Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: faf774de-7226-41f8-ba11-7cf612907af6
Document Type: srp
Title: GASEOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1306/ML13065A119.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 11
Section ID: 11.3
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
staff to conclude that the application provides a bounding assessment in demonstrating the capability to comply with the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I design objectives. The staff’s evaluation confirmed that physical attributes of the site that could affect the design basis of SSCs (in the context of SRP Sections 11.1 and 11.2) that are important to safety or risk significant are reflected in the site characteristics, design parameters, and conditions stipulated in the ESP, including COL action items. The staff confirms that the applicant has identified the appropriate COL action item, as warranted, in recognition that future local land-use information may reveal that new and different exposure pathways and dose receptors exist from that described in the ESP. The COL action item flags the necessity to consider new exposure pathways, when different than those described in the ESP, and conduct a new dose assessment and confirm that associated doses are in compliance with NRC regulations and applicable guidance. V. IMPLEMENTATION The staff will use this SRP section in performing safety evaluations of ESP, CP, DC, OL or COL applications submitted by applicants pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50 and 10 CFR Part 52. The staff will use the method described herein to evaluate conformance with Commission regulations as noted below. With respect to demonstrating conformance with the SRP, NRC regulations state, in part, that applications must contain “an evaluation of the standard plant design against the SRP revision in effect 6 months before the docket date of the application.” However, an applicant is required to identify differences between this SRP section and design features, analytical techniques, and procedural measures proposed for the facility, and discuss how the proposed alternatives to the SRP acceptance criteria provide acceptable methods in complying with regulations that underlie SRP acceptance criteria and meet NRC