Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: b8d2b8f5-432a-4c0a-81ab-20231f7d0f28
Document Type: srp
Title: PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT AND SEVERE ACCIDENT EVALUATION FOR
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1508/ML15089A068.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 19
Section ID: 19.0
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
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 of the PRA in the licensing process. 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: A. 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 3 Peer review of the DC PRA is not required prior to application. However, if a peer review was conducted prior to the application; the staff should examine the peer review report. If a certain aspect of the PRA deviates from accepted good practices, the applicant/holder should justify that this deficiency does not impact the PRA results or risk insights. Otherwise, applicants/holders 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. PRA self-assessment is an acceptable tool for assessing the technical adequacy of a PRA performed in support of an application for a design certification. 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, “An Approach for Determining the Technical Adequacy of Probabilistic