Document: NRC Regulatory Guide
Document ID: 6f84e3bf-9ff3-49fb-a16a-0de3b89e6bc6
Document Type: regulatory_guide
Title: An Approach for Plant-Specific Risk-Informed Decisionmaking for Inservice Inspection of Piping (Rev. 2)
Source: NRC Regulatory Guide Division 1
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2103/ML21036A105.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-05
Chapter: 
Section ID: RG-1.178
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
.Org. It should be noted that some of the international recommendations do not correspond to the requirements specified in the NRC’s regulations and the NRC’s requirements take precedence over the international guidance. RG 1.178, Page 9 C. STAFF REGULATORY GUIDANCE When a licensee elects to incorporate risk insights into its ISI programs, the staff assumes that the licensee will build upon its existing PRA activities. RG 1.174 describes in detail the five key principles involved in the integrated decisionmaking process. In addition, RG 1.174 describes a four-element process for evaluating proposed risk-informed changes. The key principles and the section of this guide that addresses each of these principles for RI-ISI programs are as follows. a. The proposed licensing-basis change meets the current regulations unless it is explicitly related to a requested exemption. (See section C.2.1.1.) b. The proposed licensing-basis change is consistent with the defense-in-depth philosophy. (See section C.2.1.2.) c. The proposed licensing-basis change maintains sufficient safety margins. (See section C.2.1.3.) d. When proposed licensing-basis changes result in an increase in risk, the increases should be small and consistent with the intent of the Commission’s policy statement on safety goals for the operations of nuclear power plants. (See section C.2.2.) e. The impact of the proposed licensing-basis change should be monitored using performance measurement strategies. (See section C.3.) Section C of RG 1.174 describes the four-element process for developing risk-informed regulatory changes: (1) define the proposed change, (2) perform an engineering analysis, (3) define the implementation and monitoring program, and (4) submit the proposed change. The order in which the elements are performed may vary, or they may occur in parallel, depending on the particular application and the preference of the program developers. The process is highly iterative. Thus, the final