Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 1ee704a4-ae61-4af0-8158-c68006e8528a
Document Type: srp
Title: and 3.8.2, which apply to the other Category I concrete and steel structures,
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1006/ML100630323.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 3
Section ID: 3.8.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
onservative as those specified in Subsection II.3 of this SRP section. The reviewer identifies any deviations from the acceptance criteria for loads and load combinations that have not been adequately justified as unacceptable and transmits these findings to the applicant. 3.8.4-16 Revision 3 – May 2010 4. Design and Analysis Procedures. The reviewer verifies that for the design and analysis procedures, the applicant is utilizing the specifications for concrete and steel structures found in ACI 349, with additional guidance provided by RG 1.142, and ANSI/AISC N690-1994, including Supplement 2 (2004), respectively. The reviewer verifies the validity of any computer programs used in the design and analysis of the structure in accordance with the acceptance criteria delineated in Subsection II.4.E of SRP Section 3.8.1. The reviewer ensures that the applicant has met the provisions specified in Subsection II.4 of this SRP section regarding design report, structural audits, and design of spent fuel pool and racks. As discussed in Subsection II.4.I of this SRP section, reviewers evaluate the use of modular construction methods on a case-by-case basis utilizing guidance provided in NUREG/CR-6486. 5. Structural Acceptance Criteria. The reviewer compares the limits on allowable stresses and strains in the concrete, reinforcement, structural steel, etc., with the corresponding allowable stresses specified in Subsection II.5 of this SRP section. If the applicant proposes to exceed some of these limits for some of the load combinations and at some localized points on the structure, the reviewer evaluates the justification provided to show that structural integrity will not be affected. If the reviewer determines such justification to be inadequate, the proposed deviations are identified and transmitted to the applicant with a request for adequate justification and bases. 6. Materials, Quality Control, and Special Construction Techniques. The reviewer compares the materials,