Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: b6b57a00-5b85-4f0c-965c-ca89ef4265e7
Document Type: srp
Title: DETERMINATION OF RUPTURE LOCATIONS AND DYNAMIC EFFECTS
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1608/ML16088A041.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 3
Section ID: 3.6.2
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
as appropriate, as discussed for pressurized water reactor (PWR) primary systems in NUREG-0609, “Asymmetric Blowdown Loads on PWR Primary Systems.” 7. 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 final safety analysis report (FSAR) meets the acceptance criteria. DCs have referred to the FSAR as the design control document (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. For review of a COL application, the scope of the review is dependent on whether the COL applicant references a DC, an early site permit (ESP), or other NRC approvals (e.g., manufacturing license, site suitability report or topical report). 3.6.2-12 Revision 3 – December 2016 For review of both DC and COL applications, SRP Section 14.3 should be followed for the review of ITAAC. The review of ITAAC cannot be completed until after the completion of this section. IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS The reviewer verifies that the applicant has provided sufficient information and that the review and calculations (if applicable) support conclusions of the following type to be included in the staff's SER. The reviewer also states the bases for those conclusions. The staff concludes that the applicant has postulated pipe ruptures appropriately, has designed SSCs to accommodate and protect against the associated dynamic effects, and, therefore, has met the relevant requirements of GDC 4. This conclusion is based on the following: 1. The applicant has appropriately identified/postulated proposed pipe rupture locations, and the design of piping restraints and measures to deal with the subsequent dynamic effects of pipe-whip and jet