Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: f60cdc8f-3c25-45c3-a1d3-b0f530961625
Document Type: srp
Title: DETERMINING THE TECHNICAL ADEQUACY OF PROBABILISTIC RISK
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1219/ML12193A107.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 19
Section ID: 19.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
nably represent the as-built and as-operated plant. “Reasonableness” is judged relative to the application being considered. For NFPA 805 applications, 10 CFR 50.48(c), which incorporates NFPA 805 by reference, requires that the PRA approach, methods, and data be appropriate for the nature and scope of the change being evaluated, be based on the as-built and as-operated and maintained plant, and reflect the operating experience at the plant. For new reactors, the licensee shall maintain and upgrade the PRA in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.71(h). The reviewer should confirm that the PRA has been revised to reflect any significant changes in design or operational practices (including operating procedures), and that the data used to estimate the parameters are current. This may be achieved by reviewing the licensee's description of its updating process and ascertaining that the licensee has adequately addressed recent plant modifications and operational changes that could have a significant impact on the results of the specific application that are not reflected in the current PRA model. 2 For new reactors, since plant-specific operational data (i.e., initiating event frequencies, failure rates, etc.) and test and maintenance data may not yet be available in sufficient quantity, the staff should ensure that the impact caused by the use of generic experience or data is insignificant or otherwise acceptable. The staff should assess relevant assumptions and data to ensure that the PRA is statistically and feasibly developed. 19.1- 7 Rev. 3 – September 2012 III.2.2 Assessment of the Technical Adequacy of the PRA Required by the Application The parts of the PRA relied upon by the application should be assessed for technical adequacy. The reviewer should determine that the peer review and self-assessment have been performed in conformance with the relevant documents and with the exceptions and clarifications found in the appendices to RG 1.200. The