Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 94d86f6a-6c87-46a2-93df-ed4b0721bbdd
Document Type: srp
Title: is complete.
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0520/ML052070646.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 13
Section ID: 13.5.2.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
acceptable approach for preparing EOPs. 88 It should be recognized, however, that approaches other than those found in these documents may be acceptable, and reviewers will need to use their judgment in determining the adequacy of the PGP. As described in the SRP, all PGPs will be reviewed by the staff. The review guidelines presented in Subsections 3 through 6 of this appendix provide additional assistance to the reviewers. All applicants have the option of providing a justification for their approach where they disagree with a staff position. When all issues are resolved or when the schedule dictates, the reviewer will prepare a Safety Evaluation Report (SER). 2.0 General Guidance to Reviewers The guidance that follows is provided to assist the reviewer in using the criteria presented in Subsections 3 through 6 of this appendix. 2.1 Reviewers should be aware that different degrees of objectivity (and thus, subjectivity) may be required in reviewing each of the four parts of the PGP since the parts may differ in detail and approach. DRAFT Rev. 0 - April 1996 13.5.2.1-14 2.2 Reviewers should become very familiar with the General Objectives associated with each section of a PGP. The specific review guidelines can serve as the basis for making the subjective evaluations of the general objectives. 2.3 When an objective is not met or a specific response cannot be judged acceptable because of missing information, the reviewer should identify the information that is missing and what is needed in the PGP to make it acceptable. 2.4 Some items included in a PGP may not be addressed either within the general objectives or the specific review guidelines. These items must be evaluated carefully to ensure that unnecessary or possibly detrimental inclusions do not occur in the EOPs (e.g., an "EOP Deficiencies" section is not a desirable inclusion in an EOP). 2.5 As stated in the Background, most of the review guidelines are subjective in nature. The reviewer will have to judge