Document: NRC Regulatory Guide
Document ID: 22ccfd5e-c5d8-4615-a02c-32369aa9f533
Document Type: regulatory_guide
Title: Acceptability of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Results for Risk-Informed Activities (Rev. 3)
Source: NRC Regulatory Guide Division 1
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1930/ML19308B636.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 
Section ID: RG-1.200
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ccur prior to the onset of core damage SY-C1 thru SY-C3 -------------------- No objection -------------------- 2-2.5 – HR 2-2.5.1 -------------------- No objection -------------------- Table 2-2.5-1 -------------------- No objection -------------------- Tables 2-2.5-2(a) thru 2-2.5-10(i) HR-A1 thru HR-A3 -------------------- No objection -------------------- HR-B1, HR-B2 -------------------- No objection -------------------- HR-C1 thru HR-C3 -------------------- No objection -------------------- DG-1362, Appendix A, Page A-12 Table A-2. Staff Position on ASME/ANS RA-Sa-2009 Part 2, Technical and Peer Review Requirements for At-Power Internal Events Index No Issue Position Resolution HR-D1, HR-D2HR-D4, HR-D5, HR-D7 -------------------- No objection -------------------- HR-D3 Add examples for what is meant by quality in items (a) and (b) of Cat II, III. Clarification Cat II, III: (a) the quality (e.g., format, logical structure, ease of use, clarity, and comprehensiveness) of written procedures (for performing tasks) and the type of administrative controls that support independent review (e.g., configuration control process, technical review process, training processes, and management emphasis on adherence to procedures). of administrative controls (for independent review) (b) the quality of the human-machine interface (e.g., adherence to human factors guidelines [Note (3)] and results of any quantitative evaluations of performance per functional requirements), including both the equipment configuration, and instrumentation and control layout (3) NUREG-0700, Rev. 2, Human- System Interface Design Review Guidelines; J.M. O’Hara, W.S. Brown, P.M. Lewis, and J.J. Persensky, May 2002. HR-D6 This SR should be written similarly to HR-G9 Clarification PROVIDE an assessment of the uncertainty in the …. point estimates of HEPs. CHARACTERIZE the uncertainty in the estimates of the HEPs consistent with the quantification approach, and PROVIDE mean values for use in the