Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 4f141c71-35ca-4353-9047-a13efe6d56b7
Document Type: srp
Title: Revision 6 - August 2016
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1601/ML16019A308.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 7
Section ID: 7
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ble and useful. One method which can be used for this determination is for the reviewer to take the training courses which use these manuals. The training manuals will generally be aimed at either the technician level or the software engineer, and therefore the determination of the understandability and usability of the training manual needs to take into account the intended use. If the reviewer does not have enough experience with training or training documentation to make this determination, the reviewer may require the assistance of other NRC personnel or independent contractor personnel. B.4 Review Procedures Reviews are carried out by a combination of inspection and analysis of documents. The adequacy of the computer development process should be reviewed to confirm that software life cycle plans incorporate appropriate commitments, as described in Subsection B.3.1 above. New software, or an unproven development team, will require greater emphasis on the adequacy of the planning phase. A sample of V&V, safety analysis, and configuration management documentation for various life cycle activity groups should be audited to confirm that the developer's life cycle activities have been properly implemented. Subsection B.3.2 above presents specific criteria from which the inspection activities for each specific life cycle activity may be derived. A sample of software design outputs should be reviewed to confirm that they address the functional requirements allocated to the software, and that the expected software development process characteristics are evident in the design outputs. Subsection B.3.3 above describes functional characteristics and software development process characteristics from which the inspection activities for each specific design output may be derived. SRP Appendix 7.0-A contains additional detail on the software review process and the relationship between software reviews and system reviews. C. REFERENCES 1. American Society of Mechanical