Document: NRC Regulatory Guide
Document ID: c7a40fcc-fc9d-4eb2-ad86-f9f5b0f04c82
Document Type: regulatory_guide
Title: Plant-Specific, Risk-Informed Decisionmaking:  Technical Specifications (Rev. 2)
Source: NRC Regulatory Guide Division 1
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1920/ML19206A489.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 
Section ID: RG-1.177
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
n or PRA model features should be dispositioned by implementing PRA model changes or by the qualitative assessment of the impact of the changes on the CRMP assessment tool. This qualitative assessment recognizes that changes to the PRA take time to implement and that changes can be effectively compensated for without compromising the ability to make sound engineering judgments. (2) Limitations of the CRMP assessment tool are identified and understood for each specific CT extension. b. Procedures exist for the control and application of CRMP assessment tools, including a description of the process when the plant configuration of concern is outside the scope of the CRMP assessment tool. Component 3: Level 1 Risk-Informed Assessment The CRMP assessment tool uses at least a Level 1, at-power, internal events PRA model. CRMP assessments can reference a risk matrix, preexisting calculations, or new PRA analyses. The CRMP assessment may use any combination of quantitative and qualitative input: a. Quantitative assessments should be performed whenever necessary for sound decisionmaking. b. When quantitative assessments are not necessary for sound decisionmaking, qualitative assessments can be performed. Qualitative assessments should consider applicable existing insights from previous quantitative assessments. Component 4: Level 2 Issues and External Hazards The licensee should treat external hazards and Level 2 issues either qualitatively or quantitatively, or both. 2.4 Acceptance Guidelines for Technical Specification Changes The guidelines discussed in Staff Regulatory Positions C.2.4 and C.2.5 of RG 1.174 are applicable to TS CT and SF change requests. Those sections present risk-acceptance guidelines as a function of the result of the licensee’s risk analysis in terms of total CDF and total LERF predicted for the plant and the change in CDF and LERF predicted for the proposed licensing basis changes. TS submittals for changes to CTs should also be evaluated against