Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 8160c1fd-7cef-4c93-8e12-456019f2cfd2
Document Type: srp
Title: FOUNDATIONS
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1319/ML13198A267.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 3
Section ID: 3.8.5
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ROTECTION NOTIFICATION The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for information or an information collection requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control number. 3.8.5-24 Revision 4 – September 2013 SRP Section 3.8.5 Description of Changes Section 3.8.5 “FOUNDATIONS” This SRP section affirms the technical accuracy and adequacy of the guidance previously provided in Revision 3, dated May 2010 of this SRP. See ADAMS Accession No. ML100621093. I. AREAS OF REVIEW 1. Enhanced SRP Section 3.8.5 I.3 “Loads and Load Combinations” to include loads induced by the construction sequence and differential settlements. See item 2 below (under “Acceptance Criteria”) for the technical rationale for this change. 2. Added an additional ”Review Interface” Item 5 to indicate that the review of the foundation design for differential settlement and construction sequence aspects is performed in coordination with SRP Sections 2.5.4 and SRP 3.7.2. See item 2 below (under “Acceptance Criteria”) for the technical rationale for this change. II. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 1. Revised SRP Section 3.8.5 II.4 “Design and Analysis Procedures” item B, to include enhanced guidance to evaluate sliding and overturning stability. The technical rationale for this change is as follows. The conservatism in the SRP pseudo-static approach for demonstrating the factors of safety for sliding and overturning stability has led to difficulties when performing such analyses for generic plant designs where higher seismic loads are defined and a range of soil profiles are typically considered. Therefore, it is reasonable to utilize more realistic analytical methods which reduce some of the conservatisms inherent in the static type stability evaluation methods. Several DC applicants have resorted to more complex analytical methods to reduce the conservatisms inherent in the static approach. These methods rely on