Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 32179098-f78d-4852-9c29-1e5e3abb2705
Document Type: srp
Title: RISK-INFORMED DECISION MAKING:  TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0703/ML070380228.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 16
Section ID: 16.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
arized here. Other equivalent guidelines are acceptable. Sufficient safety margins are maintained when: (i) Codes and standards (e.g., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) or alternatives approved by the NRC are met (e.g., the proposed TS AOT or STI change is not in conflict with approved codes and standards for the subject system). (ii) Safety analysis acceptance criteria in the final safety analysis report (FSAR) are met or proposed revisions provide sufficient margin to account for analysis and data uncertainties (i.e., the proposed TS AOT or STI change does not adversely affect any assumptions or inputs to the safety analysis or justification ensures continued sufficient safety margin). For TS AOT changes, the effect on FSAR acceptance criteria should be assessed, assuming the plant is in the AOT (i.e., the subject equipment is inoperable) and there are no additional failures. The assessment should identify all situations in which entry into the proposed AOT could result in failure to meet an intended safety function. C. Need for and Adequacy of Change. The licensee has demonstrated that the change is needed for adequate reliability and availability of significant safety systems. D. Justification. The licensee has provided the justification for the change based on the guidance of subsection III.A of this SRP section. 2. Probabilistic Guidelines. The guidelines stated in RG 1.174, "An Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-Specific Changes to the Current Licensing Basis," Sections 2.2.4 and 2.2.5 (Reference 16), apply to TS change requests. Those sections present risk-acceptance guidelines as functions of the licensee's risk analysis of predicted changes in total core damage frequency (CDF) and large early release frequency (LERF) for the TS change requested. In addition, those sections address cases when the scope of the licensee's PRA does not include a Level 2