SOURCES SOUGHT
R -- Technical Assistance in Support of the Division of Safety Systems, Nuclear Performance & Code Review Branch Review of Topical Reports and Issue Resolution Activities
- Notice Date
- 10/28/2013
- Notice Type
- Sources Sought
- NAICS
- 541990
— All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
- Contracting Office
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Acquisition Management Division, Acquisition Management Division, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852-2738, United States
- ZIP Code
- 20852-2738
- Solicitation Number
- NRC-NRR-001
- Archive Date
- 11/12/2013
- Point of Contact
- Valerie M. Whipple, Phone: 301-415-1927
- E-Mail Address
-
valerie.whipple@nrc.gov
(valerie.whipple@nrc.gov)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- This is a Sources Sought Synopsis. THERE IS NO SOLICITATION AT THIS TIME. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) is conducting a market survey and analysis to determine the range of available contractors that exists and to assess their capabilities to assist the NRC in performing the scope of work described below. This request for capability information does not constitute a request for proposal. The NRC does not intend to award a contract on the basis of this request or to otherwise pay for the information solicited. The purpose of this announcement is to provide potential sources the opportunity to submit information regarding their capabilities to perform work for the NRC free of Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCOI). For information on NRC OCOI regulations, visit NRC Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR) Subpart 2009.5, entitled "Organizational Conflicts of Interest" (http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/contracting/48cfr-ch20.html). All interested parties, including all categories of small businesses (small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, 8(a) firms, women-owned small businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, and HUBZone small businesses) are invited to submit a response to the market research questions below and submit the capability information as described below. The capabilities package submitted by a vendor should demonstrate the firm's ability, capability, and responsibility to perform the principal components of work listed below. Submission of additional materials such as glossy brochures or videos is discouraged. Responses are due no later than 4:00 pm Eastern Standard Time (EST) on November 11, 2013. The Government will not reimburse respondents for any costs associated with submission of the requested information. Telephone inquiries or responses are not acceptable. Responses should be no longer than 15 pages in length. Responses should be sent via email to Valerie Whipple, Contracting Officer, at valerie.whipple@nrc.gov. The applicable North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code assigned to this procurement is 541990. The anticipated period of performance will be up to 5 years. Background The NRC is responsible for the licensing and regulatory oversight of civilian nuclear power reactors in the United States. The NRC implements regulations and develops and implements policies, programs, and procedures pertaining to all aspects of licensing and inspection of these facilities. The NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) is responsible for contributing to the regulatory mission of the NRC by providing lead in all licensing and inspection activities associated with the operation of existing nuclear power reactors and research and test reactor. NRR conducts a broad range of regulatory activities in the four primary program areas of rulemaking, licensing, oversight, and incident response for commercial nuclear power reactors, and test and research reactors to protect the public health, safety, and the environment. Division of Safety Systems (DSS) of NRR provides nuclear plant systems-related analysis to assess the regulatory and technical appropriateness of the changes to existing licenses (Technical Specification, TS) including amendments, exceptions and applications for new facilities or designs. This analysis focuses on plant safety-related (primary and secondary systems) and non-safety related systems (containment, ventilation and balance of plant), in-core performance of fuel, clad and fuel assembly, core physics, and core thermal hydraulic performance. DSS provides expertise for other related purposes such as specific safety issue resolution, specific inspections, and incident response. Also, DSS develops programs and guidelines to improve generic technical specifications and provides interpretations of technical specification requirements. Nuclear Performance and Code Review Branch (SNPB) of DSS is responsible for the review of transients and accident analyses that evaluates the thermal, mechanical and material design of the fuel system. The fuel system consists of arrays (assemblies or bundles) of fuel rods, including fuel pellets, insulator pellets, springs, tubular cladding, end closures, hydrogen getters, and fill gas; burnable poison rods including components similar to those in fuel rods; spacer grids and springs; end plates; channel boxes; and reactivity control rods. SNPB maintains the ability to review thermal-hydraulic and fuel performance related computer code models for operating reactors, together with the necessary staff technical expertise to run the models. The fuel system safety review provides assurance that (1) the fuel system is not damaged as a result of normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences (AOOs), (2) fuel system damage is never so severe as to prevent control rod insertion when it is required, (3) the number of fuel rod failures is not underestimated for postulated accidents, and (4) coolability is always maintained. General Design Criterion (GDC) 10, within Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50, also addresses item 1 above. Specifically, GDC 10 establishes specified acceptable fuel design limits (SAFDLs) that should not be exceeded during any condition of normal operation, including the effects of AOOs. Therefore, the SAFDLs are established to ensure that the fuel is not damaged, i.e., the fuel rods do not fail, fuel system dimensions remain within operational tolerances, and functional capabilities are not reduced below those assumed in the safety analysis. Standard Review Plan (SRP) (NUREG-0800) Section 4.2 describes all fuel design and damage criteria. Acceptance criteria fuel system design should meet the relevant regulatory requirements identified in SRP Section 4.2. Though compliance with SRP Section 4.2 is not required since SRP is not a substitute for NRC's regulations, the applicant is required to identify differences between the design features, analytical techniques, and procedural measures proposed for its methodology/facility and the SRP acceptance criteria and evaluate how the proposed alternatives to the SRP acceptance criteria provide acceptable methods of compliance with NRC regulations. SRP Chapter 15.0.2 provides guidance for transient and accident analyses methodology. This guidance can be extended to review of analytical models and computer codes used for other safety related areas, such as, in-core fuel performance methodology and computer code. SRP Chapter 15.0.2 provides acceptance criteria in the areas (i) Documentation, (ii) Evaluation model, (iii) Accident scenario identification process, (iv) Code assessment, (v) Uncertainty analysis, and (vi) Quality assurance plan. Acceptance criteria for these areas are listed in Section II of Chapter 15.0.2 of SRP. Detailed procedures for acceptance and detailed review are provided in Chapter 15.0.2, Section III of SRP. The reviewer for nuclear safety related methodology and code should document all findings in an evaluation model safety evaluation report (SER) that either accepts the evaluation model for the intended use or rejects the evaluation model. Acceptance may be subject to limitations determined during the review. If the evaluation model is to be accepted, it must be clearly demonstrated that the model is getting the right answer for the right reasons. The review process and the results of communications with the submitted code must also be documented as appropriate in the SER to provide a traceable history of the review process. Restrictions and limitations on use of the evaluation model must be explicitly documented in the SER. The SER must document areas that were reviewed, the method of review, and the findings in each area. The SER must also document areas that were not reviewed and provide the reasons for their omission. The specific regulations that establish criteria for fuel performance methodology and computer codes are (i) 10 CFR 50.46, 10 CFR 50.34, and 10 CFR 50.67 as they relate to cooling performance analysis of the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) using an acceptable evaluation model and establishing acceptance criteria for light water nuclear power ECCS and analysis and evaluation of the design and performance of structures, systems and components (SSC) of the facility with the objective of assessing the risk to public health and safety resulting from operation of the facility, (ii) 10 CFR 100 and 10 CFR 67, as they relate to determining the acceptability of a reactor site based on calculating the exposure to an individual as a result of fission product releases to the environment following a major accident scenario, (iii) GDC 10 as it relates to assuring that SAFDLs are not exceeded assuring that SAFDLs are not exceeded during any condition of normal operation, including the effects of AOOs, and (iv) GDC 27, as it relates to the reactivity control system being designed with appropriate margin and, in conjunction with the ECCS, being capable of controlling reactivity and cooling under post-accident conditions. The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) has been providing technical assistance to the Division of Safety Systems in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) in the area of fuel rod thermal-mechanical design and methodology for Boiling Water Reactors (BWR) and Pressurized Water Reactors. A typical fuel performance methodology and computer code submittal includes fuel rod evaluation methodology, SRP compliance, criterion for normal operation and AOOs, uncertainty analyses, PWR and BWR applications, and code calibration and validation. Capability Sought The NRC is seeking to identify commercial organizations capable of providing technical assistance in reviewing methodology and computer code for the realistic evaluation of the thermal-mechanical performance of fuel rods for BWRs and PWRs. The methodology and the computer code are applicable to the following fuel rod characteristics: • Fuel rods containing UO2, gadolinia-bearing UO2, or mixed oxide (MOX) fuel pellets, • PWR fuel rods fabricated with M5® or Zircaly-4 cladding, and • BWR fuel rods fabricated with Zircaloy-2 cladding in either the recrystallization annealed (RX) or stress-relief annealed (SR) condition. The second component of the realistic thermal-mechanical fuel rod performance methodology is the application of the code for evaluating the behavior of rods under normal operation and accident conditions. The methodology used in the code evaluates scenarios for normal operation and transients to quantify the margins relative to the design criteria in a statistical manner. The uncertainties considered in the methodology spans over the projected range of fuel operation for the fuel rods for parameters, such as, power histories, manufactured fuel rod parameter uncertainties, and the computer code model uncertainties. The statistical methodology that is employed in the analysis of fuel rod performance during normal operating and AOO conditions for a given fuel reload at any given power plant will show that the fuel meets the design criteria with a quantified probability. The methodology employs a random sampling of the power, manufacturing, and model uncertainties, similar to Monte Carlo method with the best-estimate code in conjunction with non-parametric statistics to evaluate the propagation of the uncertainties to the design analysis results. In order to calibrate and validate the fuel performance code and methodology results, the TR simulates the complex behavior of fuel rod and assesses a number of performance measures. Code calibration involves iteration between interrelated models to obtain an acceptable best-estimate prediction of the measured data. Validation of the code demonstrates that all aspects of the fuel rod behavior subject to fuel design criteria are well predicted in a best-estimate manner over the entire range of database. This means the validation process assures consistency between models by demonstrating that the interrelated fuel behavior for the different sets of test data is accurately predicted. The TR provides application examples to demonstrate the realistic fuel rod analysis methodology for several BWR and PWR reactors under normal operating conditions and transients. These cases are selected to demonstrate the code and methodology application for different cladding types, urania fuel, gadolinia-bearing fuel and MOX fuel over a wide range operating conditions. This project requires a mixture of expertise in nuclear engineering, materials science and engineering nuclear plant operations, and statistics - i.e., individuals assigned to this project will need to have a combination of knowledge and experience in both nuclear power systems and nuclear, materials and mechanical aspects of in-core fuel performance in PWRs and BWR. Additionally, staff assigned to work on this project shall have knowledge and experience in application of probability and statistics and quantification of uncertainty for in-core fuel performance parameters. In addition, the reviewing staff must have experience in applying non-parametric order statistics. Collectively, staff assigned to work on this project shall be knowledgeable and highly skilled in their own (individual) field(s) of expertise; they shall have demonstrated skills in computation and data compilation, programming and coding, communication and working with others; more specifically, experience in or knowledge of: nuclear power plant (NPP) system design and operation; NPP response to various transient and accident and their impact on fuel performance. A minimum of about 10 years of experience in fuel performance methodology and related code development is desirable. In order to verify the results presented in the topical report, a confirmatory calculations using NRC-approved fuel performance audit code will be necessary. Also, audit of calculations performed by TR vendor may be required to confirm validity of the results presented in the TR. Mandatory Qualifying Criteria The contractors should be technical experts in their field, with extensive nuclear experience in the areas of fuel performance methodology and code development. The reviewing staff should be knowledgeable about fuel performance database that consist of statististically significant number of test rods from integral test programs, commercial irradiation, and separate test effects. The technical personnel should have the knowledge and experience with the applicable NRC's regulatory process, applicable code of federal regulations (CFR), the applicability of Regulatory Guide (RG), NRC technical report designation Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NUREGs), Generic Letters (GLs), Information Notices (INs), Regulatory Issue Summaries (RISs), Interim Staff Guidance (ISGs), and relevant industry standard to the extent sufficient that the process can be applied to the potential support tasks. Commercial organizations that are interested in supporting our technical assistance requirements please address the market research questions below and provide capability information on your staff's qualifications and your firm's corporate experiences and qualifications on similar contracts or efforts. Market Research Questions If your organization has the potential capacity to perform these contract services, please provide the following information: 1) Organization name, address, email address, website address and telephone number? 2) How long has your company been in operations? 3) What type of business is your company (i.e., small, 8(a), service-disabled veteran-owned, etc.)? 4) How many people does your company employ, including consultants? Please break down the mix between the two categories. 5) Describe teaming arrangements your company has formed to perform scopes of work outside your core competencies. Describe both the type of work and how you managed it. 6) Which GSA Multiple Award Schedules or Governmentwide Acquisition Contracts, if any, does your organization possess? When do they expire? 7) Does your organization have a Defense Contract Audit Agency (or other cognizant audit authority) approved accounting system? 8) Does your organization have agreed upon indirect rate agreement with any government agency? 9) Has your company previously faced organizational conflict of interest issues with NRC? How were they resolved? 10) Has your company worked for any of the licensees regulated by the NRC in the past year? 11) List any companies or government agencies your company either plans to or has performed work for related to civilian nuclear reactors. Describe the work performed. 12) Although no geographic restriction is anticipated, if responding organizations are located outside the Washington Metropolitan area, indicate how the organization would coordinate with the NRC program office located in Rockville, MD. 13) Provide a tailored capability statement addressing the particulars of this effort, with appropriate documentation supporting claims of organizational and staff capability. Organizations responding to this market survey should keep in mind that only focused and pertinent information is requested. If significant subcontracting or teaming is anticipated in order to deliver technical capability, organizations should address the administrative and management structure of such arrangements. Taking into account the magnitude of the scope of this effort, organizations also should address the capacity of their financial infrastructure to coordinate and deliver contract performance. 14) Describe any other information your company deems relevant to support NRR in connection with the review of fuel performance methodology and computer code. Government Evaluation The Government will evaluate market information to ascertain market capacity to: 1) Potentially provide the services consistent in scope and scale with those described in this notice and otherwise anticipated; 2) Potential capacity to secure and apply the full range of corporate financial, human capital, and technical resources required to successfully perform similar requirements; 3) Potential capability to implement a successful project management plan that includes: compliance with tight program schedules; cost containment; meeting and tracking performance; hiring and retention of key personnel; and risk mitigation; and 4) Potential to provide services under a performance based service acquisition contract. DISCLAIMER AND NOTES: This market survey is being conducted through the FedBizOpps to reach the widest possible audience and to gather current market information. Any organization responding to this notice should ensure that its response is complete and sufficiently detailed to allow the Government to determine the organization's potential capability and capacity to perform the subject work. The Government may provide access to the information contained in the response to a contractor providing acquisition planning and strategic technical assistance support to the Government. Respondents are advised that the Government is under no obligation to acknowledge receipt of the information received or provide feedback to respondents with respect to any information submitted. After a review of the responses received, a pre-solicitation synopsis and solicitation may be published in Federal Business Opportunities. However, responses to this notice will not be considered adequate responses to a solicitation.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/NRC/OA/DCPM/NRC-NRR-001/listing.html)
- Record
- SN03223423-W 20131030/131028233917-d301972a61db2631d235934d3f3f75ca (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |