Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 8b8173c5-5bd5-417d-bda1-023ee9c7ef5e
Document Type: srp
Title: Ground Motion Response Spectra.  In this subsection, the staff reviews the
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1230/ML12301A010.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 2
Section ID: 2.5.2.6
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
compliance or adequate protection issue, 10 CFR 52.39 precludes the staff from imposing new site characteristics, design parameters, or terms and conditions on the early site permit at the COL stage. Consequently, a COL application referencing an ESP need not include a re-investigation of the site characteristics that have previously been accepted in the referenced ESP. However, in accordance with 10 CFR 52.6, “Completeness and Accuracy of Information,” the applicant or licensee is responsible for identifying changes of which it is aware, that would satisfy the criteria specified in 10 CFR 52.39. Information provided by the applicant in accordance with 10 CFR 52.6(b) will be addressed by the staff during the review of a COL application referencing an ESP or a DC. For a COL application referencing either an ESP or DC or both, the staff should review the corresponding sections of the ESP and DC FSER to ensure that any ESP conditions, restrictions to the DC, or COL action items identified in the FSERs are appropriately handled in the COL application. For review of a DC application, the reviewer should follow the above procedures to verify that the design, including requirements and restrictions (e.g., interface requirements and site parameters), set forth in the FSAR meets the acceptance criteria. DCs have referred to the FSAR as the DCD. The reviewer should also consider the appropriateness of identified COL action items. The reviewer may identify additional COL action items; however, to ensure these COL action items are addressed during a COL application, they should be added to the DC FSAR. IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS The review should document the staff’s evaluation of geologic and seismic site characteristics with respect to the relevant regulatory criteria. The evaluation should support the staff’s conclusions as to whether the regulations are met. The reviewer should state what was done to evaluate the applicant’s safety analysis report. The staff’s