Performing reanalysis cont'd

DOE-STD-1073-2003

Configuration Management

approach is typically the most expensive. This approach should be used only for

the most important missing design requirements.

Gathering and documenting information from the experience of knowledgeable

engineering and operations personnel. Their memory is a valuable (and

frequently undocumented) source of information, and that information could be

lost through attrition, transfers, retirement and death. Following recognition of

the need to identify design information, contractors should promptly initiate this

activity to prevent any further loss of knowledge.

Repeating the original design process to decide which design outputs or portions

of the equipment specifications are essential and which are optional. This

approach is a combination of the first two approaches. While it may not go as far

as reanalysis, it does carefully consider the likely design inputs, constraints,

analysis and calculations, and outputs. After reanalysis, this is the most

technically acceptable method.

Testing equipment to determine its current functionality and accepting the results

as design requirements after a technical evaluation by the engineering

organization. Testing might be the only practical method for showing that system

performance remains adequate.

When selecting the approach to be used, the contractor should consider

what information is already available,

the importance of the systems and components,

feasibility, and

resources.

A combination of methods is often the most cost-effective approach. Throughout design

requirements regeneration, the design basis resulting from the regeneration efforts should

be documented. The regenerated requirements should be incorporated into the

configuration management database.

Additional guidance on design basis reconstitution for a complex nuclear facility, such as

a reactor, can be found in IAEA-TECDCO-1335, Configuration management in nuclear

power plants.

D-2