Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 9e12eef7-842c-43db-9170-12cf365ca8b9
Document Type: srp
Title: PIPING SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS - INSPECTIONS, TESTS, ANALYSES,
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0706/ML070660622.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 14
Section ID: 14.3.3
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
tions and consistent with DCD Tier 2, Section 3.2. Ensure that system boundaries and interfaces are indicated clearly in Tier 1 and that the figures are in accordance with the legends. 4. The reviewer should provide appropriate guidance to other reviewers for consistent treatment of piping design issues in Tier 1, especially applicable standard ITAAC and piping issues for figures. 5. Ensure that standard ITAAC entries in SRP Section 14.3, Appendix D, for piping systems and components are included where appropriate in the standard design systems, in particular, the basic configuration ITAAC (for dynamic qualification of SSCs and welding), hydrostatic test ITAAC, MOV ITAAC, POV ITAAC, and check valve ITAAC. Ensure adequate supporting information is in Tier 2, generally Chapter 3, and the initial test program in Section 14.2. 6. Ensure that design features from the resolutions of selected policy and technical issues are addressed adequately in Tier 1 based on safety significance. Ensure that the appropriate NRC guidance, requirements, bases, and resolutions for these items are documented clearly in the SER. 7. Ensure that any Tier 2* information is clearly designated in Tier 2, and consider expiration of these items at first full power, if appropriate. The staff's basis for designating the information as Tier 2* and the rationale for its decision that change requires prior NRC approval should be specified in the SER (See also RP Section 14.3, Appendix A). 8. Ensure appropriate interface with the secondary reviewers listed in the "Areas of Review" section. 9. For review of a DC application, the reviewer should follow the above procedures to verify that the design, including requirements and restrictions (e.g., interface requirements and site parameters), set forth in the final safety analysis report (FSAR) meets the acceptance criteria. DCs have referred to the FSAR as the design control document (DCD). The reviewer should also consider the appropriateness of identified