Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 7916b088-fb90-4163-84fe-027bd315bcc5
Document Type: srp
Title: REVIEW OF RISK INFORMATION USED TO SUPPORT PERMANENT PLANT-
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0717/ML071700658.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 19
Section ID: 19.2
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ontainment? 19.2-33 June 2007 Note: The analysis will be subject to increased technical review and management attention as indicated by the darkness of the shading of the figure. In the context of the integrated decisionmaking, the boundaries between the regions should not be interpreted as being definitive; the numerical values associated with defining the regions in the figure are to be interpreted as indicative values only. Figure III-1 Acceptance Guidelines for Core Damage Frequency (CDF) 19.2-34 June 2007 Note: The analysis will be subject to increased technical review and management attention as indicated by the darkness of the shading of the figure. In the context of the integrated decisionmaking, the boundaries between the regions should not be interpreted as being definitive; the numerical values associated with defining the regions in the figure are to be interpreted as indicative values only. Figure III-2 Acceptance Guidelines for Large Early Release Frequency (LERF) 19.2-35 June 2007 IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS The results of the reviewers’ evaluation should reflect a consistent and scrutable integration of the probabili stic considerations and traditional engineering considerations provided by the licensee or applicant and developed independently by the reviewers. To reach a finding of acceptability, reviewers will generally need to show that in light of a small or nonexistent increase in risk and a reduced level of conservatism, defense in depth and sufficient safety margins are maintained. Findings of acceptability should be supported with logical bases built from an evaluation of the considerations given in Subsection III of this SRP section. Reviewers should confirm that sufficient information is provided in accordance with the requirements of this SRP section and that the evaluation supports the following conclusions; these confirmations are to be included in the staff’s safety evaluation. IV.1 General • The proposed change meets the current