Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: e32f0820-4e33-476e-aa36-4ca8c2c64af0
Document Type: srp
Title: Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Plant-Specific, Risk-Informed Decisionmaking:
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0119/ML011940192.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 19
Section ID: 19.0
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
lity for supporting the results as they were used in the decision. In this sense, quality can be thought of as a measure of the confidence in the results. To ensure that the important assumptions used in the engineering analysis to justify the LB change remain valid, the integrated decisionmaking process should ensure that the licensee maintains an appropriate set of programmatic activities (e.g., iST, QA, ISI, maintenance, monitoring) for important elements of the plant response capability. In addition, performance of compensating SSCs should be ensured (through programmatic activities) when these SSCs are used to help justify the relaxation of requirements for other SSCs. The process used by licensees to integrate traditional and probabilistic engineering evaluations for risk-informed decisionmaking is expected to be well-defined, systematic, and scrutable. Appendix B to this SRP chapter presents review guidance and staff expectations for the licensee's integrated decisionmaking process. SRP 19-25 In evaluating the acceptability of a proposed change, reviewers should also address the following factors: the cumulative impact of previous changes and the trend in CDF and LERF (the licensee's risk management approach) the impact of the proposed change on operational complexity, burden on the operating staff, and overall safety practices plant-specific performance and other factors, including for example, siting factors, inspection findings, performance indicators, operational events, and Level 3 PRA information if available the benefit of the change in relation to its CDF/LERF increase, and whether it is practical to accomplish the change with a smaller CDF/LERF impact practical actions that could reduce CDF/LERF when there is reason to believe that the baseline CDF/L.I-RF are above the guideline values (i.e., 10. and 10' per reactor year) Review of Combined Change Requests In assessing combined change requests, reviewers should evaluate the acceptability of each of