC/ DOT Griffiss AFD 11Y 13441 (315) 330-3046 V.
TERijS OF,AGPEEl4EffT:
This 140A will be effective on the latest date set forth on page 1 of the AFSC Form 607.
This agreement will be kept current, reviewed and updated as necessary on cn annual basis and will remain effective until superseded or cancelled by mutual agreement of both parties.or program completion / termination whichever oc-curs first..
(,
o O %
g s
9,
1,.0 INTRODUCTION _
The purpose of this study program is to develop a total (life-cycle) reliability program plan than can be implemented by construction permit (CP) cpplicants and operating reactor licenses (OL) in order to enhance the The reliability of safety systems and their supporting auxiliary systems.
program plan must be based on accepted reliability practices but must be extended, modified or otherwise tailored to the unique characteristics of The nuclear power systems and the environment in which they operate.
reliability program plan, as delineated in the statement of work, is "(1) to provide additional assurance that availability is designed into the plant systems at an early stage in order to enhance safety, and (2) to f
define a disciplined, systematic approach'to the' implementation of proven,
reliability techniques without impacting excessively upon the plants' current car. figuration.".The elements of the plan are to be complete with
{
criteria and guidelines that are compatible with life-cycle reliability data and information generated by the nuclear industry.
Development of the plan will involve a thorough survey and review of reliability programs utilized currently by the nuclear and non-nuclear
(
fields.
Effort includes surveying the total nuclear power generating industry (such as, utilities, architect-engineering firms, nuclear / steam system supply, vendors, and nuclear industry supportive technical organizations such as EPRI, INP0 and the Clinch River Breeder Program office) to determine reliability programs and practices currently being l
utilized; reviewing standards, methods and practices employed by non-
{
nuclear power generating utilities and Government agencias such as NASA, DoD and FAA; screening the information'for applicability of reliability 5
program elements to nuclear power plant safety systems; and prcparing the overall program plan that includes elements for planning and implementing 6
i reliability engineering practices during design, construction and plant
[
operation.
-This program will lead to a final report that provides the program plan including all applicable reliability engineering elements, guidelines and practices.
r.
1
-l
- g '
53 It is envisioned that implementation of a reliability program plan is
. the first effort in a multi-step effort by NRC to help engineer reliability into the safety systems.
The program plan would describe reliability
]
control elements that can be applied during design, construction and plant operation, and define applicable management administrative control functions consistent with the regulatory and licensing process.
Once the plan has been completed and accepted by NRC, the next logical step in further establishing NRC's reliability program would be developing actual prediction models and analysis tools / procedures complete with forms and data for implementation. The analysis tools would be based on availability and reliability analysis procedures that specifically reflect nuclear I
safety systems and failure characteristics, and long term environmental application factors.
Several analysis toals can be formulated covering l
re}iability prediction, failure modes and effects analysis, degradation
~]
analysis and control, failure analysis and reliability growth methods once a nuclear reliability model and overall method have been established.
Procedures used by the industry, as reviewed and evaluated during this proposed study, can be tailored to meet the needs and constraints of the NRC reliability program.
Perhaps,'also, as with NASA, DoD and the FAA, k
detailed and comprehensive reliability guidebooks that reflect the unique design / application characteristics of nuclear power systems and components could be prepared and disseminated to the nuclear industry. The guidebooks l
would define the methodology of reliability, describe reliability trade-
)
off considerations, provide suggested engineering procedures for perform-l ing the engineering tasks delineated in the program plan and, in general,
}
provide data and information that can aid in planning, evaluating and monitoring life-cycle system reliability programs.
Critical to the establishment of NRC's reliability program is the l
development of the proposed program plan.
These elements will cover system, hardware and operational reliability considerations as outlined in I
the 50W. Some of the considerations that would be stressed in formulating i
the plan and selecting / developing the program elements are.
O.
1 h.
l 2
'l
o Performance of detailed analyses and trade-off studies to establish reliability and maintainability designs and parameters consistent with specified requirements during system design.
o Definitions and implementation of a management and control
]
program that enables reliability personnel to influence design,
^
provide timely outputs consistent with major design and program decisions, and provides the means to develop nuclear power systems and components that meet plant safety requirements.
'f systematic and highly disciplined o
Continual application e
reliability engineering tasks du-ing the design phase to identify and correct problems.
Early reliability development and growth testing of critical 0
equipment and components.
The test program would emphasize failure analysis and corrective action and would be based on a test cycle that reflects the actual power plant environments, including mechanical (vibration) stresses and temperature / hum-idity extremes.
o Implementation of a
reliability assurance program during system /ccmponent fabrication and plant construction.
This program would include controls and procedures that allows a smooth transition frca design to construction without degrading reliability, and emphasizes " nondestructive" testing at critical stages in the overall ftbrication/ construction process.
h Assessment / tracking of reliability during plant operation and o
the performance of physical analyses of operational failures to
]
identify and correct root causes.
J The general approach to developing the program plan involves:
1.
Acquiring detail data and information through' in-depth personnel interviews with representatives from the nuclear and non-nuclear d
industries (utilities), and other agencies such as NASA, DoD and FAA and others who are active in reliability design and
~
implementation methodology.
1 3
~
p Reducing and analyzing all data and information and preparing a 2.
summary technical report.
Preparing criteria / guidelines to develop an effective, viable
- 3. _
and practicable NRC reliability program plan.
Reviewing the criteria / guidelines (and survey findings) with NRC 4.
and iterating as necessary.
Formulating the proposed reliability program plan based on the 5.
final criteria / guidelines..
Section 2.0 of this proposal presents the Program Plan for conducting this study. The project team anticipates no difficulties in performing the work as required per the statement of work and believes that the program can be pursued with a high degree of success, in the time frame established.
~
e s
9 h
b e
k n*
k t
?
t N[
r-c k
4
e 9
2.0 PROGRAM PLAN In order to fulfull the objectives of this proposed study and to as delineated in NRC's provide. the. required output, the work effort, statement of work, consists of two (2) major tasks:
Task 1 - Conduct Survey / Evaluation of Reliability Techniques Task 2 - Development of Reliability Program Plan The proposed approach and plan for the conduct of each task and subtask are ' given in the paragrpahs below.
A performance plan which depicts the time frame for the overall program and each of the study tasks is given in Section 3.0, " PROGRAM SCHEDULE." The plan also indicates the schedule of reports and meetings.
Task 1 - Conduct Survey / Evaluation of Reliability Techniques 2.1 The operating utilities, architect-engineering (AE)
- firms, nuclear /stesn system supply vendors, nuclear industry supportive technical organizations such as EPRI and INP0, Clinch River Breeder Program Office, l
the non-nuclear industries (utilities), and other' organizations such as DoD, NASA and the FAA, will be surveyed to gain an in-depth knowledge of the extent, effectiveness, usefulness and applicability of current reliability practices to meeting the needs of nuclear power plant supply The organizations to be surveyed will be discussed with, an f systems.
approved by, NRC, a priori. The survey will be performed through a combin-ation of telephone conversations, letter inquiries, and extensive visits f
to selected sites to obtain the necessary reliability information, data The survey will be conducted within the framework of and documentation.
the elements listed in the statement of work and the general approach discussed below:
1.
System Reliability Considerations and Analysis 9
Reliability Prediction / Apportionment / Assessment A.
Current methods will be identified and evaluated for their effectiveness, usefulness and their applicability to b
5 i
)
meeting the reliability prediction, apportionment and assessment needs of nuclear safety systems.
The survey will address such considerations as how the methods are 1
applied to: (1) establish sub-system / component reliability goals, (2) provide quantitative measures of reliability I
during the development process and (3) to determine where T
the design can be improved.
Effort would include 0
evaluating the usefulness of the methods in aiding design trade-off decisions, providing criteric for planning (and verifying) reliability growth and demonstration tests, i
)
establishing the need for redundancy, identifying single failure points and providing quantitative input for early spare provision plans.
Effort would also include evaluating system models that show the reliability 4
interconnection and the' subsystems and components and the component failure rates used to support reliability 1
predictions; techniques used to apportion reliability 1
requirements and to set goals among subsystems and components; and actual test / field data used to assess 7
achieved reliability.
4.
B.
Maintainability Prediction / Assessment The survey will address how current maintainability prediction / assessment methods are applied to establish subsystem / component maintainability
- goals, provide a
quantitative measure of how easily a design can be J
maintained and to determine where the design can be improved.
In addition, the effectiveness of the methods to aid design tradeoff decisions, plan and varify test methods 7
+
and provide input for early spare.provisioning plans will J
be assessed.
Efforts also include evaluating maintenance level diagrams, work factors, repair time data (e.g.,
determined via maintenance analysis)' and repair frequencies (e.g., based on component failure rates) used to support maintainability predictions; techniques to apportion
],
maintainability requirements and set maintainability goals among subsystems and components; and actual test and fieid data (repair time / failure rates) used to assess achieved maintainability.
C.
System Interface 1
System analysis techniques will be as,sessed for their effectiveness and usefulness in evaluating system interfaces and compatibility between subsystems / components q
particularly to determine the consequences of failure or it malfunction on overall system reliability. The survey will address such considerations as how the methods are applied qL to determine the need for redundancy and fail safe design features, identify single failure points, identify critical items and to assure subsystem / component compatibility.
In addition the effectiveness of the methods in providing w
6 4
~
l input to reliability ' and maintainability models/predic-
~
l I
tions, identifying remedial action priorities, identifying 1
critical
- items, defining failure detection / evaluation 4
. methods and providing key inputs for developing maintenance strategies and plans will be assessed.
Among the rg -
system / interface analyses that would be addressed are 4
Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Failure Modes and Effects Criticality Analysis (FMECA),
Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) and sneak circuit analysis.
Efforts would include evaluating the extent, depth and rigor of:
(1)
~
FMEA/FMECA procedures (bottom-up process to identify the effects and criticality of component failure modes) and the
}
basic data and information (e.g., from design configur-ations, component engineering and part failure rates from prediction studies) used to support the resulting (2) structural process; models (logical "and" and "or" q
4 symbols and failure events) used to support fault tree analysis (top-down process to identify system / component failure modes); and (3) sneak path analysis techniques that y
4 are applied to further locate and ultimately force out potential malfunctions, that occur without component failure, due to the existence of a sneak circuit or latent path.
i
- D.- -
Trade-Off Study
-~
-C'urrent methods and tachniques to help make R&M trade-off decisions, involving the evaluation of design alternatives as well as the determination of the most effective program / test requirements will be. reviewed for effective-ness / applicability.
The survey will address, for example, how trade-off studies are performed to determine the wh MTBF/MTTR mix for critical subsystems and components that would achieve maximum availability most effectively.
Efforts will include evaluating sensitivity curves and
]
other data which would show the break point for R&M parameters (such as cocponent technology,
- quality, redundancy, diagnostics, screening, etc.), as well as for T
R&M program test control elements and engineering tasks with respect to availability and cost.
3 E.
Independent Design Review (IDR) 9 The usefulness and applicability of proc'edures applied to systematically review performance, reliability, maintain-6 abi'iity and various other system characteristics at major design and testing decision points will be evaluated.
The survey will address the adequacy and completeness of 3
checklists developed to support design review and provice a disciplined means for formal assessment of the design effort.
Efforts will include evaluating the checklists q
(particularly R&M criteria established at various design phases and levels of detail) for adequacy of such items as:
u 7
m
l.
)
l-3 o
Program plans o
R&M allocation, predictions and assessments o
Identification and evaluation of critical l
components o
Test plans and procedures
'1 o
Maintenance concepts i
o Subsystem and component specifications o
Remedial actions o
Single Point Failure (SPF) assessment o
FMEA/FMECA/FTA/ sneak circuit analysis or other techniques to surface hidden system faults i
o
-Failure analysis reports
]
o Crowth test data 0
Production reliability assurance plans o
Supplier control methods F}
o Configuration management o
Documentation and reports 3
In addition, the survey will assess the methods employed to 4
control the IDR's, including the thoroughness of deficiency follow-up control procedures.
u h
2.
Hardware Reliability Specifications A.
Hardware Specification y
H Techniques and approaches to establish effective and viable
~
hardware R&M specif.ications wjll be identified and l
evaluated for applicability to nuclear safety systems. The 4
establishment of R&M requirements, controls and engineering program tasks are an essential element of the hardware n
i development process.
The specifications, in general, must j
satisfy system safety requirements, operational availabil-ity needs, and also reflect requirements that are attain-able within the state-of-the-art.
Effort will include
.)
assessing how quantitative requirements are established by the various organizations and how the requirements are formulated into a hardware specification that reflects an
[
effective balance of the various demands.
B.
Hardware Selection 5
Basic procedures and criteria applied to selected system hardware will be reviewed for applicability. Hardware must be selected based on proven R&M and life characteristics 1
and demonstrated acceptability to meet system needs.
This is generally accomplished by thoroughly reviewing hardware failure rate and n,cda data, considering subsystem / component 3
interfaces (particularly between R&M parameters and the system design and development process), evaluating logistic factors and examining the supplier's background or prior
}
experience in the R&M and related areas.
The survey will address specific techniques, guidelines and criteria 8
[
v
~
applied by the various organizations to select critical
. hardware items.
j f
C.
Screening i
Metnods, techniques and guidelines to plan and implement hardware screening and burn-in programs will be identified L
and evaluated for their effectiveness and applicability.
Screening involves the application of stress during hard-ware production on a 100% basis for the purpose of
.l t
revealing inherent, as well as workmanship and process-
' induced, defects without weakening or destroying the hardware.. Screen test. profiles, time durations, acceptance criteria and other elements and controls will be reviewed.
(
la addition, the survey will evaluate methodologies and c
techniques to plan optimum screen programs that effectively
{
reveal defects wihtout weakening or degrading the hardware and to determine the most effet.tive burn-in time periods.
u Criteria / guidelines.will be rey.iewed for planning and 7
applying screens and burn-in tests at various levels of I
assembly (e.g.,part, board, equipment, system). Also pro-cedures/ criteria to increase, reduce or eliminate screening based on subsequent test / field experience factors will be L
evaluated.
u D.
Production Degradation Control I
Techniques to control reliability during manufacturing, to minimize degradatica of intrinsic or designed-in relia-bility and to accelerate reliability growth will be evalu-
~
I ated. The survey will assess methods of control, including techniques to isolate intrinsic and induced defects in a manner such that special inspections or screens can be i
applied to eliminate the defects.
Included will be the evaluation of special tests, screens and various other control procedures at various stages of assembly and under various production conditions.
Emphasis will be placed c.n 3
evaluating failure analysis and data collection programs t
(which consist of the failures reported during manufac-turing tests / inspections and actual experience during
(
operation life) and how the data is applied to modify aad improve the manufacturing process in response to exrar-ience.
+
3.
System Operations Considerations
[
A.
Maintenance Policy / Practices and Strateoy
~
Basic maintenance policies, practices and strategies will y
be ruviewed including various maintenance concepts, main-J tenance personnel skill levels, support equipment require-ments, logistics, training repair management, maintenance manuals and support data and other maintenance parameters.
s e
F-9
1 1
Effort will include assessing the rationale / cost benefits of the maintenance parameters and evaluating techniques for establishing preventive maintenance frequencies, correc-1 tive maintenance procedures, fault detection / isolation 4
methods and, in general, controlling downtime over the entire service life of the system.
)
B.
Replacement Strategy Various replacement strategies will be reviewed including
}
those based on t.ime (or number of cycles) constraints as well as those based on the operational condition of the hardware..
Effort will include reviewing methods and rationale for establishing replacement criteria (time /
}
condition factors), throwaway concepts, and verification that replacement was accomplished prcper'iy, and that the hardware is restored'to full operational integrity.
}
C.
Reliability Growth Program aj Methods applied to analyze, correct, improve and, in general, grow reliability will be reviewed.
Included will be the review of automatic nonitoring functions designed to i
]
survey selected system performance parameters or operating conditions (such as temperature) in order to detect impending system / component malfunction and to make (or 1'
allow)compensatingadjustmentsorcorrections. The survey will address the extent and depth of built-in hardware diagnostics, the application of end-to-end verification
-3 tes. ting, and t,he rigor and thoroughness of failure / data LJ analysis procedures.. Failure / data' analysis procedures and activities will be reviewed to assess the adequacy of: (1) analysis techniques to determine root causes as they relate
)
to various hardware
. technologies; (2) statistical techniques to isolate infant mortality, randem and wearout failures and to establish trends, and; (3) control methcds
]
to thoroughly define personnel responsibilitics, scheduling requirements, depth of analysis activities, reporting
- forms, feedback mechanisms and output 1
requirements particularly relative to assessing achieved
-d R&M parameters.such as mean time between failure (MTBF) and mean time to repair (MTTR).
This final result will be the 1
identification of critical components and areas for
,1 improvements, and the assessment of overall reliability growth.
Prior to performing the actual survey, effort vill be directed. toward further establishing the basic survey approach and defining the specific
]
data and information to be obtained from the survey.
Organizations and individuals to be contacted will be identified ar.d checklists will be 3
10
~
h' designed to facilitate the gathering of information on the reliability practices and control elements planned and applied by the nuclear /non-
}.
nuclear industry.
The checklists will include:
questions or checks covering basic reliability organizational information (description,
}
functions, relation to the functions, steff size, etc.); the requirements that the organization has to meet (specifications, regulations, standards, m
etc.); the types and ef fectiveness of the reliability practices and program elements as discussed above; current system / component reliability performance (or outage) data and documentation describing the reliability program and engineering methods ( i.~e., program plans, specification, procedures, definitions, perfor=ance indices, etc.).
It is envisioned that at least two complete and fairly detailed
]
checklists will be designed and, once approved by NRC, used as the basis for the on-site visits.
One of the checklists will deal with the
]
application and effectiveness of reliability methods, practices, specifi-cation methods, program control provisions, data collection efforts and test techniques from the nuclear power system aanufacturers, AE firms, utilities and plant operators' standpoint.
The other checklist will be aimed at the application and effectiveness of methods and practices i
cmployed by the non-nuclear industry (utilities), and other organizations (t;ASA,DoD,FAA).
~
In addition to the information obtained from the survey, published
)
R&M standards, specifications, handbooks and technical articles will t,e reviewed and evaluated for tethod and/or provisions that may be either T
directly applied or can be easily modified or tailored to meet the needs of NRC.
Documents to be screened for applicability will include those
]
published by organizations directly associated with the nuclear power generating industry, as well as others prepared and published by DoD, NASA, FAA, and non-nuclear power utilities. Examples of some of the documents to be evaluated are included in the appendix.
k d
Based an the information collected, reviewed and evaluated during the survey, reliability methods, control elements and engineering tasks considered applicable to the design, construction and operation of nuclear 1
w I
11 m
I safety systems will be defined. The intent is to prepare a composite list i-of recommended reliability engineering practices and program control pro-
)
visions that can be applied to a reliab'ility program in support of planning l
and operation of nuclear safety systems. Emphasis will be directed toward
}
defining effective and viable reliability program elements and practices j
covering system, hardware and operation categories delineated in the S0W.
This task will be organized.anto two subtasks.
Task la - Initial Sursey and Preliminary Results Includes:
(a) establishing the survey approach
]
(b) developing the checklists and submitting to NRC for l
approval'
)
(c) conducting on-site visits to selected nuclear l
organizations (approved by NRC) such as operating utilities, A-E firms, nuclear / steam system supply vendors, INPO, EPRI and the Clinch River Breeder Program Office
~
(d) reviewing / screening collected infccmation for applicability to NRC program (e) preparing a subtask report that, describes the survey approach, includes and summarizes the results of the J
_ initial survey, and provides a preliminary evaluation of those results.
l Task Ib - Additional Survey Results and Final Evaluation
]
Includes:
(a) conducting on-site visits to non-nuclear power generating utilities and Government
- agencies,
.1 including DoD, ASA, and FAA
^
- l. 7 (b) conducting on-site visits to additional, selected J
nuclear agencies h
(c) reviewing / screening collected information for applicability to NRC program (d) preparing a Final Report that summarizes and evaluates the results of the Task 1 activities.
53 12
m r
j*
The Task 1 Final Report will describe how the survey was performed, the crganizations contacted, an assessment of '.hc cepth and completeness of the survey and an evaluation of the results including the potential
}'
Tne significant chara'cteristics of each benefit to the nuclear industry.
program element will be described, and a matrix will be compiled for each element which provides a tabulation of the following information:
o Evaluation of
- results, potential benefits (verification),
approach vulnerability, availability of documentation, etc.
Description of technique, covering objective, approach, scope,
)
o function, procedure, etc.
o Assessment (and verification) of expected benefits / effec-
]
tiveness Applicability to the nuclear industry and applicable life cycle o
}
phase (i.e., design, constructicn, operation) o Relative strong point and weaknesses, or technological inadequacies, in terms of application to the NRC reliability l
program
]
Complexity, practicality, including availability of documented o
I procedures
)
o Resource requirements ana' lysis
]
A draft table of contents will first be prepared and submitted to NRC for j
approval prior to preparation of the final report.
]
2.2. Task 2 - Development of Reliability Plan Using the data and information compiled, developed, and evaluated The during Task 1, the proposed Reliability Program Plan will be prepared.
plan will be consistent with current design and construction plans and wil1 exclude quality assurance and design review programs already covered by h
NRC regulations (10.CFR 50, App. B).
IF The plan will be formulated into two major parts; one addressing the CP and OL applicants covering Categories 1
(System Reliability
[
Considerations and Analysis) and 2 (Hardware Reliability Considerations) l 13 L
h*
, of Task 1; the other addressing operating reactor licensees covering Category 3 (System Opertional Considerations) of Task 1.
Targets will be defined for the immediate implementatio1 of certain program elements, as well as for expansion to a full nuclear energy reliability operating pro. gram where all elements are implemented.
Administrative guidelines, including organizational functions and administrative control and implementation procedures, will also be defined.
3 aJ The plan will fully describe.the control elements and practices considered applicable to nuclear safety systems and identify the life cycle phase to which they apply. The plan will cover system, hardware and h
operation elements as delineated in the 50W.
Each element will be developed and described in the program plan to such an extent that it will
]
clearly project the purpose, implementation activities, interface with other program descriptions and the final product.
Prior to preparing the actual program plan, criteria and general guidelines (including a draft annotated table of contents) will first be 1
formulated for establishing a vi;ble and practical plan that meets the
~
current and long range needs of the NRC nuclear reliability program.
For
,b each of the re' ommended reliability engineering elements and practices c
defined during Task 1, current, as well as long range criteria, approaches, h
methods and/or techniques and general guidelines for their transfer or modification / tailoring will be defined. The criteria / guidelines and table
]
of contents vill be reviewed with NRC and iterated, as necessary, until an effective, viable and practical approach has been defined that fully
]
satisfies NRC needs.
g The reliability program plan will then be prepared based on the approved criteria / guidelines and outline. At the conclusion of this task, a Final Report will be prepared that provides the rationale for each g
L program element and presents the proposed NRC reliability program plan.
The final report will contain (per S0W):
o Purpose of program element h
It will specifically state the purpose qf each program element f
and its role in the overall reliability assessment program.
I 14
Q.
'o Implementation of program element The report will delineate the activities that the recipient or user of the guidelines should perform in order to satisfy the 9oal of the program element.
o Limitations Considering that a QA program is currently implemented by NRC as
]
well as an IDR program, the. bouridary limitations and/or interfaces will be covered for each program element.
Technical supporting rationale and logic as to why the recommended reliability program elements were included in the proposed relitbility program plan will be discussed.
The l
following areas will be justified and technically supported:
1.
Rationale for program element' selection 2.
Vulnerability of each program element selected i
3.
Negative aspects 4.
Potential implementation problems 5.
Rationale, logic for applicability to nuclear industry 6.
Benefits derived in terms of reliability growth.
ill 11 in la L1 Eil
j.
3.0 PROGRAM SHEDULE l-}
A schedule depicting the time frame of the overall program including
. technical review meetings, site visits, report submittals as well as for the performance of each task, and subtask is given in Figure 3-1. The schedule indicates that a business letter will be submitted monthly (by the y
15th of the month) to the cognizant Branch Chief with a copy to Director, DSI (Attn: J. Rakowski); M.
Err., t, DST; D.L.
Grenier, NRR, and the Contracting Officer, and that a technical report will be prepared and submitted upon completion of each task.
The monthly business letters will contain (per 50W):
1 o
A listing of any efforts completed during the period; milestones reached, or, if missed, an explanation provided;
}
o-The amount of funds expended for manpower, computer services, number of manhours expended during the period and o
cumulative to date for each task; o
Any problems or delays encountered or anticipated; o
A summary of the progress to date; o
Plans for'the next report period.
The technical reports will be prepared in accordance with NRC Publication NUREF-0550, Nov. 1979; they will present all pertinent
]
information generated during the study including the survey results, the NRC reliability program plan, as well as supporting descriptive rationale.
The project schedule will be assessed monthly for manpoaer requirements including team assignments, workload distribution, taskload priorities, etc., and revised as necessary.
51
?
El 16
M M
M H ~ A.me Jim.s I.a.J Am.J
&n.J iA 4A iA 4.and shed imod M
5ead name assi o
7 MONTHS AFTER AWARD 1
2 3
~4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 Task 1: Conduct Survey / Evaluation Task la - Initial curvey and preliminary results (a) establish survey approach (b) develop checklists (c).
conduct on-site visits (nuclear (d) review / screen information (e) prepare interim report Task Ib - Additional survey and final report (a) conduct on-site visits (non-
~
G nuclear)
I (b)
Conduct on-site visite (addi-tional nuclear)
(c) revleu/ screen information (d) prepare draft report i
(e) prepare task 1 final report j
i I
^
Task 2:
Develop Program Plan 4
(a) develop critoria/ guidelines (b) establich outline s
4 (c) prepare draft report (and plan; (d) prepare final report (and plan.
Plant Site Visits 4
-.4 -
Nuclear 8
Nun Nuclear Technical Review Meetingo with NRC A
A A
A A
A Business Letter Reports A
A A
A A
A A
A A
.A A
Technical Reports js
,g g
3 g
i FIGURE 3-1 PROGRAM SCHEDULE j
)
4.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION
]'
The proposed project, as shown in Figure 4-1, is organized to make use of a technical team having up-to-date experience in reliabii ny/ maintain-ability program planning and implementation disciplines as well as the nuclear licensing process. In structuring this proposal, RADC has taken a course which it believes will provide NRC with a cost effective, highly
]
responsive program that fully satisfies the requirements of the statement of. work. The proposed. program ha.s been organized to make use of appropriately mixed team members from the IIT Research Institute and consulting organizations that have direct experience in the reliability program planning and implementation disciplines as well as the nuclear licensing process. The program will be conducted in DoD's Reliability
]
Analysis Center (RAC) under the overall' administration of Dr.
C.
Ehrenfried, Director. Dr. Ehrenfried will provide assistance to the assigned technical team leader on day-to-day control and staffing, and
]
will periodically review costs and the program budget. This control will be performed, as needed, between the technical leader and the RAC Director.
?
Significant results of,these meetings will be do::umented in the monthly reports.
As shown in Figure 4-1, Mr. J.'J. Naresky has been asigned technical leader of the proposed project. Mr. Naresky brings to the program a long
]
history of techical experience in widely diversified research and development programs to advance the state-of-the-art and provide
]
completely new capabilities in system R&M analysis. His most recent work involves. preparing a detailed and comprehensive handbook covering the latest, most effective and innovative reliability engineering techniques
]
and methods applicable to both systems and components. The methods and techniques that he is investigating and futher developing for incorporation into the handbook will be reviewed for possible application to the proposed study. As technical leader, Mr. Naresky will be responsible for successful conpletion of all project tasks.
Mr. R. Anderson and Mr. A Garrou will participate in the program as l
shown in Figure 4-1.
Mr. Anderson has over 20 years experience in the fields of R&M involving aerospace, military, industrial, medical and I
18
Yn Y
O*
i l
NRC RADC C. Botsch DoD's RELIABILITY' ANALYSIS CENTER (RAC) l I
TECHNICAL I
l TEtji LEADER g
J. Naresky (IITRI:
1 I
1
- 8. Reich l
~
{
Other Support l
1 I
.l l
i R. ANDERSON (RTA) +--
+
A. CARROU (ETA) l l
1 1
I I
t e
FIGURE 4-1 Proposed Project Organization
l L
consercial products.
He has planned, implemented and directed numerous o
R&M assessment, study efforts and programs covering such activities as:
prediction and
- analysis, failure mode
- analysis, environmental and reliability testing, data collection and reduction, quality / reliability assurance control and life cycle cost analyses.
Pts most recent work involved assessing reliability and quality assurance practices in the
.(
electric power generating industry, developing reliability engineering methods for photovoltaic modules, and preparing R&M planning and Mr.
implementation guidebooks for the Federal Aviation Adminstration.
' Anderson will coordinate technical outputs of supporting team members.
Mr. Garrou has over seven years experience as a Nuclear Engineer covering a wide range of activities including security system analysis and regulatory engineering (with responsibility for nuclear licensing tasks).
He is familiar with several operating nuclear power plants including Prair'ie Island 1 and 2, River Bend Units 1 and 2 and North Anna Units 3 and Mr. Garrou will have major responsibilities for that portion of Task 1 4.
dealing with survey and evaluation of nuclear sites.
Several other specialists in the reliability area, as depicted in j
Figure 4-1, are available to support the program, and would be called upon to augment the project team, as needed.
+ - - -
a g
i '.
ATTACHMENT II
~
4 BILLING INSTRUCTIONS FOR NRC/RADC INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT General.
shall submit vouchers for cost-reimbursement in the following manner.
~ 7orm. Claims shall be submitted on the Standard Form 1060, Voucher for Transfers Between. Appropriations and/or Funds.
Number of Copics.
An original and four copies shall be mailed to the NRC of fice identified below.
Frequency.
shall submit claims for reimbursement once each quarter.
Billing of Costs Af ter Expiration of Agreement.
If cost-reimbursements are incurred during the agreement period and claibed after agreement has expired, the period during which these costs were incurred must be cited.
Preparation and Itemization of the Voucher.
shall furnish the infor=a-tion set forth in the explanatory notes balow.
(a) Payor's Name and Address.
Address the original vcucher (with copies) to:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co= mission, Divisio,n of Accounting, Office of the Controller, ATTN: GOV /COM Accounts Section, kashington, DC 20555; (b) Voucher Number.
Insert the appropriate serial number of the voucher.
Thia must be in s'equential order beginning with 001 as the number ec be used for the first voucher submitted under this agreement.
(c) Date of Voucher.
Inset t the date the voucher is prepared.
(d) Contract Namber and Date.
Insert the ISSA number and the effective
'date of the agreement.
(..
(
i
[$
(e) Payee's Name and Address.
Show the name and address of RADC and include name of voucher preparer and telephone number.-
(f) -Billing Period.
Insert the beginning 'and ending dates (day, month, and year) of the period in which costs were incurred and for~which reimburse-
]-
-ment is claimed.
(g). Billing Detail.
Insert the major. cost elements as follows:
~(g) (1) Direct Labor. This c.ansists of salaries and vages paid (or accrued) for dire:t performance of the contract.
(g) (2) Materials and Supplies.
This is consumable materials and supplies and equipment. Specify separately all items over $1.000.
y
' (g) (3)
Other.- List all other direct costs.
(g) (4)
Overhead.
Show that amount of the billing which is overhead.
(h) - Amount Billed for Current Period.
Insert the amount billed for
-adjustments and adjusted amounts for the period.
e V
A
- gh 2,6 e
e e
f
~
, __