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:
sk-informed regulation. The robustness of the results can be determined by developing an understanding of the contributors and the sources of uncertainty that impact the results. For the proposed risk change, reviewers should identify the elements that increase risk and those that decrease risk, and then identify the contributors to both the risk increase and decrease. A review of the basic events, assumptions, and uncertainties involved in the increase and decrease in risk will help reviewers understand the elements that are important in determining the risk change, and thus ensure that the conclusions are robust with respect to the results obtained. In addition to the focused-scope review, reviewers should consider the following factors in determining the need for a more detailed and larger scope staff review of the PRA: • The PRA results play a relatively significant role in the decisionmaking process, coupled with the finding that the proposed change in risk and/or the baseline risk is close to the decision guidelines as defined in Section 2.2.4 of Regulatory Guide 1.174. • Staff audits of the licensee's process for conducting a PRA have identified practices that could detrimentally affect the quality of the technical analysis. • Results of the licensee's analysis submitted in support of a licensing action are in some way counter-intuitive or inconsistent with results for similar plants on similar issues. • The licensee's analysis is part of a pilot application of PRA in a regulatory activity. • The PRA includes new methods that are unfamiliar to the staff. The staff review should take into account the process used in a peer review (including the review guidelines or standards to which the PRA is compared, the review scope and elements, the qualification and makeup of the review team, etc.). Results from previous staff reviews of the PRA (e.g., from previous applications) could also provide a good starting point. In cases where the PRA is based on the