IR 05000354/2019010
| ML19235A007 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 08/22/2019 |
| From: | Brice Bickett Reactor Projects Branch 3 |
| To: | Carr E Public Service Enterprise Group |
| Bickett B | |
| References | |
| IR 2019010 | |
| Download: ML19235A007 (16) | |
Text
August 22, 2019
SUBJECT:
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION - BIENNIAL PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND RESOLUTION INSPECTION REPORT 05000354/2019010
Dear Mr. Carr:
On August 2, 2019, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed a problem identification and resolution inspection at your Hope Creek Unit 1 and discussed the results of this inspection with Mr. Jim Priest and other members of your staff. The results of this inspection are documented in the enclosed report.
The NRC inspection team reviewed the stations corrective action program and the stations implementation of the program to evaluate its effectiveness in identifying, prioritizing, evaluating, and correcting problems, and to confirm that the station was complying with NRC regulations and licensee standards for corrective action programs. Based on the samples reviewed, the team determined that your staffs performance in each of these areas adequately supported nuclear safety.
The team also evaluated the stations processes for use of industry and NRC operating experience information and the effectiveness of the stations audits and self-assessments.
Based on the samples reviewed, the team determined that your staffs performance in each of these areas adequately supported nuclear safety.
Finally the team reviewed the stations programs to establish and maintain a safety-conscious work environment, and interviewed station personnel to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs. Based on the teams observations and the results of these interviews the team found no evidence of challenges to your organizations safety-conscious work environment. Your employees appeared willing to raise nuclear safety concerns through at least one of the several means available.
The NRC inspectors did not identify any finding or violation of more than minor significance. This letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be made available for public inspection and copying at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the NRC Public Document Room in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Brice A. Bickett, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects
Docket No. 05000354 License No. NPF-57
Enclosure:
As stated
Inspection Report
Docket Number:
05000354
License Number:
Report Number:
Enterprise Identifier: I-2019-010-0005
Licensee:
Facility:
Hope Creek Generating Station
Location:
Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038
Inspection Dates:
July 15, 2019 to August 02, 2019
Inspectors:
M. Draxton, Senior Project Engineer
S. Ghrayeb, Resident Inspector
J. Patel, Resident Inspector
B. Sienel, Resident Inspector
Approved By:
Brice A. Bickett, Chief
Reactor Projects Branch 3
Division of Reactor Projects
SUMMARY
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) continued monitoring the licensees performance by conducting a biennial problem identification and resolution inspection at Hope Creek Generating Station in accordance with the Reactor Oversight Process. The Reactor Oversight Process is the NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors. Refer to https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/oversight.html for more information.
List of Findings and Violations
No findings or violations of more than minor significance were identified.
Additional Tracking Items
None.
INSPECTION SCOPES
Inspections were conducted using the appropriate portions of the inspection procedures (IPs) in effect at the beginning of the inspection unless otherwise noted. Currently approved IPs with their attached revision histories are located on the public website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/insp-manual/inspection-procedure/index.html. Samples were declared complete when the IP requirements most appropriate to the inspection activity were met consistent with Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 2515, Light-Water Reactor Inspection Program - Operations Phase. The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel to assess licensee performance and compliance with Commission rules and regulations, license conditions, site procedures, and standards.
OTHER ACTIVITIES - BASELINE
71152B - Problem Identification and Resolution Biennial Team Inspection (IP Section 02.04)
- (1) The inspectors performed a biennial assessment of the licensees corrective action program, use of operating experience, self-assessments and audits, and safety conscious work environment.
- Corrective Action Program Effectiveness: The inspectors assessed the corrective action programs effectiveness in identifying, prioritizing, evaluating, and correcting problems.
- Operating Experience, Self-Assessments and Audits: The inspectors assessed the effectiveness of the stations processes for use of operating experience, audits and self-assessments.
- Safety Conscious Work Environment: The inspectors assessed the effectiveness of the stations programs to establish and maintain a safety-conscious work environment.
INSPECTION RESULTS
Assessment 71152B Corrective Action Program -
Identification: The inspectors determined that, in general, PSEG identified issues and entered them into the corrective action program at a low threshold. During plant walk downs, there is evidence of continued focus to improve the look and condition of the plant, although the inspectors identified a few deficiencies not previously identified and captured in PSEGs corrective action program. PSEG promptly entered each issue into their corrective action program and took actions to evaluate and address.
The inspectors identified a potential weakness in the processing of anonymous condition reports. This is documented as an observation below.
Prioritization and Evaluation: Based on the samples reviewed, the inspectors determined that, in general, PSEG appropriately prioritized and evaluated issues commensurate with the safety significance of the identified problem. PSEG appropriately screened notifications (NOTFs) for operability and reportability, categorized NOTFs by significance, and assigned actions to the appropriate department for evaluation and resolution.
Correcting Problems: The inspectors determined that the overall corrective action program performance related to resolving problems was effective. In most cases, PSEG implemented corrective actions to resolve problems in a timely manner.
However, the inspectors identified two minor performance deficiencies for corrective actions being closed to non-corrective actions that were subsequently closed with no action taken, and for failure to assign a corrective action program action item to a condition adverse to quality. Additionally, the inspectors identified an observation on untimely actions in addressing a long term asset management (LTAM) item. The two minor performance deficiencies and the observation are documented below.
Assessment 71152B Operating Experience, Self-Assessments and Audits -
The team determined that PSEG appropriately evaluated industry operating experience for its relevance to the facility. PSEG appropriately incorporated both internal and external operating into plant procedures and processes, as well as lessons learned for training and pre-job briefs.
The team reviewed a sample of self-assessments and audits to assess whether the licensee was identifying and addressing performance trends. The team concluded that PSEG had an effective self-assessment and audit process.
Assessment 71152B Safety Conscious Work Environment -
The team interviewed a total of 41 individuals: 13 in focus groups and 28 in one-on-one interviews. The purpose of these interviews was
- (1) to evaluate the willingness of the licensee staff to raise nuclear safety issues,
- (2) to evaluate the perceived effectiveness of the corrective action program at resolving identified problems, and
- (3) to evaluate the licensee's safety-conscience work environment. The personnel interviewed were randomly selected by the inspectors from the Operations, Engineering, Maintenance, Security, and Radiation Protection work groups. To supplement these discussions, the team interviewed the Employee Concerns Program (ECP) Coordinator to assess her perception of the site employees' willingness to raise nuclear safety concerns. The team also reviewed the ECP case log and select case files.
All individuals interviewed indicated that they would raise safety concerns. All individuals felt that their management was receptive to receiving safety concerns and generally addressed them promptly, commensurate with the significance of the concern. Most interviewees indicated they were adequately trained and proficient on initiating NOTFs. All interviewees were aware of the licensee's ECP, stated they would use the program if necessary, and expressed confidence that their confidentiality would be maintained if they brought issues to the ECP. When asked whether there have been any instances where individuals experienced retaliation or other negative reaction for raising safety concerns, all individuals interviewed stated that they had neither experienced nor heard of an instance of retaliation at the site. The team determined that the processes in place to mitigate potential safety culture issues were adequately implemented.
Minor Performance Deficiency 71152B Minor Performance Deficiency: The Inspectors reviewed corrective actions related to the finding associated with the High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) turbine lube oil water intrusion (ML16319A289). Specifically, the inspectors reviewed those corrective actions that were not completed by the end of the associated supplemental inspection (Inspection Report 05000354/2017011, ML17242A220). During the review, the inspectors identified two examples of corrective actions that were closed out to a non-corrective action program (NCAP) action tracking item (ACIT), contrary to PSEG procedure. Per LS-AA-125, Corrective Action Program, corrective actions (CAPR / CRCA / CRDA) cannot be closed to an ACIT. Root cause evaluation (RCE) order 70188669, Operations 1160 and 1170 for CRCA-3 and CRCA-4 respectively were to Perform a gap analysis of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) HPCI and Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) maintenance manual guidance as compared to the PSEG HPCI and RCIC maintenance procedures, document the results, and initiate corrective actions to close any gaps identified. These condition report corrective actions (CRCAs) were subsequently closed to NOTF 20776157, which was categorized as significance level (SL) 5, an NCAP, which generated ACITs to track the actions. Review of NOTF 20776157 identified that the gap analyses were completed but that the ACIT tracking actions were subsequently closed without completing the corrective actions identified from the gap analyses.
Screening: The inspectors determined the performance deficiency was minor because the gaps identified in the evaluation are not safety significant. The inspectors evaluated this issue using IMC 0612, Appendix B, Issue Screening, and IMC 0612, Appendix E, Examples of Minor Issues, and determined that this performance deficiency was minor because all screening questions were answered No. PSEG initiated a NOTF to review their gap analyses and to re-evaluate for any proposed changes (NOTF 20830358).
Minor Performance Deficiency 71152B Minor Performance Deficiency: The inspectors identified a minor performance deficiency associated with PSEG procedure LS-AA-125, Corrective Action Program, Revision 26 for the failure to assign an action item commensurate with the significance level of a NOTF that documented a condition adverse to quality (CAQ). Specifically, PSEG procedure requires the licensee to assign a CRCA action item for a CAQ that requires restoration. The inspectors found that PSEG assigned an ACIT action item, which is an NCAP action item, to a CAQ NOTF 20800224. As a result, no engineering analysis was documented to determine the acceptability of voltage readings outside of the acceptance criteria provided in the surveillance test procedure. Additionally, the inspectors identified that PSEG did not generate a new NOTF in accordance with LS-AA-125 to document a new occurrence of a condition adverse to quality.
The inspectors reviewed several NOTFs related to the Hope Creek HPCI 250V direct current (DC) system. NOTF 20791133, dated April 1, 2018, documented that the HPCI battery is in bad condition due to corrosion and needs to be rebuilt. The inspectors noted that this NOTF was correctly classified as a CAQ, significance level 2, and was correctly assigned to the next monthly surveillance work order to inspect, clean, and restore the 250V DC battery to its normal condition.
However, during the July 2018 quarterly surveillance test, performed under work order 50202962, PSEG found that battery voltages measured from positive phase to ground and negative phase to ground did not meet the acceptance criteria in procedure HC.MD-ST.PJ-0002, 250 Volt Quarterly Battery Surveillance. PSEG determined this was due to corrosion on battery terminals and it did not impact any technical specification acceptance criteria, such as electrolyte level, battery float voltage, individual cell voltage, and specific gravity. The inspectors reviewed NOTFs 20797958 and 20800224, dated July 1, 2018, that documented this issue, and found both NOTFs were correctly classified as conditions adverse to quality. Dispositioning these NOTFs, PSEG assigned NOTF 20797958 to work order 50205332 to perform a cleaning of battery terminals during the next monthly surveillance test, which is an acceptable assignment for a CAQ item per PSEG procedure. NOTF 20800224 was assigned to engineering as an ACIT 70201508-0010, an NCAP action item, to address this issue, which was not in accordance with the LS-AA-125 procedure.
Procedure LS-AA-125 requires the licensee to assign a CRCA action item for a CAQ that requires restoration. The inspectors determined that the engineering ACIT 70201508-0010 should have been assigned as a CRCA because previous action items assigned to work orders to clean and inspect battery for corrosion did not restore a CAQ. The inspectors reviewed ACIT 70201508-0010 and found that it was completed without review and approval, as it was an NCAP item, and documented that this condition existed because of corrosion on battery terminals. No engineering analysis was performed to determine what would be the acceptable voltage levels when measured to ground to ensure voltage leakage to ground does not challenge battery operation. The inspectors reviewed samples of monthly and quarterly surveillance test results and determined that HPCI 250V DC battery met all the acceptance criteria specified in Hope Creek technical specification, as such battery remained operable. The inspectors also performed walkdown of battery to assess the material conditions. The inspectors noted that corrosion amount found on battery terminals was not in high concentration.
Additionally, the inspectors found that no new NOTFs were written to document the batterys degraded conditions when quarterly surveillance tests performed in October 2018 (50205371)and April 2019 (50209680) found again battery voltages to ground outside of its acceptance criteria. The team determined that these were new occurrences of a CAQ as previous work orders should have cleaned and restored the battery to its normal condition. PSEGs action for not writing a new NOTF was contrary to their corrective action program procedure LS-AA-125, which states to promptly identify and correct items or occurrences that are conditions adverse to quality or might adversely affect the safe operation of nuclear plant.
PSEG promptly documented this issue in their corrective action program as NOTFs 20830113 and 20830418.
Screening: The inspectors determined the performance deficiency was minor. The inspectors evaluated this issue using IMC 0612, Appendix B, Issue Screening, and IMC 0612, Appendix E, Examples of Minor Issues, and determined that this performance deficiency was minor because all screening questions were answered No. In addition, PSEG will be replacing the HPCI 250V DC battery during the refueling outage in October 2019 as part of their 15-year preventive maintenance replacement frequency. Additionally, the inspectors determined that monthly and quarterly surveillance tests procedures require inspecting all battery cells and terminals are clean and free from corrosion, as any further degradation should reasonably be identified and corrected until the battery is replaced.
Observation: Untimely Action in Addressing Long Term Asset Management (LTAM) Item.
71152B The inspectors reviewed NOTF 20757935, dated March 1, 2017, that documented 17 safety-related molded case circuit breakers (MCCBs) in the RCIC 250V DC system that are installed in the plant beyond the vendor recommended service life of 24 years. This NOTF was written from the expert panel review of RCIC motor operated valve failure. The inspectors noted that the NOTF was assigned a significance level 4, which is a NCAP condition. As a result, an ACIT 70187722-0060 was assigned to address this NOTF. The inspectors noted that this ACIT was closed on July 17, 2017, stating that LTAM item H-17-0007 had been created and approved by the supervisor for presentation to the plant health committee (PHC) for the replacement of all 250V DC MCCBs. During the interview of system manager who is assigned to this LTAM item, the inspectors found that no progress has been made from the LTAM to address this condition. The LTAM item has been opened since March 2017 and has not been presented to PHC for resolution. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed the initial NOTF screening and action item assignments and determined that no action item was assigned to perform an evaluation of breakers currently installed in the plant for documenting an equipment reliability strategy until the LTAM item is fully implemented. Based on inspectors questioning of the lack of evaluation, PSEG presented an environmental qualification report EQ-HC-070 to the inspectors that showed these breakers have a thermal life of 43 years. PSEG initiated NOTF 20830192 to present the LTAM item to PHC, determine if an equipment reliability strategy should be developed, and determine why the LTAM item was not presented to PHC in two years and communicate lessons learned.
Observation: Potential Weakness in Anonymous Condition Report Processing 71152B The inspectors identified a potential weakness in the processing of anonymous condition reports. At Hope Creek, all anonymous condition reports that are generated from the internal PSEG website, automatically initiate an email that is sent and reviewed by only one individual, the ECP Manager. The ECP Manager then determines whether to forward the emails on to other PSEG staff and then manually enters the information into an ECP database. The ECP Manager, who is not a current or previously licensed reactor operator, has the responsibility to complete all necessary screenings that a condition report would receive that is not generated anonymously. Examples of these screenings include: condition significance determination for conditions adverse to quality or regulatory compliance, determinations of whether any equipment operability concerns, any regulatory reporting requirements, or maintenance rule assessment. Additionally, the inspectors observed that during a period when the ECP Manager was scheduled to be out of the office, the individual acting in the ECP Managers absence did not have access to the anonymous condition report emails, thereby introducing a potential delay in its review, in this case, approximately two weeks. PSEG had previously removed guidance from the corrective action program procedures and the ECP procedure (EI-AA-101-1001) only states to ADDRESS anonymous concerns in the same manner as any other concern except that direct feedback to the CI cannot be performed. The inspectors completed a review of recent issues identified through the anonymous condition report process and did not identify any missed immediate safety or security concerns and therefore determined that there was no performance deficiency. PSEG initiated a NOTF to address the issue (NOTF 20830551).
EXIT MEETINGS AND DEBRIEFS
The inspectors verified no proprietary information was retained or documented in this report.
- On August 2, 2019, the inspectors presented the biennial problem identification and resolution inspection results to Mr. Jim Priest and other members of the licensee staff.
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
Inspection
Procedure
Type
Designation
Description or Title
Revision or
Date
Corrective Action
Documents
70188669, 70188669, 70189117, 70195826, 70196335,
70199676, 70207066, 70207181, 70207183, 70207214,
207681, 70207710
20646549, 20669265, 20673253, 20681229, 20681234,
20684861, 20686027, 20701152, 20706542, 20707933,
20711033, 20721083, 20721482, 20729267, 20733274,
20734665, 20752195, 20753185, 20753328, 20753501,
20756466, 20757935, 20760377, 20760534, 20761771,
20761853, 20763122, 20765269, 20769459, 20770143,
20770560, 20771144, 20771542, 20771751, 20772095,
20772331, 20772898, 20775158, 20776157, 20776332,
20779096, 20783856, 20784017, 20784207, 20786627,
20788159, 20788580, 20789672, 20791133, 20792102,
20792269, 20792450, 20792776, 20793027, 20793068,
20793638, 20794010, 20794358, 20795835, 20797958,
20798315, 20799124, 20799402, 20800224, 20802452,
20803120, 20803200, 20808531, 20812743, 20813032,
20813609, 20814275, 20814988, 20815405, 20817261,
20817433, 20819294, 20819607, 20820854, 20821328,
20821572, 20822687, 20824565, 20824948, 20824969,
20825101, 20825608, 20825609, 20825610, 20826010,
20826508, 20826941, 20827285, 20827321, 20827603,
20828359
70192117
WGE (Work Group Evaluation), Commercial Grade
Dedication Plan
2/27/2017
70192567
ACE (Apparent Cause Evaluation), Fuel Conditioning
Exceeded NF-AB-440
04/19/2017
70194313
ERE (Equipment Reliability Evaluation), H1-BC-HVF027B
Tripped Breaker During Stroke
09/25/2017
70194313
H1-BC-HVF027B Tripped Breaker During Stroke
Revision 0
70195872
RCE (Root Cause Evaluation), Hope Creek 2017
Maintenance & Training TIF
10/25/2017
Inspection
Procedure
Type
Designation
Description or Title
Revision or
Date
70197980
WGE, Pitting Identified on Strainer Body
01/04/2018
70198651
WGE for NCV 2018410-01 [Failure to establish and
maintain compensatory measures]
201011
CCE (Common Cause Evaluation), Evaluate H1R21
Rework for Common Causes
08/02/2018
201021
ACE, Trip of 'A' Feed Pump
07/02/2018
202192
Root Cause Evaluation - HC Cycle 22 Failed Fuel
Revision 0
203043
10C617 CAB Blown Fuse
Revision 0
207064
CCE, HCVS SAWA Fill and Vent Pior to use
05/22/2019
Corrective Action
Documents
Resulting from
Inspection
20829285, 20829387, 20829605, 20829675, 20829899,
20829921, 20830037, 20830113, 20830117, 20830182,
20830192, 20830358, 20830418, 20830550, 20830551,
20830862
Miscellaneous
Hope Creek Generating Station Plant Performance Report
April 2019
Hope Creek Generating Station Plant Performance Report
May 2019
EQ-HC-070
Environmental Qualification Binder for General Electric DC
Breakers TEC/TED Series
Revision 1
05000354/2018001-
Implementing Procedures for Beyond Design Basis FLEX
Mitigating Strategies Not Followed
05000354/2018003-
Inadequate Procedures for Restoration of the 'A' Reactor
Feed Pump Turbine (RFPT) Following Maintenance
HC-MSPI-001
Mitigating System Performance Index Basis Document
Revision 8
05000354/2018410-
Failure to establish and maintain compensatory measures
05000354/2019011-
Inadequate Procedural Guidance to Perform Time Critical
Actions
05000354/2017001-
Inadequate Control of Defective Material Causes the 'A'
EDG to Fail to Start
Inadequate Preventive Maintenance Replacement
Inspection
Procedure
Type
Designation
Description or Title
Revision or
Date
05000354/2017001-
Schedule for the HPCI Overspeed Trip Tappet Reset
Spring
05000354/2017003-
Inadequate Operability Determination of Ground Fault
Alarm
05000354/2017003-
Inadequate Establishment of Maintenance Rule Goals,
Monitoring, and Corrective Actions for the Reactor
Protection System
05000354/2017004-
Scaffold Installed with Insufficient Separation from Safety-
Related Equipment
05000354/2017004-
Inadequate Design Control of Emergency Diesel Generator
Speed Switch
05000354/2017008-
Improper Preventive Maintenance Deletion Results in the
Inoperability of the 'A' Control Room HVAC System
05000354/2018002-
Inadequate Instructions for Station Service Water Pump
Maintenance
05000354/2018004-
Inadequate High Pressure Coolant Injection Trip Unit
Preventive Maintenance
Operability
Evaluations19-004
206392, H1PK -1B-D-417 and H1PK -72-42023
Revision 0
70185270-0010
Op evaluation for NCV 2019011-02 [Inadequate Procedural
Guidance to Perform Time Critical Actions]
Procedures
Procedure Biennial Reviews
Revision 1
Nonconforming Materials, Parts, or Components
Revision 5
ENGINEERING TECHNICAL EVALUATIONS
Revision 12
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS PROGRAM
Revision 10
Employee Concerns Program Process
Revision 12
PSEG ANS Siren Monitoring Troubleshooting, and Testing
Revision 2
System Health Indicator Program
Revision 17
System Performance Monitoring and Analysis
Revision 11
Inspection
Procedure
Type
Designation
Description or Title
Revision or
Date
Conduct of Plant Engineering Manual
Revision 16
OPERATING EXPERIENCE PROGRAM
Revision 18
Issue Identification and Screening Process
Revision 19
Corrective Action Program
Revision 26
SELF-ASSESSMENT / BENCHMARKING
Revision 17
NC.RS-TI.ZZ-0592
Radiation Protection Instrumentation (RPI) Laboratory
Calibration and Quality Control
NC.RS-TI.ZZ-0592
Radiation Protection Instrumentation (RPI) laboratory
calibration and quality
Revision 3
Operability Determination and Functionality Assessment
Revision 4
Radioactive Material (RAM) Control
Revision 13
Work Screening and Processing
Revision 21
Self-Assessments
Aggregate Performance Review - Nuclear Safety Culture
Monitoring (18-03)
Aggregate Performance Review - Nuclear Safety Culture
Monitoring (19-01)
Performance Improvement Functional Area Assessment
May 2019
Employee Concerns Program Evaluation
2/20/2018
Nuclear Safety Culture Survey Fleet Overview
December
2017
Problem Identification and Resolution Focused Area Self-
Assessment
04/26/2019
Engineering - Current Performance Assessment
May 2019
80119657
Corrective Action Program Audit Report, Audit NOSA-HPC-
17-04, April 17, 2017 to April 28, 2017
05/03/2017
80124590
Corrective Action Program Audit Report, Audit NOSA-HPC-
19-04
05/02/2019
CISA 70187691
Maintenance Execution of On-line LCO Windows
08/18/2017
FASA 80119257
F-Ops Leadership in Mitigating Risk
06/13/2017
NOSA-HPC-17-08
Radiation Protection Audit Report
October 9-
20, 2017
NOSA-HPC-17-09
Operations, Operations Training, and PORC
11/22/2017
NOSA-HPC-18-01
Security Plan, FFD, AA, PADS, and Cyber Security
01/31/2018
Inspection
Procedure
Type
Designation
Description or Title
Revision or
Date
NOSA-HPC-18-03
Maintenance
2/28/2018
NOSA-HPC-18-04
Chemistry, Radwaste, Effluent and Environmental
Monitoring
05/24/2018
NOSA-HPC-18-06
Engineering Programs and Station Blackout
08/16/2018
NOSA-HPC-18-07
Fire Protection
10/09/2018
NOSA-HPC-18-12
Document Control and Quality Assurance Records Audit
Report
December 3-
17, 2018
Work Orders
202962
250V DC Quarterly Surveillance
07/02/2018
205371
250V DC Quarterly Surveillance
10/01/2018
209680
250V DC Quarterly Surveillance
04/14/2019
60136011
NUCM lFDHV-FOOl-DIAGNOSTIC TST W/HI TEMP GLUE
04/19/2018