Draft Safety Evaluation (August 21, 2000), Version 5, Restart of IP2 Following Steam Generator Tube Failure

Notes: 1. Extensively revised from last version. Comments from Ted, Bill, and Jack incorporated. 2. No conclusions had been reached regarding the acceptability of plant restart or for how long operation could be authorized at the time this draft SE was prepared. 3. The detectability of ODSCC in the small radius u-bends still stands out as an issue we would have had to address in our conclusions. We are getting the information from Cauis Dodd that Jack requested. 4. This SER sends the message that NRC had to drive all the inspection improvements; that is, ConEd would not have implemented improvements on their own. I have no problem with this since it is true. However, we need to make sure senior management understands that this SER sends that message. Also, this observation should be considered as part of the assessment of the licensee performance implication/issue-ConEd didn't take effective corrective actions even after the tube failure?]