Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 4e1d86bd-74a5-4678-8bc0-ffce3ba28ea0
Document Type: srp
Title: RISK-INFORMED INSERVICE TESTING
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0428/ML042880272.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 3
Section ID: 3.9.7
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
intains sufficient safety margins. 4) When proposed changes result in an increase in core damage frequency and/or risk, the increases should be small and consistent with the intent of the Commission's Safety Goal Policy Statement. 5) The impact of the proposed change should be monitored using performance measurement strategies. In demonstrating adherence to the above principles, reviewers should ensure that licensees address the following issues as part of their RI-IST submittals: All safety impacts of the proposed change are evaluated in an integrated manner as part of an overall risk management approach in which the licensee is using risk analysis to improve operational and engineering decisions broadly by identifying and taking advantage of opportunities for reducing risk, and not just to eliminate requirements the licensee sees as undesirable. For those cases when risk increases are proposed, the benefits should be described and should be commensurate with the proposed risk increases. The approach used to identify changes in requirements was used to identify areas where requirements should be increased as well as where they could be reduced. 3.9.7-1 2 Rev. 0-August 1998 * The scope and quality of the engineering analyses (including traditional and probabilistic analyses) conducted to justify the proposed licensing basis change are appropriate for the nature and scope of the change and are based on the as-built and as-operated and maintained plant, including reflecting operating experience at the plant. * The plant-specific PRA that is used to support licensee proposals has been subjected to quality controls such as an independent peer review or certification. * Appropriate consideration of uncertainty is given in analyses and interpretation of findings, including using a program of monitoring, feedback and corrective action to address significant uncertainties. * The use of CDF and LERF as bases for probabilistic risk assessment guidelines is an acceptable