United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Protecting People and the Environment
Home > NRC Library > Document Collections > NUREG-Series Publications > Staff Reports > NUREG 0933 > Section 3. New Generic Issues- Issue 183: Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits in Technical Specifications (Rev. 2)

Resolution of Generic Safety Issues: Issue 183: Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits in Technical Specifications (Rev. 2) ( NUREG-0933, Main Report with Supplements 1–35 )


The objective of this task was to respond to the Regulatory Review Group (RRG) Item #55. The RRG recommendations were to provide quicker review of core reload codes and to revise existing TS to permit changes, in accordance with approved core topical reports, to take advantage of improved analyses without a license amendment by revising GL 88-161638 (Core Operating Limits Report [COLR] Guidance). The task was subsequently revised to address the first recommendation only by preparing a supplement to GL 83-11.1637 This issue was identified in an NRR memorandum1601 to RES in February 1996.

The RRG recommended actions had no impact on safety and were only intended to reduce schedule and resource requirements for NRC review of reactor core reloads and the reload analysis methodology. Thus, the issue addressed economic impacts on both licensees and the NRC and, therefore, was considered a Regulatory Impact issue.1731


In resolving the issue, the staff drafted a proposed supplement to GL 83-11,1637 presenting criteria for licensees who wish to perform their own analyses using previously approved methods. By complying with these criteria, a licensee would eliminate the need to submit a topical report qualifying the use of a previously approved methodology. The supplement was published for public comment in the Federal Register (60 FR 54712) on October 25, 1995. However, the staff later concluded that reducing NRC oversight was not justified because of concerns for improper application of approved methods by licensees as well as increased complexities in core reload analysis due to mixed core designs. This conclusion was to be published in the Federal Register. Thus, the issue was resolved.


1601. Memorandum for C. Serpan from A. Chaffee, "Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) Input Into Research NUREG-0933 (WITS Item 9400213)," February 13, 1996. [9602260124]
1637. Letter to All Operating Reactor Licensees from U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Licensee Qualification for Performing Safety Analyses in Support of Licensing Actions (Generic Letter No. 83-11)," February 4, 1983. [ML031080334]
1638. Letter to All Power Reactor Licensees and Applicants from U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Removal of Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits from Technical Specifications (Generic Letter 88-16)," October 4, 1988. [ML031130447, ML031150422]
1731.Memorandum for W. Russell from D. Morrison, "Prioritization of the NRR Action Plans Submitted to RES on February 13, 1996," June 24, 1996. [9606260260]