Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 29ea352c-081e-469e-95b8-7278f6da64ce
Document Type: srp
Title: FRACTURE PREVENTION OF CONTAINMENT PRESSURE BOUNDARY
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0636/ML063600407.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 6
Section ID: 6.2.7
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ase of radioactivity to the environment. 2. GDC 16 requires reactor containment and associated systems to be provided to establish an essentially leak-tight barrier against the uncontrolled release of radioactivity to the environment and to assure that the containment design conditions important to safety are not exceeded for as long as postulated accident conditions require. Containment must be leak tight and withstand accidents because it is the final barrier 6.2.7-5 Revision 1 - March 2007 against the release of radioactivity to the environment in the event of a LOCA. To ensure leak tightness, containment must not be subject to brittle fracture even under the most severe postulated conditions. Meeting GDC 16 provides assurance that containment will satisfactorily fulfill its safety role and that significant radioactivity will not be released to the environment. 3. GDC 51 requires, part, that the reactor containment boundary be designed with sufficient margin to assure that under operating, maintenance, testing and postulated accident conditions (1) its ferritic materials behave in a nonbrittle manner and (2) the probability of rapidly propagating fracture is minimized. As the final barrier against the release of radioactivity to the environment, containment must not be subject to brittle failure or rapidly propagating fracture, either of which could cause a breach of containment integrity. Meeting GDC 51 will ensure that the containment pressure boundary remains intact during the harshest expected conditions, thereby precluding the release of radioactivity to the environment. III. REVIEW PROCEDURES The reviewer will select material from the procedures described below, as may be appropriate for a particular case. These review procedures are based on the identified SRP acceptance criteria. For deviations from these acceptance criteria, the staff should review the applicant’s evaluation of how the proposed alternatives provide an acceptable method of complying