MTA-OP-002

Administrative Items
Date	9/30/2023
Functional Area Where Benefits Will Be Realized	Operations Maintenance Radiation Protection
Reference Implementation Guidance	Unmanned Ground System (UGS) Users’ Guide for Nuclear Power Plants (EPRI 3002025464) Cyber Security Technical Assessment Methodology: Risk Informed Exploit Sequence Identification and Mitigation, Revision 1 (EPRI 3002012752) Guidelines for Electromagnetic Interference Testing in Power Plants (EPRI TR-102323)
Industry SME	EPRI – Ilya Golberg Contact: nuclearplantmod@epri.com
Previous Implementation	This improvement has been implemented at several nuclear power plants. Please contact the EPRI SME for additional information.
Implementation Enablers	A wireless network is needed if the unmanned ground system is to be communicating over a network (for control or data collection/storage). If so, then one of the following MTAs can be referenced for implementing a wireless network: MTA-MA-003 – Implement a Wireless Network Infrastructure Using a Distributed Antenna System (DAS) MTA-MA-004 – Implement a Wireless Network Infrastructure Using Wi-Fi
SWEEP Score	Cost – Level 3 – Implementation cost is less than $1 million. Estimated cost is on the order of $50,000‑$300,000 for a single UGS. Savings – Level 1 – Savings are less than $1 million per year and could vary depending on use cases implemented by UGS at a plant. Additional savings may be achieved based on dose savings and prevented outages. Payback – Level 2 – Payback period is expected to be greater than one year but less than five years (inclusive). Payback period will vary based on use cases implemented. Technical Readiness – Level 3 – The technology is ready for wide operational deployment. This technology has already been implemented at nuclear power plants. Licensing Readiness – Level 3 – No changes are required for implementation. This technology has already been implemented at nuclear power plants. Implementation Proficiency – Level 3 – The technology can be implemented by all sites, regardless of digital experience.
Applicability	All reactor types All geographic regions
Keywords	Ground robotics; Unmanned ground systems; maintenance; operations; radiation protection
Business Case Analysis Cross-Reference	N/A

Description

Unmanned Ground Systems (UGS) are robotic technologies that consist of a mobile platform, control system, and associated payloads and operate without a human presence. The mobile platform typically includes on‑board data storage, a central processing computer for controlling locomotion and receiving commands from an external controller, a power source, and on‑board sensors for movement control and data acquisition. Additional payloads can be attached to the platform for a variety of use cases, including high‑definition imaging systems, sensors, and manipulator arms. UGS can be manually controlled with input from an operator or utilize autonomous capabilities to perform missions such as inspection or security rounds without operator input.

UGS provide a platform for gathering data and manipulating the environment in areas that may be potentially hazardous to human workers, such as confined spaces and areas of high radiation. Compared to UGS designed for dedicated use cases, general‑use UGS may perform multiple use cases and can be leveraged by plant personnel to perform emergent inspection tasks or evaluate situations that may otherwise require a plant outage for manual entry. The overall intent of a general‑use UGS is to augment plant personnel and improve the quality and quantity of data available to stakeholders.

This Modernization Technology Assessment (MTA) covers the following use cases for UGS in a nuclear plant environment. UGS used for radiation protection are detailed in MTA‑RP‑005.

• Visual inspection – using a UGS for either emergent or routine visual inspections of assets.
• Thermal data collection – using a UGS with a thermal camera to troubleshoot plant conditions.
• Environment Mapping – using UGS to create 3D models of their environment to inform maintenance and construction resource planning.
• Surveillance rounds – using UGS to monitor and record data for equipment in real‑time.
• Transport – using UGS to transport materials within nuclear plant environment.
• Task execution – using UGS to perform tasks, such as retrieving items or component manipulation, using various payloads.

Benefits

Benefits Estimate

Level 1 – Savings are expected to be less than $1 million per year based on deployment in a plant. Savings are based on increased efficiencies for plant staff. Additional savings may be realized through dose savings associated with fewer radiological surveys and prevented power reduction or outage time (e.g., from sending a UGS to investigate concerns that would normally require a down‑power for manual entry).

Benefits Description

• Improved resource usage. UGS are expected to increase efficiencies for plant staff by decreasing schedule and labor hours associated with both routine and emergent tasks and allow personnel to shift their attention towards other tasks.
• Increased safety and reduced dose. Utilizing UGS in place of manual execution for site tasks can reduce personnel exposure to radiologically or industrially hazardous areas such as confined spaces and areas of elevated temperature. Associated benefits include the reduced need for additional safety protocols and equipment needed for manual task completion.
• Increased schedule flexibility. UGS can be deployed to assess the condition of an area or component prior to manual entry to improve task planning and efficiency or perform tasks that would usually be performed during an outage.
• Higher quality data. UGS with high‑definition imaging payloads can be precisely controlled to take high‑resolution images of plant assets and items of interest. UGS that utilize autonomous capabilities can take recurring images and track progress of degradation features such as cracks and corrosion. Higher quality data collection in high‑risk areas is enabled by increased loiter time vs a human inspector.
• Improved task performance. UGS can improve overall task performance by increasing the consistency and standardization of tasks and provide higher quantity and quality of data during inspection tasks.

Costs and Schedule

Cost

Level 3 – Implementation cost is expected to be less than $1 million. Estimated costs associated with general‑purpose UGS are on the order of $50,000‑$300,000 per UGS unit and depend on robotic model complexity and desired payloads. Some utilities may opt to purchase two or more UGS, with varying payloads. For example, one UGS could include an actuator attachment (e.g., robot arm) for manipulation and one could be dedicated to data collection and not include the actuator.

Costs include procuring and integrating the UGS and associated infrastructure, including its payloads, docking stations, spare batteries, and UGS accessories. Additional costs may be associated with UGS operator training and custom software integration.

Schedule

Less than six months for implementing the technology in a single‑unit plant. Most UGS infrastructure (e.g., docking stations, fiducial markers) can be installed online, except for areas of high dose which may require installation while the plant is in an outage. The schedule also includes supplier‑based integration. Custom software integration is often needed for more complex use cases and may extend schedule.

Scope Context

Cost and savings are based on a plant‑wide implementation with general plant use cases. Additional use cases may increase savings.

Risks

• UGS integration to a plant’s network may present cybersecurity risks. Existing utility practices for satisfying NRC cybersecurity requirements should be applied to help mitigate such risks. The EPRI Technical Assessment Methodology for UGS (EPRI 3002012752) may also be leveraged for guidance on identifying cybersecurity vulnerabilities and associated mitigations and controls.
• Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) must be considered to prevent electromagnetic interactions between the UGS and other systems. Following U.S. NRC EMC guidance for equipment EMC qualification and maintaining appropriate standoff distance to sensitive systems will mitigate such risks. EPRI Report TR‑102323 provides additional guidance on EMC qualification and includes best practices for in‑plant EMC.
• Personnel and equipment safety concerns must be addressed to prevent personnel injury and damage to site assets. UGS models with obstacle detection and avoidance features, proper UGS implementation planning, personnel training, and forbidden zones around vulnerable equipment will mitigate such risks.