Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: ac43f632-9db1-4857-9f56-bfba45965456
Document Type: srp
Title: * These are modifications to a plant’s design, operations, or other activities that require NRC approval. These modifica
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0232/ML023250195.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 19
Section ID: 19
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ce of adequate protection. A more in-depth assessment of the special circumstances, the safety principles, and the issues identified for management attention in Section 2.2.6 of Regulatory Guide 1.174 should then be made in order to reach a conclusion regarding the level of safety associated with the requested change. In making this assessment, the reviewers should be mindful to clearly differentiate the concept of adequate protection from the numerical risk acceptance guidelines. The guidelines in themselves do not constitute a definition of adequate protection but provide an appropriate set of criteria to be used in the process for evaluating adequate protection. As discussed in Regulatory Guide 1.174, the uncertainty in the analyses must be considered in any finding that adequate protection is achieved. The final acceptability of the proposed change should be based on a consideration of current regulatory requirements, as well as on adherence to the safety principles, and not solely on the basis of a comparison of quantitative probabilistic risk assessment results with numerical acceptance guidelines. The decision to reject a non-risk-informed license amendment request on the basis of risk should be supported by the RILP and would be expected to be elevated to office- level management for a final decision. The authority provided by the Atomic Energy Act and current regulations requires rejection of a license amendment request if the NRC is unable to find that adequate protection is provided.