1. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry and the CMBG
Presented By:
John Parler
CMBG Steering Committee
Brief History of Nuclear Configuration Management in the US
CMBG’s role in that history
CM documents
CM Fundamentals Workshop this afternoon. Discuss the concepts and processes mentioned in this presentation in more detail.
Presentation is somewhat chronological with some segways along the way

2. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
Configuration Management in military and aerospace industry geared towards product conformance to facilitate interchangeability of parts while still satisfying the overall design requirements
MIL-STD-973 (1992), ”Configuration Management” (later replaced by ANSI/EIA )
First couple of slides are focused on U.S. govt CM initiatives
Military CM started in the post WWII era of jet aircraft development.
Many contractors and parts manufactures involved.
Rapidly evolving designs.

3. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
DOE STD “Configuration Management”
Applicable to DOE nuclear facilities in the operational phase.
DOE-STD-1073 was updated in 2003
DOE had numerous facilities for handling nuclear materials and needed to define controls of the processes to change these facilities.
This became the early model for nuclear CM

4. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
Nuclear plants in mid 60’s to early 80’s typically designed by AEs under contract
Final design documents typically turned over to the utility at the end of construction
Little knowledge transfer of design info to utility engineering organization
Utilities struggled to deal with long term design maintenance and related document upkeep
Commercial nuclear power
Not much structure – Get the documents and dump them into Records

5. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
Early indicators that the nuclear plant design basis knowledge was becoming disconnected from the physical plant
IE Bulletin uncovered
calculation discrepancies
undocumented modifications
document discrepancies
as-built problems
A series of commercial nuclear industry events led to regulatory actions.
IE- NRC Inspection and Enforcement bulletins are predecessors to Generic Letters
IE Bulletin was focused on hangers/pipe supports

6. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
Salem ATWS event (1983)
Generic implications identified in NUREG-1000 and NRC Generic Letter 83-28
compliance with vendor recommendations
part and procurement issues
vendor manual controls
Industry initiatives by INPO, NUMARC and EPRI to provide guidance and consistency
INPO recently formed following 1979 TMI accident.
Salem event – Feb SG low low level event and there was no trip.
Happened twice in a couple of weeks.
Challenged the Reactor Protection System.

7. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
Davis Besse Loss of Feedwater event (1985)
Led to NRC Safety System Functional Inspections (SSFIs) and NUREG-1154
difficulties maintaining operational readiness of safety systems
lack of understanding design bases
Voluntary design basis reconstitution, DBDs and self-evaluation
NUREG-1397, NUMARC , INPO and NUREG/CR-5147
Bottom Line it lead to:
A range of industry regulation and guidance issued as a result of these inspections.
NUREG 1397 and NUMARC Design control and design reconstitution\
INPO and NUREG/CR-5147 Fundamentals for CM program for Design control

8. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
Browns Ferry (1985)
Browns Ferry fire in Unit 1 (1975) led to changes in NRC standards for Fire Protection
All three Browns Ferry units shut down voluntarily in March 1985 due to CM related problems - containment isolation testing (Unit 1), reactor water level instrumentation (Unit 2)
Unit 1 restarted in May 2007 after 22 year shutdown
Led to creation of Appendix R to 10CFR50
“Train Seperation”

9. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
NRC specialized SSFIs for safety systems
Electrical Systems (EDSFI)
Service Water Systems (SWOPI)
SECY : intent to issue generic letter to require utilities to address how they were dealing with the problems - withdrawn
SSFI’s (Safety System Functional Inspection) in late 80’s
SSFI concept developed by NRC as another means to find deficiencies in the industry. Used as a proactive deep dive into utility programs/ processes.
Revealed serious CM problems existed. Utility documentation, change control, information accuracy, retrievability was very poor.
SECY is a letter from the NRC secretary.

10. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
Nuclear Information and Records Management Association (NIRMA) CM Committee developed solution
control of technical information by engineering and operations personnel
mature records management and document control process
PP “Position Paper on Configuration Management Program”
In the early ’90s
Mostly focused on control of the Paper.

11. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
First Nuclear CM benchmarking conference hosted by PPL Susquehanna in Fall 1994
Forum to exchange information on CM processes and methods at work in the industry
17 US utilities were represented
Each utility made presentation about their CM program
No motivational speeches
No sales promotions by service providers
So here’s where CMBG comes into the picture.
The next several slides focus on the history and operations of CMBG

12. The CMBG Idea Grows
Interest from industry to hold another similar conference
Second conference hosted by Ontario Hydro in 1995
Drafted plans for continuing organization - approved in 1996
Adopted name: Configuration Management Benchmarking Group
Formed Steering Committee
Wrote Mission Statement “…forum for peer-level information sharing…”
Defined ground rules for holding future conferences

13. CMBG is not affiliated with any other single organization
Independent of regulatory and oversight agencies
Conference costs are paid by registration fees and supplemented by host utility
Web site developed
Activities limited to information exchange
Written Principles and Practices guide our endeavors.
P & P’s on CMBG.org website

14. CMBG Conferences Year Host Location 1994 PP&L Poconos, PA
1995 Ontario Hydro Ontario, Canada
1996 Houston Lighting & Power Galveston, TX
1997 Commonwealth Edison Chicago, IL
1998 NAESCO Boston, MA
1999 Duke Power Charlotte, NC
2000 Consolidated Edison Tarrytown, NY
2001 Progress Energy Raleigh, NC
2002 PSEG Nuclear Atlantic City, NJ
2003 PPL Susquehanna Hershey, PA
2004 Wolf Creek Nuclear Kansas City, KS
2005 First Energy Cleveland, OH
2006 Dominion Richmond, VA
2007 SCE&G Charleston, SC
2008 Pacific Gas and Electric Shell Beach, CA
Entergy Boston, MA
Duke Energy Charlotte, NC
PSEG Nuclear Philadelphia, PA
Exelon Chicago, IL
2013 Southern Co. Atlanta, GA
CMBG Conferences
Make a pitch of prospective future sites for CMBG. Talk to steering committee members if potentially interested. Provides great industry and regulator visibility of your fleet/ station’s commitment to CM.

15. CMBG Accomplishments Annual Conferences
Participation in development of industry documents (e.g.; ANSI-NIRMA CM , INPO AP-929, INPO AP-932)
Web Site (
CMBG history
Conferences (proceedings from all previous conferences and info on upcoming conference)
Steering Committee members
IAEA Activities
CM Links
Papers and publications
CMBG Google Group

16. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
NIRMA TG
“ Configuration Management of Nuclear Facilities”
Built on the NIRMA PP-02 document
Presented elements and attributes that facilities needed to establish of a good CM program.
Later became basis for ANSI/NIRMA CM
Criteria
Program management
Design requirements
Information Control
Change control
Assessment
Training
TG= Technical Guide
Effort driven out of early CMBG conferences with involvement of participants in Tech Guide development.

17. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
INPO AP-929 (1998)
“Configuration Control Process Description”
Focused on changes to plant configuration
AP’s were intended to apply to the expected next generation of nuclear reactors. INPO applied these guidelines to existing nuclear fleet.
Again CMBG participants worked with INPO on development of this document.

18. CMBG Contributions to Industry CM Guidance Documents
ANSI/NIRMA CM
“ Configuration Management of Nuclear Facilities”
Based on NIRMA TG-19
CMBG members participated in development, review and issuance.
Drafts reviewed at CMBG conferences
Criteria
Program management
Design requirements
Information Control
Change control
Assessment
Training

19. CMBG Contributions to Industry CM Guidance Documents
2002 CMBG Conference - initiative to reach agreement between INPO and NEI documents
NEI CM Community of Practice (2002)
CM Process and PI’s included in NEI Standard Nuclear Performance Model (2003)

20. CMBG Contributions to Industry CM Guidance Documents
IAEA TECDOC-1335 (2003)
"Configuration Management in Nuclear Power Plants“
Contained elements of INPO AP-929 and ANSI/NIRMA CM-1.0
Criteria
Program management
Design requirements
Information Control
Change control
Assessment
Training
International Atomic Energy Agency

21. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
INPO - Margin Management (2003)
INPO reorganization emphasized, “Evaluating Configuration and Margin Management”
Functional/Design Failure
Greater than design basis range
Design margin
( This is a prohibited range of operation and represents the additional conservative margin to account for uncertainties in design and construction )
Design or Tech Spec Basis Limit
Analyzed transient range
( Design allows operation in the transient range. However operating restrictions consistent with the design, such as the magnitude and frequency of excursions into this range apply)
Operating Point Limit
Operating margin
Allowed operating range
( The allowed operating range provides the normal margins operators use without violating setpoints )
Normal Operating Point

22. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
INPO (November 2003)
“Performance Objectives and Criteria”
Configuration Management
CM.1 Maintaining Margins Consistent with Design Requirements
CM.2 Operational Configuration Control
CM.3 Design Change Processes
CM.4 Conduct of Engineering
CM.5 Reactor Engineering and Fuel Management
INPO began to focus on Configuration Management as a performance area.

23. A Brief History of CM in the Nuclear Industry
INPO (May 2005)
“Performance Objectives and Criteria”
Configuration Management
CM.1 Maintaining Margins Consistent with Design Requirements
CM.2 Operational Configuration Control
CM.3 Design Change Processes
CM.4 Reactor Engineering and Fuel Management
Moved the Conduct of Engineering PO&C to OP area. 23

24. CMBG Contributions to Industry CM Guidance Documents
INPO AP-929, Rev 1 (2005) “Configuration Management Process Description”
“Three-Ball model became “CM Equilibrium Model”
Return to CM Equilibrium
Margin Model

25. CMBG Contributions to Industry CM Guidance Documents
IAEA Draft Safety Report. “Application of Configuration Management in Nuclear Power Plants”
Contains elements of AP-929 (Rev 1)

26. CMBG Contributions to Industry CM Guidance Documents
ANSI/NIRMA Standard-CM-1.0, Rev 1 (August 2007) “Configuration Management of Nuclear Facilities”

27. CMBG Contributions to Industry CM Guidance Documents
INPO Good Practice Excellence in the Management of Design and Operating Margins
Developed with partnership of INPO and industry (including many CMBG participants)
Have had presentations and breakout sessions on this topic at past conferences.

28. What’s next?
CM Aspects of
Beyond Design Basis
Fukuschemia

29. The Next Big Thing in Nuclear CM
We need your help in identifying the CM issues important to our Nuclear Station Health
CM for new plants
CMBG is a forum for sharing lessons learned from the current generation of operating plants in developing CM controls/ processes for the next generation of the nuclear fleet
YOUR CMBG will continue to provide a forum for industry benchmarking on CM issues
Your participation and feedback are critical to keeping CMBG a meaningful forum for the industry.
New plants have a significant opportunity to learn from the mistakes/ successes of the existing fleet in the area of effective CM.
In addition to this conference, we encourage you to use the network available to you on our CMBG Google Group to benchmark the industry and share your plant’s approach to current issues in CM.
Another Plug for Hosting
And
Participation with presentations – breakouts.
Feedback on future suggestions