Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 8a69e211-8100-413b-aa05-61dd44b10160
Document Type: srp
Title: REVIEW RESPONSIBILITIES
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0523/ML052350115.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 15
Section ID: 15.1.4
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
burnup is selected to yield the most limiting combination of moderator temperature coefficient, void coefficient, doppler coefficient, axial power profile, and radial power distribution. d. Mitigating systems should be assumed to be actuated in the analyses at setpoints with allowance for instrument inaccuracy in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.105. Compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.105 is determined by ICSB. III. REVIEW PROCEDURES The procedures below are used for both the construction permit (CP) and operating license (OL) reviews. During the CP review the values of system parameters and setpoints used in the analysis will be preliminary in nature and subject to change. At the OL review stage, final values are used in the 15.1.1-4 Rev. 1 - July 1981 analysis and the reviewer should compare these to the limiting safety system settings included in the proposed technical specifications. RSB reviews the applicant's description of the transients caused by excessive heat removal with specific attention to the occurrences that lead to the initiating event. The sequence of events from initiation until a stabilized condition is reached is reviewed to ascertain: 1. The extent to which normally operating plant instrumentation and controls are assumed to function. 2. The extent to which plant and reactor protection systems are required to function. 3. The credit taken for the functioning of normally operating plant systems. 4. The operation of engineered safety systems that is required. 5. The extent to which operator actions are required. 6. That appropriate margin for malfunctions, such as stuck rods (per II.3.b) are accounted for. If the SAR states that a particular transient involving an increase in heat removal is not as limiting as some other similar transient, the reviewer evaluates the justification presented by the applicant. The applicant is to present a quantitative analysis in the SAR of the increase-in-heat-removal transient that is determined to be most