Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 04c894f5-e3ab-479e-8bca-0722777c79a7
Document Type: srp
Title: Revision 4 – January 2016
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1502/ML15027A401.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 11
Section ID: 11
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
of a tank and components has been evaluated, (2) the design features are acceptable and meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, GDC 60 and GDC 64 for controlling and limiting releases of radioactive materials to the environment, and (3) the design features provide an adequate level of safety during normal reactor operation, including anticipated operational occurrences. Plant facility structures and system design features described in the application provide reasonable assurance that the assumed release will not result in radionuclide concentrations in surface water or groundwater exceeding the SRP acceptance criterion of a total dose of 100 mrem (1 mSv) when used in unrestricted areas. For applicants that have used alternate methods and assumptions, other than that described in this BTP, the staff concludes, after conducting an independent evaluation, that the supporting information and results of the consequence analysis are acceptable and the staff finds that the dose results are consistent with the acceptance criteria. 5. For an ESP or a CP application in which the results of the consequence analyses and comparisons to BTP 11-6 acceptance criteria rely on preliminary design information, the staff confirm that the applicant has proposed appropriate COL action items for the purpose of revising the analysis once more definitive information on design features becomes available at the OL and COL stage. In the review of the information provided BTP 11-6-18 Revision 4 – January 2016 in the ESP or CP, the staff confirms that the applicant has met BTP 11-6 acceptance criteria based on the approach and model assumptions described in the analysis, including the reasonableness of the assumptions applied in the analysis and degree of conservatism in modeling the failure scenario and doses to a receptor located in unrestricted areas. 6. The staff concludes that the applicant’s proposed TS limiting the total amounts of radioactivity in tanks and components,