K06 assurance and procurement architecture

Part 53 advanced-reactor campus

Direct answer

Use security-by-design, technology-inclusive licensing evidence, consequence analysis, and selected Part 73 pathways from the beginning; never infer election, applicability, or approval from the existence of the final rule.

Authority and evidence boundary. K06 publishes reference architecture, source review, machine-checkable dependencies, procurement scope, and test-evidence formats. These records do not certify a facility, award a contract, authorize an operation, prove deployment, establish current operation, or transfer regulatory or command authority.

Operating context

A new advanced reactor under a Part 53 licensing path supplies a high-consequence compute campus.

Required assumptions

  • The final Part 53 framework exists, but facility elections and license-specific requirements are not assumed.
  • Passive safety can reduce some consequences but does not eliminate sabotage, cyber, insider, supply-chain, or grid hazards.
  • Digital design decisions can become licensing-basis evidence and must be controlled from concept through operation.

Priority hazards

  • security claims unsupported by design evidence
  • digital I&C common-cause failure
  • remote fleet-management compromise
  • supply-chain and firmware substitution
  • authority drift between applicant, licensee, vendor, and datacenter operator

Required evidence

  • licensing-path and election record
  • security-by-design traceability
  • high-consequence event analysis
  • digital asset and support-system inventory
  • independent verification plan and change control

Site-tailoring questions

  • Which Part 73 provisions are elected or imposed?
  • Which claims depend on passive safety and what defeats them?
  • How are vendor, fleet, and remote-service privileges bounded?
  • What evidence is required at each licensing and deployment milestone?

Priority control trace

Recommended work packages

Explicit non-claims

  • Not a Part 53 application
  • Not an NRC approval
  • Not a conclusion that armed responders or other safeguards may be removed

Machine-readable facility pattern