Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 8aed6e45-e1a4-4461-a194-dbee884f551d
Document Type: srp
Title: -22
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1305/ML13059A367.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 13
Section ID: 13.6.3
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
Draft Revision 2 – April 2014 The requirements in the following are sufficiently independent from effects of site characteristics or of low significance in possible effects that they need not be addressed in the review: • 10 CFR 73.55(f), “Target Set” • 10 CFR 73.55(l) “Facilities Using Mixed-Oxide (MOX) Fuel Assemblies Containing up to 20 Weight Percent Plutonium Dioxide (PuO2)” • 10 CFR 73.55(m), “Security Program Review” • 10 CFR 73.55(q), “Records” Various requirements within sections identified above, are programs, processes, or procedures or based on details found in COL applications. Therefore, these are justified to exclude from the review of whether security plans can be developed, and they are not included in the scope of ESP review. Similarly, the list of regulatory requirements below also are programmatic in nature, met by developing administrative controls or management systems that are independent of site characteristics or are addressed in the scope of COL application. Therefore, the following are not included for considerations in the scope of an ESP review: • 10 CFR 73.54, “Protection of Digital Computer and Communication Systems and Networks” • 10 CFR 73.56, “Personnel Access Authorization Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants” • 10 CFR 73.57, “Requirements for Criminal History Records Checks of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to a Nuclear Power Facility or Access to Safeguards Information” • 10 CFR 73.58, “Safety/Security Interface Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors” • 10 CFR 73.21, “Protection of Safeguards Information: Performance Requirements” • 10 CFR 73.22, “Protection of Safeguards Information: Specific Requirements” IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS The reviewer should verify that the applicant has provided sufficient information and that the review supports conclusions of the following type to be included in the staff’s Safety Evaluation Report. For ESP reviews, the findings