IR 05000443/1986017
| ML20203Q262 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 04/29/1986 |
| From: | Eselgroth P, Nicholas H, Vankessel H, Wen P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203Q256 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-443-86-17, NUDOCS 8605090179 | |
| Download: ML20203Q262 (18) | |
Text
,
..
....
.. -. -
.
....
. -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
..
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-443/86-17 Docket No.
50-443 License No.
CPPR-135 Category B
Licensee:
Public Service of New Hampshire P.O. Box 330 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Facility Name:
Seabrook Station, Unit 1 Inspection At:
Seabrook, New Hampshire Inspection Conduc March 3 to 14, 1986 Inspectors:
.J
,)
//)
Ib M.
anKess 1,' Reactor Engineer
/ d th kn 4 9lW
.
H. H. Nicholas, S'tartup Consultant
'/dat)
T A c. N u r/nh6 P. ' Wen, Reactor Engineer date
//2I D
Approved by:
'
P". W. Eselgroth, Chief, Test Programs Mate /
Section, 08, DRS Inspection Summary:
Inspection on March 3-14, 1986 (Inspection No. 50-443/86-171 Areas Inspected: Routine Unannounced inspection of the Pre 0perational Test (POT) Program including the test witnessing of preoperational tests, 'he eval-uation of the test results of completed tests, independent verification of test measurements, review of activities in QA/QC interface for POT program, and the review of unresolved items identified by the inspector in previous inspectiocs.
Results:
No violations were identified.
Note: For acronyms not defined, refer to NUREG-0544, " Handbook of Acronyms and Initialisms".
8605090179 860502 PDR ADOCK 05000443 Q
_ - _ - _ - _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _.
..
1.
Persons Contacted
- D. Abely, Maintenance Supervisor (NHY)
P.H. Hannes, Engineer (YAEC)
- D.R. Jaquette, Licensing (YAEC)
G.A. Kann, Test Group Manager - STD (NHY)
M. Kenney, Engineer (YAEC)
- G. Kingston, Compliance Manager - Station (NHY)
G. Kotkowski, Startup Engineer (NHY)
- D.C. Lambert, Field QC Manager (UE&C)
- J.L. Marchi, Startup Quality Control Manager (NHY)
- D.G. McLain, Startup Manager, (NHY)
- W.T. Middleton, QA Staff Engineer (YAEC)
- L. Rau, Reactor Startup Supervisor (NHY)
A. Smith, Startup Engineer (NHY)
- W.R. Sullivan, QA Engineer (YAEC)
- J.G. Teff t, STD-Project Engineer (NHY)
- D.F. Turner, QA Engineer (YAEC)
Personnel Present
- R.S. Barkley, Resident Engineer
- A.C. Cerne, Senior Resident Engineer
- M. Dev, Reactor Engineer
- W. Oliveira,
- D.G. Ruscitto, Resident Engineer
- Denotes those present at March 14, 1986 exit meeting.
l 2.
Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Unresolved Item 443/85-26-02, " Operating Restrictions on Cooling Towers".
I References 1.
Transmittal letter SBU-97707 from UE&C to Mr. R.J. DeLoach (YAEC),
"Seabrook Station Service Water System, Cooling Tower Operating Guide Lines", dated January 30, 1986 (rough draft issue).
2.
NRC Inspection report 443/85-20 3.
NRC Inspection report 443/85-31 l
l l
!
l l
!
t
.
..
Scope The applicant was to perform an engineering evaluation of the Service Water System to determine if operating restrictions must be imposed on the cooling towers (ultimate heat sink).
Discussion Discussion on this open item with the applicant revealed the following information.
PT 15.3 test proved that the thermal performance of the cooling
towers is adequate.
PT 15.6 and 15.8 tests proved that the pump performance of the cool-
ing tower pumps and the service water (ocean) pumps is satisfactory; UE&C made calculations to show the adequacy of these pumps:
For PT 5.8, UE&C calculations 4.3.8.57F show the S.W. Pumps to be ade-quate.
The FSAR has to be revised to close the loop; For PT 15.6, UE&C calculations 4.3.8-60, -61, -62 show the cooling tower pumps to be adequate. These calculations were reviewed by the NRC previously (see reference 2 above) and found to be acceptable.
Operating guide lines have been prepared (in draft form) to assure
safe cooling tower operations. (Reference 1 above).
The inspector reviewed reference 1 above and found the instructions rather cumber-some. The same view of these guide lines was expressed by the appli-cant's engineer responsible for this equipment. He was going to ask for a revision of this draft to achieve simpler and more effective results.
The item will be kept open until the draft of reference 1 has been revised and accepted by the applicant.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item 443/86-01-01, " Test Exceptions reviewed in 443/86-01 inspection" All of the open items have been closed with exception of:
Proc. No.
Title ILL No.
IPT17.2 Spent Fuel C/U SF0161 1AT13.1 Fire Pump Flow Cap.
FP0420 1AT13.1 Fire Pump Flow Cap FP0419 1PT-8 ECCS Performance RH0400 1PT-40.7 Condenser Steam Dump MS1140 1PT-13.2 MSIVs MS1222 1PT-40.7 Condenser Steam Dump MS1320 1PT-14.2 Emergency Feed Water FW1223 1PT-14.2 Emergency Feed Water FW1270
.
.
~.
.-
-
=_
_..
-
~ -.
,.
Item FW1270 is the piping modifications to enable cold starts of the Terry
'
j Turbine, as discussed in Section 6 of this report.
!
(0 pen) Unresolved Item 443/86-13-01, " Test Exceptions to Tests reviewed in 443/86-13 inspection" All of the items are still opea with exception of:
Proc. No.
Title ILL No, i
AT-39 Lube Oil Transfer 2 Purif.
SC-0259 AT-11 RC Drains N/A
- AT-38 Aux Boiler N/A
- This item is done under AT-28 (0 pen) Unresolved Item 443/86-13-03 " Hot Restart Failure on EDG-1A".
As mentioned under Section 3.1, the EDG1B unit performed well and met the j
hot restart requirements.
EDG-1A will be tested again after a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />
full load run. This will be done in the near future prior to the LOCA/
Loop test to be performed under PT-39-2.
i
3.
Preoperational Test Program
.
,
.
!
3.1 Test Witnessing l
Scope The Emergency Diesel Generators (EDS) test PT-33.1 for EDG "B" l
.
was witnessed. This included the hot restart after completion
'
of the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> test run.
-
The Loss of Offsite Power Test, PT-39.1, Rev. 0 (approved
(
2-21-86), was witnessed, i
Discussion i
{
Test witnessing by the inspector included observations of:
!
Overall crew performance
!
Use of latest revised and approved procedure by test personnel ll
Designation of one person in charge of conducting the tests
Availability of sufficient test personnel to perform the tests
Ccverage of test prerequisites
!
Use of acceptance criteria to evaluate test results
l-
,
~.,.
-
.
.. -
.. _. _.____,._ _ __.._,_._ _.~,
_ _
_ _ -... _ _,.. _ _ _ _
.. -..
-
.
f
.
Verification that plant supporting systems are in service
In-service status of calibrated special test equipment required
by the test procedure Adherence to the test requirements of the test procedure during
the tests Timely and correct action by test personnel during the perfor-
mance of the tests Data collection for final analysis by test personnel
The inspector independently verified readings of system parameters during the tests. Table 3-1 shows readings taken from local panels of the EDG by the inspector at different times during the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> run.
The EDG 18 successfully comnleted the 24-hour full load run, which included a 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> run at a 10% overload (2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> rate of 6700 kw)
followed by a 22 hour2.546296e-4 days <br />0.00611 hours <br />3.637566e-5 weeks <br />8.371e-6 months <br /> run at 100% full load (6100 kw).
At the conclusion of the 24-hour full load ran this EDG set was stop-ped.
Five minutes later, this EDG was restarted and loaded to full power in order to satisfy the Hot Restart requirement. The engine came up to speed, and the electrical load could be applied as the generator field did flash. This test was important because in the case of EDG1A, the generator field did not flash due to a malfunction of a contact.
l A strip chart recorder (Gould recorder 2800s, FLS-332) was used to obtain the transient data for voltage and frequency as required in the steps 6.14.10.1 through 3 of PT-33.1.
The inspector, indepen-dently checked the data collected on the strip chart and found these data to be within the acceptable range of the acceptance criteria.
The recorder had been recalibrated moments before the test.
This positive test result on the hot restart provides new confidence that the problem with the EDG1A may not happen again. Another at-tempt will be mada for the Hot Restart of EDG1A in the near future.
With respect to Test PT 39.1, the inspectors witnessed all of the parts, as follows:
6.1 Loss of Offsite Power - Both Trains (Event #1)
6.2 Restoration of Buses from Offsite Power Sources 6.3 Emergency Diesel Generator Loading and Running Characteristics
.
.
6.4 Loss of Offsite Power While DG-IA is Operating in Parallel With Offsite Power (Event #2)
6.5 Loss of Offsite Power While DG-1B is Operating in Parallel with Offsite Power (Event #3)
The test was successful.
There were no discrepancies.
Findings No violations were identified by the inspecto _
.
TABLE 3-1 INSTRUMENT READINGS FROM LOCAL PANELS OF EDG-1B Date 3/11/86 3/11/86 3/11/86 3/12/86 3/12/86 Time 6:45 p.m.
6:58 p.m.
10:00 p.m.
8:05 a.m.
10:33 p.m.
(start)
(6:14)
KVARS 1800 1900 1200 2000 2000 Volts 4300 4300 4250 4300 4300 KW 5980 6000 4000 6100 6180 Amps 800 800 550 870 830 Cycles
60 60.5
60 Fuel Oil to
27
26
Filter, psig Fuel Oil to
26
24.5 24.5 Engine, psig Lube Oil 94.5
93
93 Press., psig Lube Oil to 115 118 118 118 119 Strainer.
F Lube Oil to 129 136 140 143 143 HX, *F RPM 520 520 510 505 502
{
e
.
..
3.2 Test Result Evaluation
,
Scope
'
Test' procedures. listed in attachments C and D were reviewed to verify that adequate testing was -accomplished in order to satisfy regulatory guidance and licensee commitments and to ascertain whether uniform criteria were being applied for evaluating completed preoperational tests in order to assure their technical and administrative adequacy.
Discussion The test results were reviewed for:
Test changes
,
Test exceptions
Test deficiencies
Acceptance criteria
Performance verification a
Recording of conduct of test
QC inspection records
-
System restoration to normal
Independent verification of critical steps or parameters
Identification of test personnel
Verification that the test results have been approved
'
,
Findings
,
No discrepancies or unacceptable conditions were noted in the review s
of these procedures with the 'ollowing exceptions:
'
Procedure Title Exception No.
PT-3.1 RCS-Vibration
PT-27.1 FUEL BLDG HVAC
PT-27.2 FUEL BLDG EXIT FILTER 01,02,03,04,05,06,07,-
i PT-38 ESF ACTUATION SYSTEM 01,02.03,04,05,06,07, 08,09,10,11,12 PT-40.11 CONT. PEN. CLNG CAP.
PT-40.12 RTD CROSS CALIB.
01,02,03,04 PT-40.13 LPMS 01,02,03 PT-42.1 RHR HX PERF.
'
AT-19.2 SG BLOWDOWN 01,02,03,04,05 AT-19.3 SG BLOWDOWN RECOVERY
AT-33 COMMUNICATIONS 01,02,03,04,05,06 AT-59.2 CHLORINATION BLD HVAC
4
-
-
~
....
.
--.
-
.
.
. -
. - _ -
- _. - - _
--- - _.
_ _-
-
.
..
These open exceptions to completed tests will be reviewed during subsequent inspections for their resolution and closing.
These open exceptions collectively are designated. unresolved item 443/86-17-01.
3.3 Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) Status Reference (1)
Inspection Report 50-443/86-13 a
Discussion The two EDGs will be ready to support the Loss of Offsite Power /LOCA test after the EDG 1A has been successfully retested for the Hot Restart. The remaining tests to be accomplished are the mechanical and electrical load tests and the 35 consecutive starts and stops on each EDG.
For the performance of EDG 18 during the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> test run refer to paragraph 3.1 above.
The unresolved item on the lack of duplex oil strainers still remains to be addressed by the applicant (see section 2 above).
3.4 Test Procedure Review and Verification Scope The test procedures _ listed in Attachments A and B were reviewed for technical and administrative adequacy and to verify that_ test planning satisfies regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
Discussion The procedures were examined for: management review and approval; procedure format; clarity of stated test objectives; prerequisites; environmental conditions; acceptance criteria; source of acceptance criteria; references; initial conditions; attainment of test objec-tives; test performance documentation and verification; degree of detail for test instructions; restoration of system to normal after testing; identification of test personnel; evaluation of test data; independent verification of critical steps or parameters; and quality
.
control and quality assurance involvement.
Findings The review indicated that the procedures are consistent with regula-tory requirements, guidance, and licensee commitments.
No discrepan-cies or unacceptable conditions were identified.
The inspector had no further questions on these procedures.
.-
-
.
.,
3.5 New Fuel Receipt Inspection and Storage References References are documented in Inspection Report 50-443/86-13.
Scope The objective of this inspection was to ascertain whether nuclear fuel received at the construction site is properly accepted and safeguarded, and whether it is stored in accordance with the NRC license r'equirements. This was accomplished by direct observation of activities and review of documentation at various times prior to the issuance of the NRC materials license and the arrival of the first shipment of nuclear fuel, and by witnessing of the first shipment of fuel, from its arrival on site, to its final storage
-
place in the new fuel storage area..
Discussion The inspector reviewed documents in the following areas pertaining to the receipt, inspection and storage of new fuel; such as Nuclear Materials License, Qualifications and Training, Fire Protection Health Physics and Radiation Protection, Physical Security and Preoperational Testing.
The inspector witnessed inspection and storage of 4 fuel assemblies from removal from the shipping casks to storage in the new fuel storage area.
The activities included. radiation surveys of the outer metal casks; opening of the casks; initial survey of the two fuel assemblies in each cask; the removal and inspection of each fuel assembly; and the final storage of each fuel assembly in the new fuel L
storage area. The inspector observed the use of fuel handling cranes, new fuel handling tools, personnel involved, procedures being used, HP monitors and QC participation.
The inspector also reviewed documentation and made observations, on l-a sampling basis, during this evaluation, in the areas of Administra-tion, Physical Security, Health Physics and Radiation Control, Reactor Engineering, Quality Assurance and Quality Control.
Findings The inspector verified that receipt, inspection and storage, includ-ing documentation, was accomplished in accordance with NRC license requirements. The inspector also verified that all license require-ments had been implemented for new fuel receipt inspection and stor-age; security controls were exercised; health physics and radiation protection controls were implemented in the areas of swipes, surveys,
'
.
.
air monitoring, and personnel protection and dosimetry, control of the environment of the fuel storage area; verification of documenta-tion; inspection of shipping casks; and, qualification of personnel involved in management and implementation of receipt, inspection, and storage of nuclear fuel.
The inspectors witnessed the evolutions and verified documentation and proper use of procedures for fuel movement within'the fuel building and fuel storage locations.
No items of noncompliance were identified and no discrepancies were noted during these inspections.
The inspector will continue to observe and inspect this evolution of new fuel receipt, inspection, handling and storage on subsequent inspections until all fuel is on site. The inspector had no further question at this time.
4.
Startup Test Program Review Scope The inspector reviewed the Seabrook-1 startup test program for initial fuel loading, initial criticality, low power tests, and power ascension tests during this inspection period.
The sequence of tests, conduct of tests, interfaces between test engineers and station operation department, administrative control for the startup test program, establishment of acceptance criteria, and control of test and measurement equipment, were discussed with licensee representatives.
Discussion The preparation in the licensee's startup testing program is proceeding satisfactorily. Most test procedures are completed, reviewed, and approved. Only 6 out of 57 test procedures are still in the draft stage.
The detailed test procedure review will be conducted in the next inspection.
Findings Based on the discussion with licensee representatives and review of the startup program administration document, the inspector verified that the startup test program is defined and had adequate controls for the required testing.
5.0 QA/QC Interface Scope The participation of the YAEC Field QA Group in the test witnessing of the EDG test (PT 33.1), the LOP Test (PT-39.1), the Service Water Pump Tests (PT-15.10) and the HVAC test for the S.W. Pump House (PT 15.12) and the verification of test result evaluation was evaluated by the inspector.
.
%
.
.
Discussion In continuation of. the assessment of QA/QC ir.volvement with the POT pro-gram, the inspector reviewed the surveillance reports as listed in Attach-ment E.
All of these listed surveillances are samples of test witnessing of.the tests indicated in the scope of this. inspection. The review of these surveillances indicates adequate coverage of these tests.
Findings No noncompliances were observed within the scope of this inspection.
6.
Independent Inspection Effort Reference:
1.
NRC Inspection Report 50-443/86-13 2.
Transient Analysis Report, Teledyne Engineering Services Scope In continuation of the efforts reported in reference 1 on the modification of the main steam and drain lines of the main steam supply to the AFW Pump's Turbine, the inspector reviewed the transient analysis report produced by Teledyne Engineering Services (ref. 2).
Discussion
.The Teledyne report showed results based on a model of the modified main steam and drain piping system. The well known computer code Reflash was used to calculate the quantities of condensate produced during the cold start of the AFW system. These data have been used to size the drainpots (3) of the modified drain system. The valve characteristics of the new control valves (Hammel Dahl) were taken into account, including the time delay for the valves upstream of the Terry Turbine (driver for the AFW Pump). 'The Emergency Feedwater Test PT-14.2 has been rescheduled to be performed after fuel load.
There appears to be insufficient time to com-plete the piping modifications prior to the scheduled fuel load date.
Findings The transient analysis indicates that the modified system will perform adequately during a cold restart.
The retest of PT 14.2 should provide the necessary proo O
-,
7.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to determine whether they are acceptable,. items of. noncompliance or deviations.
The following new unresolved item has been identified in this report:
86-17-01: Open test exceptions as listed in Section 3.2 above.
8.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of the site inspection, on March 14, 1986, an exit interview was conducted'with the licensee's senior site representatives (denoted in Section 1). The findings were identified and previous inspec-tion items were discussed.
At no time.during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector. Based on the NRC Region I review of this report and discussions held with licensee representatives during this inspection, it was determined that this report does not contain informa-tion subject to 10 CFR 2.790 restrictions.
i-
..
.
Attachment A to 50-443/86-17 Preoperational Test Procedures
' Test Procedure Review Item No.
Proc. No.
Title Revision No.
Appr. Data (1)
PT-25.1 Combustible Gas
2/5/86 Control-Hydrogen Analyzer
'(2)
PT-25.2 Hydrogen Recombiner
10/31/84 (3)
PT-25.3 Backup Hydrogen Purge
2/5/86 (4)
PT-3.4 Piping Vibration Testing
1/22/86 (5)
PT-21 Containment Isolation
9/30/85
'
System (6)
PT-40.13 Loose Parts Monitoring
9/11/85 System (7)
PT-42.1 RHR Heat Exchanger
11/22/85 Performance Test
'(8)
PT-36 Primary Containment
2/14/86 Structural Integrity (9)
PT-37.1 Reactor Containment Integrity Leak Rate Test
2/12/86 (10)
PT-39.1 Loss of Offsite Power
2/21/86 Tests (11)
PT-39.2 Loss of Offsite Power With
2/21/86 Engineered Safeguard Features Actuation (12)
2/19/86 Verification
t S
0 m,
r,, -r e w-r-->rr
,
,
s.
,,,, -
-- -
,,-v,w-.--,-
e,w,,-,~
e,-
,
,.--.,,,,y e
-
,w
,. ~ ~ - - - -
.. - -, -,,,
r :
.
Attachment B
,
to 50-443/86-17 Acceptance Test Procedures Test Procedure Review i
Item No.
Proc. No.
Title Revision No.
Appr. Data (1)
AT-6.2 Cir. Water Intake
8/30/85 Discharge Transients
' (2)
.AT-19.3 Steam Generator Blow
10/9/85 Down Recovery (3)
AT-21.3 Control Rod Drive
7/24/85 Mechanism Cooling (4)
AT-22 Containment Purge Systems
1/22/86 (5)
AT-49 Diesel Generator and
1/22/86
"
Control Building Hot Water Heating System (6)
AT-50 PAB & Fuel Storage
1/22/86 Building Hot Water Heating System (7)'
AT-59.2 Chlorination Building
2/21/86
.
Air Handling System
,
4
+
i
.
a
._.
. -..
....
.
,. _.. _,
_, _. _ -. _ _ _., _...,.. _ _. _ _,,. _., _ _ _,. _. ~., -... ~. _ _. _, _,,.... _
..
<
.
.
Attachment C to 50-443/86-17 Test Results Evaluation Review Preoperational Tests Item No.
Proc. No.
Title Revision No.
Appr. Data
PT-3.1 Reactor Coolant System
10/9/85 Vibration Test Test results approved 2/12/86
PT-12.2 Containment Spray Nozzle
3/28/84 Test Test results approved 2/26/86
PT-15.4 Service Water System
8/14/85 Cooling Tower HVAC Test results approved 2/21/86 4-PT-27.1 Fuel Storage Building
1/10/86 Ventilation System Test'results approved 2/14/86
PT-27.2 Fuel Storage Building
2/5/86 Exhaust Filter System Test results approved 2/14/86
PT-28.3 Control Room Envelope
12/20/85 Leakage Test Test results approved 1/29/86
PT-30.1 Voltage Model
9/9/85 Verification Test results approved 2/12/86
PT-38 ESF Integrated
1/29/86 Actuation Test Test results approved 2/26/86
PT-40 Hot Functional Testing
10/23/85 Test results approved 1/29/86
PT-40.11 Containment Penetration
10/23/85 Cooling Capacity Test results approved 1/24/86
_
PT-40.12 RTD Cross Calibration
10/23/85 Test results approved 1/29/86
PT-40 13 Loose Parts
9/11/85 Monitoring System Test results approved 1/31/86
PT-42.1 RHR Heat Exchanger
11/22/85 Performance Test Test results approved 1/31/86
,
,
Attachment D to 50-443/86-17 Test Results Evaluation Review Acceptance Tests Item No.
Proc No.
Title Revision No.
Appr. Data
AT-19.2 Steam Generator
10/16/85 Blowdown System Test results approved 1/31/86
AT-19.3 Steam Generator
10/9/85 Blowdown Recovery Test results approved 1/31/86
AT-27 Individual Rod
9/20/84 Position Indication Test results approved
AT-33 Communications System
9/20/85 Test results approved 1/31/86
AT-59.2 Chlorination Building
2/21/86 Air Handling System Test results approved 2/28/86
.
~~
o
Attachment E to 50-443/86-17 Review of Surveillance Reports (SRs) Issued by YAEC FQAG Report SR No.
Test Proc. Observed T.F. Title Date SR Y-1193 PT-33.1, Rev. 1 Emergency Diesel Generator 3-13-86 Y-1107 PT-33.1, Rev. 1 Emergency Diesel Generator 3-03-86 Y-1108 PT-33.1, Rev. 1 Emergency Diesel Generator 3-03-86 Y-1190 PT-33.1, Rev. 1 Emergency Diesel Generator 3-11-86 Y-1186 PT-33.1, Rev. 1 Emergency Diesel Generator 3-13-86 Y-1129 PT-39.1, Rev. O Loss of Offsite Power 3-06-86 Y-1191 PT-39.1, Rev. O Loss of Offsite Power 3-13-86 Y-1151 PT-15.10, Rev. 1 (A)
S.W. Pump Trip / Start 3-10-86 Y-1110 PT-15.12, Rev. 1 S.W. Pump House HVAC 3-03-86