Tendarix.ca
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI)
Date: May 25, 2015 File # R624.1
Subject: Request for Information (RFI) regarding Project R624.1“Comparison of US and Canadian Reliability and Maintenance Performance Measures for Nuclear Power Plants”
1. Background and Purpose of this RFI
The purpose of this RFI is to obtain information before finalizing the requirements definition and procurement strategy for the subject project which is being carried out by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC).
This project is being undertaken to potentially enhance CNSC’s reliability and maintenance regulatory requirements for nuclear power plants by comparing Canadian regulatory requirements with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US NRC) approach.
The project will involve a review of CNSC regulatory requirements pertaining to reliability found in regulatory documents RD/GD-98 entitled “Reliability Programs for Nuclear Power Plants”, RD/GD-210 entitled “Maintenance Programs for Nuclear Power Plants” and REGDOC 3.1.1 (Section 3.7) entitled “Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants”. As well as the review of U.S. NRC requirements concerning the Maintenance Rule and MSPI found in the documents entitled “Requirements for monitoring the effectiveness of maintenance at nuclear power plants” and “Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guide”. The review of these documents will help identify the benefits and each regulatory approach.
The details of the project and requirements are further outlined in Annex “A” – Work Statement to this RFI.
2. Nature of this RFI
This RFI is not a solicitation and there is no commitment with respect to future purchases or contracts.
Potential suppliers of the services described in this RFI should not reserve stock or facilities, nor allocate resources as a result of any information contained in this RFI. The procurement of any services described in this RFI will not necessarily follow this RFI. This RFI is simply intended to solicit feedback from industry with respect to the matters described in this RFI.
3. Nature and Format of Responses Requested
Respondents are requested to provide their responses to questions in Section 6.
Responses are to be sent by email to:
Contracting Authority: Dan Simard
Email Address: d••••••••@••••••••.••.ca
Telephone: (613) 996-6784
4. Response Costs
CNSC will not reimburse any respondent for expenses incurred in responding to this RFI.
5. Treatment of Responses
a) Use of Response: Responses will not be formally evaluated. However, the responses received may be used by CNSC to develop or modify procurement strategies or any draft documents contained in this RFI. CNSC will review all responses received by the RFI closing date. CNSC may, in its discretion, review responses received after the RFI closing date.
b) Confidentiality: Respondents should mark any portions of their response that they consider proprietary or confidential. CNSC will handle the responses in accordance with the Access to Information Act.
c) Follow-up Activity: CNSC may, in its discretion, contact any respondents to follow up with additional questions or for clarifications of any aspect of a response.
6. Questions to Interested Parties of this RFI
1) Would you/your organization be able to provide the services outlined in Annex “A” – Statement of Work (SOW) and be interested in bidding on any solicitation that may be issued related to the SOW?
2) Could the work be completed within the estimated dates related to the deliverables/milestones in the SOW and an estimated budget of $55,000.00 Canadian dollars, excluding applicable taxes but all-inclusive of travel etc.?
3) What would the estimated level of effort be to complete the work (in person days)?
4) What types of resources (human and otherwise) are required to complete the work including experience and qualifications?
5) Is the Statement of Work clear and reasonable?
6) Do you have any general comments or concerns regarding the SOW and/or suggestions for improvements to the SOW?
7. Submission of Responses to Questions to Interested Parties
a) Closing Date for Submission of Responses: Suppliers interested in providing a response should deliver it by email to the Contracting Authority identified above by June 19, 2015.
b) Responsibility of Timely Delivery: Each respondent is solely responsible for ensuring its response is delivered on time per the instructions specified in this RFI.
c) Language of Response: Responses may be in English or French at the preference of the respondent.
8. Enquiries
Because this is not a bid solicitation, CNSC will not necessarily respond to enquiries in writing or circulate answers to all potential suppliers/respondents. However, respondents with questions regarding the RFI may direct their enquiries by email to:
Contracting Authority: Dan Simard
Email Address: d••••••••@••••••••.••.ca
Telephone: (613) 996-6784
ANNEX “A” - WORK STATEMENT
1.0 Background
The Canadian Nuclear Regulator is a pioneer in setting reliability performance targets for select Nuclear Power Plant systems. However these performance indicators have evolved over time and are supported by the use of modern computer based fault tree analysis generally derived from plant-specific probabilistic safety assessments (PSAs).
The current Canadian nuclear regulatory framework concerning system reliability and maintenance aspects addresses reliability requirements, maintenance requirements and reporting requirements. This includes establishing yearly reliability targets for systems important to safety (based on the RD/GD-98 reliability program), as well as reporting on a number of performance indicators, such as Predicted Future Unavailability (PFU), Actual Past Unavailability (APU), system impairments and their effects.
Other international approaches are used to achieve similar objectives in equipment reliability and maintenance. For instance, the Maintenance Rule and the Mitigating System Performance Index (MSPI) were both adopted by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
This study proposes to compare the present-day Canadian approach to reliability and maintenance indicators with the U.S. Maintenance Rule and MSPI.
2.0 Objectives
The objective of this research project is to compare the Canadian regulatory requirements in the domain of nuclear power plant system reliability and maintenance with the US NRC approach (Maintenance Rule (a(1) and a(2)) and MSPI). This comparison will identify the benefits of each approach. This study will also produce potential future enhancements of CNSC reliability and maintenance regulatory requirements.
3.0 Scope of Work
The successful contractor shall examine the Canadian regulatory reliability targets and requirements, such as PFU, APU, impairments and the U.S. NRC Maintenance Rule (a(1) and a(2)) and MSPI, to:
Upon identification and recommendation of which CANDU systems could adopt the U.S. regulatory approach, the CNSC will select two CANDU mitigating systems and the contractor shall identify a set of hypothetical but realistic assumptions and retrieve actual unavailability and equipment failure data that will be used to:
It is expected that upon applying Canada’s and U.S.’s reliability requirements on the selected CANDU mitigating systems, that the contractor shall provide recommendations for potential enhancements to the CNSC’s regulatory requirements.
4.0 Tasks to be Performed
4.1 Examine and review the CNSC regulatory requirements pertaining to reliability found in the following documents:
Examine and review the U.S. NRC requirements concerning the Maintenance Rule and MSPI found in the following documents:
Prepare a report comparing the two regulatory approaches, and identify the benefits of each.
4.2 Prepare a report identifying which CANDU systems could be subject to the U.S. NRC Maintenance Rule and MSPI and recommend in which instances the CNSC could adopt the U.S. regulatory approach.
4.3 The CNSC will select two CANDU mitigating systems from the list of identified systems found in Task 4.2. The contractor shall then identify a set of hypothetical but realistic assumptions, and retrieve actual unavailability and equipment failure data that will be used in Tasks 4.3.1 and 4.3.2.
4.3.1 Apply the CNSC reliability requirement to the selected CANDU mitigating systems using the system fault tree, that will be provided by the CNSC, and assumptions chosen (from Task 4.3). Discuss the results and approach taken.
4.3.2 Apply the US NRC Maintenance Rule and MSPI to the selected CANDU mitigating systems using the system fault tree and assumptions chosen (from Task 4.3). Discuss the results and approach taken.
4.4. Compare the results of the two regulatory approaches (from Tasks 4.3.1 and 4.3.2), and discuss with, supporting rationale, the benefits of each method. Provide recommendation for potential enhancements to CNSC regulatory requirements. This will be presented in the final report along with Tasks 4.1 and 4.2.
Documents provided by the CNSC:
*The CNSC will provide the system fault trees electronically (CD). The contractor will need to have CAFTA models in order to use this. Note that the system fault trees are considered to be protected information may require security clearances.
5.0 Deliverables
All deliverables are to be submitted to the Project Authority.
5.1 Start-up Meeting
Date: Within 2 weeks of contract award
Location: CNSC Head Office in Ottawa or Via Tele/Videoconference
Purpose: To discuss the proposed approach, work plan and schedule to ensure achievement of the contract objectives. The contractor shall make a presentation with the above purpose in mind.
5.2 First Formal Progress Report (Subject to CNSC review and acceptance)
This report shall address Task 4.1 and include a discussion of all findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Due Date: 3 months from contract award
Copies: One electronic copy via email to the Project Authority
Format and style requirements: The font Times New Roman 12 is to be used.
5.3 Second Formal Progress Report (Subject to CNSC review and acceptance)
This report shall address Task 4.2 and include a discussion of all findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Due Date: 6 months from contract award
Copies: One electronic copy via email to the Project Authority
Format and style requirements: The font Times New Roman 12 is to be used.
5.4 Progress Meetings
5.4.1 First Progress Meeting
Date: 3.5 months from contract award
Location: CNSC Head Office in Ottawa or Via Tele/Videoconference
Purpose: To assess the degree to which the agreed project objectives are being achieved as planned and thus to facilitate timely adjustments (if necessary) to ensure the project success.
5.4.2 Second Progress Meeting
Date: 6.5 months from contract award
Location: CNSC Head Office, Ottawa
Purpose: To assess the degree to which the agreed project objectives are being achieved as planned and thus to facilitate timely adjustments (if necessary) to ensure the project success.
5.5 Draft Final Report (Subject to CNSC review)
This report shall address the completion of all tasks, and include a discussion of all findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Due Date: 9 months after contract award
Copies: One electronic copy via email to the Project Authority
Format and style requirements: As specified in the Final Report.
5.6 Presentation
Due Date: 10 months after contract award
Location: CNSC Head Office, Ottawa
Purpose: To present the project findings, conclusions and recommendations documented in the Draft Report to the CNSC Commission.
5.7 Electronic Files used to support the conclusion of the project
This deliverable shall provide the all the electronic files (included but not limited to CAFTA files) associated with the projects analysis and results.
Due Date: 11 months after contract award
Copies: One electronic copy to the Project Authority
5.8 Final Report (Subject to CNSC review and acceptance)
The Final Report deliverable shall address any comments and recommended edits supplied by CNSC as it pertains to the Draft Final Report.
Due Date: 11 months after contract award
Copies: One electronic copy via email to the Project Authority and one bound copy
Format & style requirements:
The font Times New Roman 12 is to be used. Electronic copies must be provided in a format readable by Word 2003 with minor formatting changes. Any electronic files that cannot be read or require major formatting changes when opened are not acceptable and may be returned to the contractor for correction. The CNSC reserves the right, at its own discretion, to have the final report printed under CNSC cover, and to distribute it publicly. Translation of the abstract into French or English, CNSC report covers and the publication number will be provided by the CNSC.
Get a plain-English breakdown of this tender — what they need, who can bid, how to approach it, and tips for small suppliers. Takes a couple of seconds.
Other federal contracts in the same classification, and who won them.
| Tender | Awarded to | Buyer | Value | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creating the Design of a Research and Evaluation Framework for both Streams of the Age Well at Home initiative. | Qatalyst Research Group Inc. | Employment and Social Development Canada | CAD $296.3K | 2023-03-09 |
| Sector assessment identifying operational plastic waste reduction and diversion challenges | Dillon Consulting Limited | Transport Canada | Not disclosed | 2023-02-06 |
| SMART INTERSECTION DATA COLLECTION | MicroTraffic Inc. | Transport Canada | CAD $167.2K | 2022-12-28 |
| Advanced Technology Vehicle Testing | PORTAGE PERSONNEL INC. | Transport Canada | CAD $347K | 2022-11-10 |