Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: ef8be597-1275-4351-87fa-03241218cd31
Document Type: srp
Title: -
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0622/ML062210398.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 14
Section ID: 14.2.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
August 2006 If the licensee provides adequate justification for not performing certain power ascension tests, the staff may conclude that the EPU test program is acceptable without the performance of these tests. D. Evaluate the Adequacy of Proposed Testing Plans 1. General Discussion The EPU LAR should include plans for the initial approach to the increased EPU power level and steady-state testing that will be used to verify that the reactor plant operates within the values of EPU design parameters. 2. Specific Acceptance Criteria For each EPU power ascension test proposed by the licensee, the staff will review the test objectives, the summary of prerequisites and test methods, and specific acceptance criteria to establish that the functional adequacy of SSCs is verified. This review assures that the test objectives, test methods, and acceptance criteria are acceptable and consistent with the design basis for the facility. Each secondary review branch will review the licensee’s plans for the EPU test program within the branch’s technical area. The licensee’s EPU test program should include the following provisions: • The initial approach to the uprated EPU power level should be incremental and should include steady-state power hold points to evaluate plant performance above the original licensed full-power level. • The licensee should propose appropriate testing and acceptance criteria to ensure that the plant responds within design predictions. The predicted responses should be developed using real or expected values of items such as beginning-of-life core reactivity coefficients, flow rates, pressures, temperatures, response times of equipment, and the actual status of the plant, not the values or plant conditions used for conservative evaluations of postulated accidents. • Contingency plans should be implemented in the event the plant does not respond as predicted. • The test program should be scheduled and sequenced to minimize the time untested