FAQ
    
    AGREEMENT STATES
    
    Facility Locator
    
    What's New
    
    Site Help
    
    Index A-Z
    
    Contact Us
    
    Email Updates
      
      
      
      
       
      Report a Safety Concern
                  Search
        Nuclear Reactors
  
  Power Reactors
Research & Test ReactorsOperating Reactors
New ReactorsOperator Licensing
Research ActivitiesNuclear Reactor Quick LinksNuclear Materials
  
  Types of Nuclear Materials
Fuel Cycle Facilities
Medical, Industrial, & Academic UsesUranium Recovery
Materials TransportationMaterials Environmental Reviews
National Materials ProgramNuclear Materials Quick LinksRadioactive Waste
  
  Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities
Low-Level Waste
Waste Incidental to Reprocessing
High-Level WasteUranium Mill Tailings
Low-Level Waste Disposal
High-Level Waste DisposalStorage of Spent Nuclear Fuel
Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel
Research ActivitiesRadioactive Waste Quick LinksNuclear Security
  
  Domestic Safeguards
Information Security
Radioactive Material SecurityRequired Reporting for Clearance Holders
Insider Threat Program for Licensees
CybersecurityCriminal History & Firearms Checks
Contact UsPublic Meetings & Involvement
  
  The NRC Approach to Open Government
About Meetings Open to the Public
Conferences & SymposiaDocuments for Comment
NRC Rules and Petitions
Facilitating Stakeholder InvolvementNRC Information Quality Guidelines
Subscribe to E-mail UpdatesCommission Schedule
Public Meeting ScheduleAdjudications (Hearings)
Adjudicatory SubmissionsNRC Library
  
  Basic References
Document Collections
ADAMS Public Documents
Public Document Room
LSN LibraryFOIA & Privacy Act
Photos & Videos
Records Management
Training CoursesFAQ Index
Get Copies of Documents
Withholding of Sensitive Information
Controlled Unclassified Information Program (CUI)Electronic Hearing DocketAbout NRC
  
  The Commission
Organization & Functions
Governing Legislation
Plans, Budget, & Performance
Locations
History
Values
Direction-Setting & Policymaking
Research Activities
Radiation ProtectionFire Protection
Safety Culture
How We Regulate
Emergency Preparedness & Response
Public Affairs
Congressional Affairs
Enforcement
International Programs
State & Tribal ProgramsAlternative Dispute Resolution Programs
Privacy Program
Civil Rights Program
Contact Us
Career Opportunities
Contracting Opportunities
Small Businesses
Grant Opportunities
Generic SchedulesOther Links
  
  FAQ
Glossary
Facility Locator
What's NewSite Help
Index A-Z
Contact Us
Email UpdatesNRC Facebook
NRC Twitter Feed
NRC Linkedin
NRC Youtube Channel
NRC Flickr Gallery
NRC Blog Archived
NRC Email Subscriptions - GovDelivery Home
          About NRC  How We Regulate  Risk Assessment  Current Risk-Informed ActivitiesLight-Water Reactors Sub-Arena
        New light-water reactors (LWRs) comprise one of four sub-arenas that the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) identified in considering which areas of the reactor safety arena to target for greater use of risk information. This page summarizes the following aspects of this sub-arena with *expanding menus*:

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

double greater than sign**Objective**

double arrow head (chevron) pointing downward**Objective**

Implement risk-informed and performance-based activities to address the PRA elements of Title 10, Part 52, of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 52), and to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the design certification, licensing, and oversight activities that the NRC staff conducts for new LWRs.

This objective has two main parts:

First, this objective involves using the plant-specific PRA to implement risk-informed and performance-based programs. For example, the maintenance rule (10 CFR 50.65) will utilize the PRA to a great extent. Other examples include initiatives that a new reactor licensee may voluntarily pursue, such as risk-informed technical specification completion time, risk-informed in-service inspection, or special treatment under 10 CFR 50.69.
	Second, this objective involves using risk insights and PRA results to improve the NRC's effectiveness and efficiency in the licensing and oversight processes. For example, the staff will use risk insights, in conjunction with other considerations, to focus its review of a new reactor license application on those aspects that are important to risk. Other examples include developing risk-informed acceptance criteria for applications and adopting a risk-informed approach to sampling the inspection, testing, analysis, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) to confirm the acceptability of the as-built plant.

double greater than sign**Basis**

double arrow head (chevron) pointing downward**Basis**

The risk-informed and performance-based activities (listed below) for this sub-arena satisfy the following screening criteria:

The stated objective will help to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the NRC's regulatory process, while increasing nuclear plant safety and reducing unnecessary regulatory burden.
	The bases for developing a risk-informed and performance-based regulatory structure for licensing and oversight of new LWRs are articulated in several Commission documents, policy statements, and processes (including the 10 CFR Part 52 rulemaking).
	Goals and activities to meet the objective for this sub-arena will be performance-based, to the extent that they meet the following four criteria:
	measurable parameters to monitor performance
		objective criteria to assess performance
		flexibility to allow licensees to determine how to meet the performance criteria
		no immediate safety concern as a result of failure to meet the performance criteriaAn applicant for a combined license (COL) for a new LWR is required to perform a PRA. The NRC staff expects such PRAs to be used for the following purposes:

Identify risk-informed safety insights.
	Demonstrate how risk compares to the Commission's goals.
	Assess the balance between accident prevention and mitigation.
	Identify and address vulnerabilities, reduce risk contributors, and select among design alternatives during the design phase.
	Demonstrate that the plant design represents a reduction in risk (compared to existing operating plants).
	Demonstrate that the design addresses the requirements in 10 CFR 50.34(f), as they relate to Three Mile Island (TMI).PRA results and insights are used to support the following programs (among others):

Regulatory Treatment of Non-Safety Systems (RTNSS)
	Inspection, test, analysis, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC)
	Reliability Assurance Program (RAP)
	Future aspects of regulatory oversight, technical specifications, the maintenance rule (10 CFR 50.65), and others

double greater than sign**Goals**

double arrow head (chevron) pointing downward**Goals**

The following goals are derived from the Commission's policy statements and guidance, which reflect the current phase of NRC and industry development, as well as the current implementation of risk-informed activities:

Ensure (during the design certification phase) that the applicant used risk-informed safety insights to select among alternative features, operational strategies, and design options to reduce or eliminate the significant risk contributors of existing operating plants.
	Ensure that the risk associated with the design compares favorably with the Commission's goals of less than 1E-04/year for core damage frequency (CDF) and less than 1E-06/year for large release frequency (LRF).
	Using the results and insights from the PRA, ensure that the COL applicant supported the RTNSS process, including the identification of structures, systems, and components (SSCs).
	Using the results and insights from the PRA, ensure that the COL holder supported regulatory oversight processes, as well as programs associated with plant operations (such as technical specifications, reliability assurance, human factors, and maintenance rule implementation).
	Using the results and insights from the PRA, ensure that the applicant identified and supported the development of specifications and performance objectives for plant design, construction, inspection, and operation (such as the ITAAC, RAP, technical specifications, and COL action items and interface requirements).

List of Risk-Informed and Performance-Based Activities

This list shows the ongoing licensing initiatives, projects, and activities that the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has targeted for greater use of risk information in the Light-Water Reactors Sub-Arena within the Reactor Safety Arena:

Evaluate and Develop Risk-Informed Regulatory ROP Guidance for New ReactorsEvaluate and Develop Risk-Informed Regulatory ROP Guidance for New Reactors

double greater than sign**Summary Description**

double arrow head (chevron) pointing downward**Summary Description**

In response to the staff requirements memorandum (SRM) on SECY-12-0081, "Risk-informed Regulatory Framework for New Reactors," the staff submitted SECY-13-0137, "Recommendations for Risk-Informing the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) for New Reactors." In that SECY paper the staff recommended the development of an integrated risk-informed approach for evaluating the safety significance of inspection findings for new reactor designs. In its SRM on SECY-13-0137, the Commission approved the staff's recommendation to develop appropriate performance indicators (PIs) and thresholds for new reactors. The Commission requested that the staff develop, with appropriate stakeholder input, the necessary updates to the PIs, including any new PIs or changes to thresholds, and submit them to the Commission for approval before power operation for the first new reactor units.

The Commission disapproved the staff's recommendation to develop an integrated risk-informed approach for evaluating the safety significance of inspection findings for new reactor designs. The Commission directed the staff to enhance the Significance Determination Process (SDP) by developing a structured qualitative assessment for events or conditions that are not evaluated in the supporting plant risk models, such as those conditions that might arise with passive safety systems, digital instrumentation and control (I&C), and human performance issues. The Commission requested that the staff submit a paper to the Commission with its proposed approach for any revisions to the SDP for new reactors at least 1 year before the scheduled implementation of any changes to the Reactor Oversight Program (ROP).

double greater than sign**Previous Fiscal Years**

double arrow head (chevron) pointing downward**Previous Fiscal Years**

**FY 2015**

The staff continued to work on the Commission's directions from the SRM on SECY-13-0137. The staff worked with stakeholders and the public to develop appropriate PIs and enhance the SDP. In May 2015, the staff discussed its approach and plans for responding to the SRM on SECY-13-0137 with stakeholders during a ROP working group public meeting. Another public meeting with stakeholders was held in September 2015 to discuss updates on the staff's activities and to obtain stakeholder feedback.

**FY 2016**

The staff continued to hold meetings internally and with stakeholders to develop documents related to the ROP program for new reactors. A draft white paper was issued on September 7, 2016.

**FY 2017**

The staff continued to hold meetings internally and with stakeholders. The staff drafted a response to the commission direction in SRM-SECY-13-0137 which has been reviewed by internal and external stakeholders including the ACRS. The draft SECY is planned to be submitted to the Commission by December 2017.

**FY 2018**

On September 12, 2018, the staff submitted SECY 18-0091, "Recommendations for Modifying the Reactor Oversight Process for New Large Light Water Reactors with Passive Safety Systems Such as the AP1000 (Generation III+ Designs)," in response to the Commission direction in the SRM to SECY 13-0137. In this paper, the staff has provided to the Commission its proposed approach to modifying the SDP for new reactors, specifically the AP1000. The staff intends to modify Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0609, Appendix A, "The Significance Determination Process for Findings At-Power," Appendix G, "Shutdown Operations Significance Determination Process," Appendix H, "Containment Integrity Significance Determination Process," and Appendix M, "Significance Determination Process Using Qualitative Criteria." The staff intends to have the revisions to those guidance documents completed by November 2019.

In addition to the planned changes to the SDP, the staff provided to the Commission options for revising the Performance Indicators (PIs) for the AP1000. Staff analysis concluded that the five Mitigating Systems Performance Index (MSPI) PIs used for the currently operating fleet will not be valid for monitoring performance for the AP1000 design. In the paper, the staff recommended for Commission approval elimination of the MSPI indicators for the AP1000, with no new PIs to replace them. The baseline inspection program will provide additional guidance to compensate for the elimination of the MSPI indicators.

The paper also provided an analysis of the baseline inspection program for the AP1000, and determined that most inspection procedures will need to be modified to adjust sample sizes and resource estimates because of the fewer active components and lower overall risk in the design. The inspection procedures will also be modified to provide specific guidance unique to the AP1000 design.

**FY 2019**

In FY 2019, the staff completed a review of all inspection procedures for AP1000. The staff is planning to revise required sample sizes in many of those inspections based on far fewer safety-related structures, systems, and components, as well as the reduced risk profile of the new design. The staff is also adding guidance for inspectors to consider systems classified as Regulatory Treatment of Non-Safety Systems (RTNSS) for inspection samples because of their importance to defense-in-depth.

The staff continued updating Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0609, Appendix A, "The Significance Determination Process for Findings At-Power," Appendix G, "Shutdown Operations Significance Determination Process," and Appendix H, "Containment Integrity Significance Determination Process," to incorporate procedure enhancements associated with AP1000. Since the changes identified to incorporate AP1000 are not substantial, the IMC procedure revisions are merged with other updates as part of the routine procedure change process. Appendix M, "Significance Determination Process Using Qualitative Criteria," was updated in January 2019. During its review, the staff determined that no changes were necessary to Appendix M to accommodate AP1000.

**FY 2020**

The staff completed updating Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0609, Appendix A, "The Significance Determination Process for Findings At-Power," Appendix G, "Shutdown Operations Significance Determination Process," and Appendix H, "Containment Integrity Significance Determination Process," to incorporate procedure enhancements associated with AP1000. Since the changes identified to incorporate AP1000 were not substantial, the IMC procedure revisions were merged with other updates as part of the routine procedure change process. Appendix M, "Significance Determination Process Using Qualitative Criteria," was updated in January 2019. During its review, the staff determined that no changes were necessary to Appendix M to accommodate AP1000.

**FY 2021**

No Update

**FY 2022**

The NRC staff completed the update of baseline inspection procedures to incorporate unique sample requirements, to applicable procedures, that considers the risk profile of the AP1000 Units. In SECY-20-0050, the staff proposed the current inspection sample sizes (minimum, nominal, and maximum) for Units 1 and 2 as well as the proposed sample sizes for Units 3 and 4, and revised sample sizes for those Baseline Inspection Procedures (BIPs) for which the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) will be treated as a four-unit site. The staff also proposed the approach to inspecting the regulatory treatment of non-safety system systems (RTNSS) of structures and components within the Reactor Oversight Process.

For common sitewide program BIPs, the staff identified that many BIPs are not dependent on system design or numbers of components. If the applicable organizational structure is common to the four units (e.g., site security is the same for all units), the staff intends to treat the facility as a single four-unit site. For these BIPs, the staff determined that the current sample range was sufficient with the expectation that inspections will be performed at the maximum sample range and resource estimate at the VEGP.

double arrow head (chevron) pointing downward**FY 2023**

No Update

|

          
          Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, February 21, 2024
    
    Section Navigation
      Navigation
        Operating Reactors


New Light-Water Reactors


Advanced Reactors


Research and Test Reactors


Fuel Cycle


Byproduct Materials


Spent Fuel Storage and Transportation


Low-Level Waste and Decommissioning


Cross-Cutting Activities


Completed Risk-Informed Activities
      
      
      
      
      
      
Five representative photos of NRC’s regulatory arenas

      
      
      
      
      
      Spotlight
      Choose a Section

The CommissionLicense Renewal Generic Environmental ReviewJob OpeningsPalisades RestartEnvironmental JusticePilgrim Water ReleasesMonticello Tritium IssueInternational Strategy 2021-2025Tribal Liaison ProgramMAP-XTransformation at the NRC - UpdatedOIG HotlineRulemaking ActivityCommission DocumentsAdvanced ReactorsNuclear SecurityStrategic Plan
    
    We Welcome Your Views    To request additional information, contact us about risk-informed, performance-based regulation.
      Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, February 21, 2024  Home
NEWS RELEASES

EVENT REPORTS

ADAMS

OPEN GOV

DIGITAL GOVERNMENT

THE STUDENT CORNER

PHOTOS & VIDEOS

FOR DEVELOPERS
        About Us
STRATEGIC PLAN

BUDGET & PERFORMANCE

AGENCY FINANCIAL REPORT

LICENSE FEES

HISTORY OF THE NRC

CAREER OPPORTUNITIES

NRC ETHICS

AGENCY STATUS

CONTACT US
        Popular Documents
INFO DIGEST

FACT SHEETS & BROCHURES

FORMS

ELECTRONIC SUBMITTALS APPLICATION

ADJUDICATORY SUBMISSIONS

NRC REPORTS - NUREG

NRC REGULATIONS - 10-CFR

INSPECTION REPORTS

PLAIN WRITING

ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

RULEMAKING

GLOSSARY
        Stay Connected
    
    
    
    
    United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    
    
    
    
    Regulations.gov

USA.gov

FOIA

Whistleblower Protection

No Fear EEO

Inspector General

Site Map

Accessibility

Privacy Policy

Site Disclaimer

For Employees