Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 11a2be5f-50e6-47c7-beee-25b5049ab4bb
Document Type: srp
Title: REACTOR TRIP SYSTEM
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0523/ML052350474.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 7
Section ID: 7.2
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
icted on electrical drawings (OL) of the means proposed for auto- matically indicating, at the system level, bypassed or deliberately. inoperable RTS protection channels are reviewed to ascertain that the design is consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.47 as supplemented by Branch Technical Position ICSB 21 and with IEEE Std 279, paragraph 4.13. An important part of the review is the engineering design review at the OL stage. The drawing review should confirm that the design and layout meet the applicable criteria listed under subsection II. A site visit should be performed before the evaluation findings are written for an OL. A site'visit should include an audit verification that the design and-layout'criteria reviewed during the drawing review are implemented. An outline of topics for a site visit is provided in Appendix 7-B (Ref. 6) to SRP Chapter 7. In certain instances, it will be the reviewer's judgment that for a specific case under review, emphasis should be placed on specific aspects of the design, while other aspects of the design need not receive the same emphasis and in-depth review. Typical reasons for such a non-uniform placement of emphasis are the introduction of new design features or the utilization in the design of design features previously reviewed and found acceptable. However, in all cases, the review must be sufficient to conclude conformance to the acceptance criteria, i.e., the requirements of the Commission's regulations. 7.2-6 Rev. 2 - July 1981 IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS *The reviewer verifies that sufficient information has been provided and that his review supports conclusions of the following type, to be included in the staff's safety evaluation report: The staff concludes that the design of the reactor trip system (RTS) and the design of the EAS system are acceptable and meet the relevant require- ments of General Design Criteria 2, 4, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 and 10 CFR Part 50, §50.55a(h): We have conducted an audit review of these