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:
A supporting the licensee's proposals has been subjected to quality assurance methods and quality control methods [Section 111.2.2]. * 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 [Sections 111.2.2 and 111.31. The use of core damage frequency (CDF) and large early release frequency (LERF) as bases for probabilistic risk assessment guidelines is an acceptable approach to addressing Principle 4. Use of the Commission's Safety Goal quantitative health objectives (QHOs) in lieu of LERF is acceptable in principle and licensees may propose their use. However, in practice, implementing such an approach would require an extension to a Level 3 PRA, in which case the methods and assumptions used in the Level 3 analysis, and associated uncertainties, would require additional attention [Section 111.2.2]. SRP 19-6 * Increases in estimated CDF and LERF resulting from proposed LB changes will be limited to small increments. The cumulative effect of such changes should be tracked and considered in the decision process [Section 111.2.2]. The acceptability of the proposed changes should be evaluated by the licensee in an integrated fashion that ensures that all principles are met [Section 111.2.3]. Data, methods, and assessment criteria used to support regulatory decisionmaking must be well documented and available for public review [Section 111.41. Ill. REVIEW GUIDANCE AND PROCEDURES For risk-informed applications, reviewers should ensure that licensees' submittals meet the principles specified in Section II of this SRP chapter, and address the expectations for risk-informed decisionmaking (also specified in Section II). This section provides guidance to assist reviewers in making this determination. For consistency, Sections Il1.1 through 111.4 present this guidance in terms of the four elements of the approach described in