Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: f1629507-6318-4e71-94a6-9d6664ba96a3
Document Type: srp
Title: of the plant safety analysis report (SAR).  Although NRC did not endorse the annexes of
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0706/ML070660327.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 7
Section ID: 7.6
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
of the V&V effort to provide reasonable assurance of high quality software development. With this in mind, the items the reviewer should check include, but are not limited to the following: i. Is the V&V organization independent and given sufficient time and resources to avoid pressure to perform in a hurried or insufficient review? The reviewer should Interview the V&V personnel, and observe the relationship between the V&V staff and the design staff. There may be cases where the organizational relationship indicates there is independence, when in fact, the V&V personnel are subject to pressure to perform a rapid review and to show that the software product is of high quality when the level of effort or the quality of the effort does not justify that determination. ii. Are the V&V personnel qualified to perform the task? The V&V personnel should be at least equally experienced and qualified as the design personnel. iii. Is the V&V organization effective? If a thread audit of selected functions reveals errors that were not found by the V&V effort, the indication is that V&V may not be finding other errors as well. In addition to checking the outputs of the various design stages to verify that the output properly reflects the requirements, and validates that the outputs are designed so that the product will fulfill its intended use, the V&V effort should determine that the design outputs actually work. As an example, a filter may have been specified, and that filter properly designed and implemented. However, if the filter does not actually filter the required frequencies, or does not actually reduce or eliminate the noise it is intended to filter, the quality of the V&V effort is suspect. iv. Are the V&V problem reports properly addressed, corrections made, and the resulting correction itself properly checked? There have been cases where a V&V problem report was not effectively resolved, or that the correction resulting from a V&V problem report was in itself in