Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 8dd882f4-a34f-4415-acd1-ebb441c72786
Document Type: srp
Title: PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT AND SEVERE ACCIDENT
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1213/ML12132A481.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 19
Section ID: 19.0
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
rs need to correct the deficiency and resubmit the PRA results and risk insights. If a peer review has not been performed, the applicants/holders should justify why their PRAs are adequate in terms of scope, level of detail, and technical acceptability. If the applicant’s/holder’s justification fails to provide the staff with an appropriate level of confidence in the models, results, and insights, the staff should conduct an audit of the applicant’s/holder’s PRA against the technical elements described in RG 1.200 to determine the PRA technical adequacy. 19.0-14 Draft Revision 3 – September 2012 B. RG 1.206 and this SRP section indicate the expected scope and level of detail of a PRA used to support a DC or COL application. Exceptions to this expected scope and level of detail may be acceptable if adequately justified by the applicant. 11. PRAs that meet the applicable supporting requirements for Capability Category I and meet the high-level requirements as defined in the ASME PRA Standard (ASME/ANS RA-S-2008) and addenda ASME/ANS RA-Sa–2009) should generally be acceptable for DC and COL applications. Alternatively, the applicant may identify, and justify the acceptability of, alternative measures for addressing PRA quality and technical adequacy. The staff should specifically review the acceptability of these alternative measures in the context of the specific uses and applications of the PRA. 12. In making its determination of technical adequacy of the PRA, the staff will consider the information provided by applicants in FSAR Chapter 19 and responses to the staff's RAIs or obtained by the staff during onsite audits. In addressing the technical adequacy of the PRA, the applicant should discuss: C. Prior NRC staff review of the PRA (e.g., during the DC process), findings (i.e., facts and observations) from that review, disposition of those findings, and the relevance of that review to the technical adequacy of the current plant-specific PRA D. The