Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: b8d2b8f5-432a-4c0a-81ab-20231f7d0f28
Document Type: srp
Title: PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT AND SEVERE ACCIDENT EVALUATION FOR
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1508/ML15089A068.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 19
Section ID: 19.0
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
-in-depth (D3) in the DI&C system. An implementation and monitoring program should address how the applicant will ensure that the design continues to reflect the assumed reliability of the systems and components during plant operation. Severe Accident Evaluation (FSAR Section 19.2) 1. The staff reviews the applicant’s description and analysis of the design features to prevent and mitigate severe accidents, in accordance with the requirements in 19.0-33 Revision 3 – December 2015 10 CFR 52.47(23) or 10 CFR 52.79(a)(38), for a DC or a COL application, respectively. This review should specifically address the issues identified in SECY-90-016 and SECY-93-087 (listed with their SRMs above) for prevention (e.g., anticipated transients without scram, midloop operation, station blackout, fire protection, and intersystem loss- of-coolant accident) and mitigation (e.g., hydrogen generation and control, core debris coolability, high-pressure core melt ejection, containment performance, dedicated containment vent penetration, equipment survivability). 2. The staff reviews the information provided by the applicant to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 52.47(8) or 10 CFR 52.79(a)(17), for a DC or a COL application, respectively. In particular, both regulations invoke 10 CFR 50.34(f)(1)(i) to specify that a design- specific or plant-specific PRA should be performed to seek improvements in core heat removal system reliability and containment heat removal system reliability that are significant and practical and do not excessively impact the plant. 3. The reviewer compares the design features that affect containment performance and the calculated performance of the containment with published results for operating plants and evaluates whether or not the design under review is robust and has a high tolerance for severe accidents when compared to that of the operating plants. The comparison and conclusions are documented in the SER. 4. The reviewer identifies the design features