Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: dd4f84a9-8976-44c4-b631-d7c0254f4efc
Document Type: srp
Title: PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT AND SEVERE ACCIDENT EVALUATION FOR
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1416/ML14161A594.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 19
Section ID: 19.0
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
consistent with prevailing PRA standards, guidance, and good practices as needed to support its uses and applications and as endorsed by the NRC (e.g., RG 1.200). As discussed in RGs 1.174 and 1.200, the quality of a PRA is measured in terms of its appropriateness with respect to scope, level of detail, and technical adequacy. The applicant’s adherence to the 2 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 Risk Assessment Results for Risk-Informed Activities,” to determine the PRA technical adequacy. 19.0-15 Draft Revision 3 –November 2014 recommendations provided in RGs 1.174 and 1.200 pertaining to quality and technical adequacy will result in a more efficient and consistent NRC staff review process. With respect to PRA quality, the following items are noted: A. There are no regulatory requirements in 10 CFR Part 52 that specifically pertain to PRA quality with respect to DC or COL