Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 63f62189-691f-402d-9ac9-41fb60ec2261
Document Type: srp
Title: DETERMINATION OF RUPTURE LOCATIONS AND DYNAMIC EFFECTS
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1423/ML14230A035.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 3
Section ID: 3.6.2
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
0.34(f)(2)(ix), 10 CFR 50.34(f)(2)(xxv), and 10 CFR 50.34 (f)(3)(v) for a COL application. These cross-cutting review areas should 3.6.2-6 Draft Revision 3 – August 2015 be addressed by the reviewer for each technical subsection and relevant conclusions documented in the corresponding safety evaluation report (SER) section. 2. Review of the effects of postulated pipe ruptures on structures is a primary responsibility under SRP Section 3.6.2. First it must be determined whether the equipment is needed to perform a safety-related function or a risk-significant function. SRP Section 3.2.2 and SRP Section 19.3 as related to augmented design standards provide guidance on the identification of the SSCs subject to protection against postulated pipe ruptures. The safety-related functions or the risk-significant functions of the SSCs in the various plant designs are essentially the same; however, the location and arrangement of the SSCs and the methods used may vary depending upon individual design. The reviewer must evaluate variations in plant designs as individual cases. SSCs that perform safety functions or which by virtue of their failure could affect a safety function adversely should be protected from the effects of postulated pipe ruptures. 3. The staff reviews the criteria for locations and configurations of breaks in high-energy piping and leakage cracks in moderate-energy piping. A. The applicant's criteria for determining break and crack locations are reviewed for conformance with the acceptance criteria referenced in Subsection II of this SRP section. i. Exceptions taken by the applicant to the referenced pipe break location and configuration criteria must be identified and the basis clearly justified so that evaluation is possible. Deviations from approved criteria and the justifications provided are reviewed to determine acceptability. B. The following are reviewed to ensure that the pipe break criteria have been properly implemented: i. Sketches showing the