Text

Response to Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Unit 2, Part 3 of 3
	ML12333A269
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	11/27/2012
From:	; Pacific Gas & Electric Co
To:	; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML123330375	List: DCL-12-119, Response to Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Unit 2, Part 2 of 3; ML12333A269; ML12333A270;
References
	DCL-12-119
	Download: ML12333A269 (142)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:Seismic walkdovvn Checklist (SWC) Status! Y Equipment 10 No OC-2-67-ERBTC-BTC21 Equipment Class: 16 Equipment

== Description:==

125V DC Batten' Chargers location: Building: AwillI!m! Floor EI. 1l.§ Room, Area: 2-BTC21 Manufacturer, model, Etc. Ametek SQljdstale ContrQIs Instructions for Compfeting Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an Item of equipment on the SWEL. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of thIs for documenting other comments. AnchOrage

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e, is the item one of the 50% of SWElltems requIring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent. broken, missing or loose hardware?

Nothing broken, bent, or mIssing. 3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? No corrosion observed y y y 4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks In the concrete near the anchors? Y . No creeks observed 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies If the item Is Y one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuratton verification Is required.) The anchorage Is consistent with drawing 050053 sheet 241 6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations. Is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions? y InteractIon Effects 7. Are soft targets free from Impact by nearby equipment or structures? Switches on the front panel are protected by plexlglass panels. Selector switch knobs are located on the front panel. However, no credible Interaction sources 8. Are overhead equipment. distribution systems. ceiling tites, and lighting. and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment? Conduit and cable trays are well supporled. Lighting Is conduit hung with ball and socket and closed hook connecUons at the ceiling. Masonry wall has been strengthened for seismic loads 9. 00 attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? Conduit at the top has a flex connect/on

10. Based on the above seismic Interaction evaluatlons,ls equipment free of potentially adverse seismic Interaction effects? PA speaker and junction box are adequately anchored to the wall behInd the panel. The emergency light Is selsmlcafly qualified.

Other Adverse y y y y 11. Have you looked for and found no other seIsmic conditions that could adversely affect the safety function of the Y equipment? Page lof10 Seismic WalkdolNl1 Checklist (S\IVC) Status! Y Equipment 10 No OC-2-67-E-BTC-BTC21 Equipment Class: 16 Equipment

== Description:==

12SY pC Battery Chargers Comment: Evaluated by' DKN / ( DRC Ila1ft:. i'!"--+----=:..-. __ l d I "I I IO/,,/Znt l--Page 2ofl0 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) Status: V Equipment 10 No OC-2-67 -E-lC-PD25 Equipment Class: .1! Equipment

== Description:==

125Y DC Distribution PaneJ§ Location: Building: Turbine FloorEI. m? Room, Jllea: 2-PD25 Manufacturer. model, Etc. Instructions for Completing CheCklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an item of equipment on the SWEl. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for d.ocumooting other comments. Anchorage 1.15 the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e, is the Item one of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verlfication)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?

Anchored at comers of wall-mounted panel by (4) 112" through-bolts through the 8" reinforced masonry block wall that forms the battery room. 3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

4. Is the anchorage free of visible craCks In the concrete near the anchors? 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

Consistent with calculation sketch ES-21,attachment

28. 6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions?

Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures? Panel does not contain soft targets. 8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems. cening blest and lighting, and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment? Nearby conduit is class 1 but most overhead conduit and piping Is class 2 and Is rod or spring hung Including sew, CCW and SeNice Air piping systems. All piping appears to be welded piping. 9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? 10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations. 'S equIpment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects? Panel Is essentially shielded by block wall on which it Is mounted. Other Adverse Condition! y y y y y y y y y y 11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic condftfons that could adversely affect the safety function of the Y equipment? Page 1 of 17 --_.---------- Seismic WalkdolNll Cheddist (SWC) Status: Y Equipment 10 No DC-2-67-E-lC-PD25 Equipment Class: M Equipment Description

125V DC Distribution Panels Comment: Eyaluated by' / b // '1' / ""kJ /-2-IO/IO/ZO Il.-Page 2 of 17

, ; I Seismic WslkdollVl1 Checklist (SWC) Status: Y ---------------------- Equipment 10 No DC M 2-96-E-PNL-2CC1 Equipment Class: 2Q Equipment

== Description:==

Main Control Boards (Console) Location: Building: FloorE!. HO Room, Area: Manufacturer, model. Etc. Instructions for Completing Checklist this cheokllst may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an Item of equipment on the SWEL The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. Anchorage

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (I.e l Is the Item one of the 50% of SWEL Items requiring such verification)?' . . 2. Is the anchorage free of bent; broken. missing or loose hardware?

No bent, broken, or missing hardware.

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that Is more than mild surface oxfdation?

No signs of corrosion were observed. The room maintains a vel}' controlled envIronment.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks In-the conorete near the anchors? No cracks observed In the concrete where visible. The carpet was not pulled up. 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies If the Item Is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification Is required.)

6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, Is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions?

Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures? No credible sources. 8. Are overhead eqUipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles, and lighting, and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment? Suspended ceiling Is hung by a braced un/strut system. The lighting over the control consoles and vertical boards are Independently hung. The HVAC duct Is braced and the regIsters are Independently rod hung. No masonry walls. 9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? Cables enter the panel from the floor 10. Based on the above seismIc interaction evaluations, Is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic Interaction effects? Other Adverso Conditions N y y N/A y y y y y 11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversefy affect the safety function of the Y equipment? Page 1 of 14 Seismic WalkdolM1 Checklist (SWC) Status: Y Equipment 10 No DC-2-96-E-PNL .. 2CC1 Equipment Class: 2Q Equipment

== Description:==

Maio Control Boards (Coosole) Comment: The panel Is welded to steel plates embedded in the concrete floor below. The Internal hardware Is securely mounted. The length and spacing of the welds to the embedded plates were confirmed by probing under the panel base cove. The existence of the welds Joining the tab plates to the panel base channel was confirmed by , locating the heat scorch marks on the InsIde face of the base channel. Evaluated by' /<l r.J(U I 2-SMM Page 2 of14 Seismic Walkdovtn Cheddist (SlIVC) Status: Y Equipment ID No pC-2-96-E-PNL-2VB1 Equipment Class: 2.Q Equipment DescrIption: Main Control Boards (Vertical) Location: Building: FloocEI. Room. Area: Manufacturer. model. Etc. InstnJctions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an Item of equipment on the SWEL. The space below each of the followIng questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. Anchorage

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e, Is the Item one of the 50% of SWEL Items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken. miSSing or loose hardware?

No bent, broken, or missIng hardware 3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that Is more than mild surface oxidation? No sJgns of colTosion observed N y Y 4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks In the concrete near the anchors? Y No cracks observed where the concrete was visible. The control room carpet was not pulled up. 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applle$ If the Item Is N/A one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification Is required.) . 6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, Is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic condItions? Interaction Effeets 7. Are soft targets free from Impact by nearby equipment or structures? No credible Interaction sources. 8. Are overhead equipment. distribution systems. ceiling tiles, and lighting, and masonry block wans not likely to collapse onto the equipment? Suspended ceiling Is hung by a braced un/strut system. The lighting over the control consoles and vertlcel boards are Independently hung. The HVAC duct Is braced and the registers are Independently rod hung. -No masonry walls. 9. Do attached have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? Cables come into the cabinet from be/ow. 10. Based on the above seismic Interaction evaluations, Is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic Interaction effects? The panels behind 2-VB1 are anchored. Other Adyerse Conditions Y y Y y y 11. Have you looked for and found no other seIsmic conditions that could adVersely affect the safety function of the Y eqUipment? Page 1 of 19 I Seismic Walkdo\Nl1 Cheddist (SVVC) Status: Y Equipment 10 No Equipment Class: .2.Q Equipment

== Description:==

Main Cootrol Boards (Vertical) Comment: The vertical board Is welded to steel plates embedded In the concrete floor. All hardware Is securely 1!10unted In the panel. The length and spacing of the welds to the embedded plates were confirmed by probing under the panel base cove. The existence of the welds JOining the tab plates to the panel base channel was confirmed by locating the heat scorch marks on the Inside face of the base channel. Includes SUbcomponents: DC-2-09-E-S-8/-2-8923A-CS, DC-2-14-E-S-CCW-2-FCV-430-CS Evaluated by: .l A .. ______ ' SMM Page 2of19 Seismic WaIkdow1 Chedclisl: (SWC) status: y Equipment ID No DC-2-96-e .. PNL-HSP Equipment Class: Equipment

== Description:==

Hot Shutdown Panel Location: Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. .1JlQ Room. Area: 2-TRY21 Manufacturer. model. Etc. Westinghousft Instructions for Completi!1g Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an item of equipment on the SWEL. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. . Ancbor<<;,ge

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e. Is the item one of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent. broken. miss1ng or loose hardware?

The panel is anchored to 8 structura' wide-flange frame by (4) 5/8" bolts both front and back. The outer flange of the wide-flange beam is anchored to the concrete floor Slab by (6) 6/8" embedded studs both front and back. There ere (2) additional anchor studs for the Inner flange that are located opposite the (2) center studs both front and back which could not be seen (See drawing 443480-1).

3. Is the anchorage free of corrOSion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

4. Is the anchorage free of vlslbte cracks In the concrete near the anchors? 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 600k for which an anchorage configuration verification Is reqUired.)

Anchorage Is consistent with drawing 443480 4 1 and calculation sketch sheet 41. 6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, IS the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions? IntQ[actJon Effects 7. Are soft targets free from Impact by nearby equipment or structures?

6. Are overhead equipment, systems! ceiling tiles, and lighting.

and masonry block walls not like\y to collapse onto the equipment? . Conduit and HVAC dueling Is rlgfdly supported. Room lighting is supp-orted by ball and socket connections. Reinforced masonry wall has additlonal support both at the base and top. 9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? Connections are rigid conduit. 10. Based on the above seismic Interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects? Other Adverse CondWons 11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety function of the equipment? y y Y y Y y y y y Y y Page 1 of 29 Seismic walkdovvn Chedclist (SWC) Status: Y Equipment 10 No DC-2-96-E-PNL-HSP Equipment Class: 2Q Equipment

== Description:==

Hot Shutdown Panel Comment: Includes CCW Pump Control Switch DC-2-14-E-S-CCWP1-CSH which wasr8view()d. Evaluated by' If! K;.;v Dam; ORe Jlfk 10/1 13 (Wll-Page 2 of29 Seismic Wallcdmlvn Checklist (9NC) Status: y Equipment 10 No DC-2-96 w M-PNl-PM-101 EquIpment Class; 2Q Equipment

== Description:==

Mechanical Panel No. PM-101(Component Cooling Water Supply Header Instrymentation)

.. ------_ ..* __ ... _---_.----_

.. -... __ .. -Location: Building: Floor EI. t!§ Room, Area: 2-PM-101 Manufacturer, model , Etc. M. Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismrc Walkdown of an ilem of equipment on the SWEL. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and find' ngs. AddItional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for dOCumenting other comments. Anchorage

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required O.e. is the item one of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent. broken, missing or loose hardware?

Anchorage to the concrete well consists (2) t8bs that ere welded to the back of the cabinet near the top and bottom corners and ere bolted to Un/strut sections by 112" bolts and spring nuts. The Un/strut sections are In turn bolted to the concrete wall by (3) 112" expansion anchors. 3. Is tlie anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies If the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions?

Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from Impact by nearby equipment or structures? Soft targets consist of runs of stainless steel tubing to the panel whic/} run along the wall. S. Are overhead eqUipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles, and lighting, and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment? Overhead conduit and CCW piping are weI/supported.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? Tubing and panel mounted on common wall. 10. Based on the above seismic Interaction evaluations, is eqUipment free'of potentially adverse seismic Interaction effects? Other Adverse Cgndltlons N y y y N/A y y y y y 11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety function of the Y equipment?

Minor housekeepIng Issues in room will not affect function of panel. Page 1 of14 Seislric Walkdo1lUl1 Checklist (9JVC) status: Y Equipment ID No Equipment Class: 2Q Equipment

== Description:==

Mechanical panel No PM-101(Component Cooling Water Supply Header Instrumentation) Comment: Includes Flow Transmitter DC-2-14-/-T-FT-65 which was reviewed. Eyaluated by' /Olio/mIl-Page 2 of 14 I ! ! Seismic WalkdollUl1 Checklist (SWC) Status: Y Equipment 10 No OC-2-96 .. M-PNL-PM-103 Equipment Class: 2.Q Equipment

== Description:==

Mechanical Panel No pM.1MSteam Generator No.1 Instrumentation) Location: Building: Floor EI. B.§ Room, Area: 2-pM-103 Manufacturer, model, Etc. Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an Item of equipment on the SWEL. The space below each of the following questions may be used to reCQrd the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. Anchorage

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (I.e. Is the Item one of the 50% of SWEL Items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, miSSing or loose hardware?

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosIon that Is more than mild surface oxidation?

Mild corrosion on the plate attaching the panel to the frame. Mild corrosion on the roof of the panel. A notification had been written (SAPN 50267143). Panel feet had recently been replaced and show no signs of corrosion.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks In the concrete near the anchors? 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies If the Item Is one of the 50% for which an anchorage confIguration verification is required.)

Drawings show 518" expansion bolts connecting back struts to mounting plate. As buill condllions show normal 618" bolts. Judged to be ok due to equivalent capacIties. Base anchors are 6 5/8" bolts (3 on each side of panel). 6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, Is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions? Interactton Effects 7. Are soft targets free from Impact by nearby equipment or structures? No credible sources for Impact. 8. Are overhead eqUipment. distribution systems, ceiling tiles, and lighting, and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment? . No overhead equipment, ceiling tiles, lighting, or masonry block walls. Piping above Is mounted securely.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? All attached lines appeared to have adequate

10. Based on the above seismic Interaction evaluations, Is equipment free of potentially adverse seismiC Interaction effects? No seismic Interaction Issues. tUher Adyerse Condftlons Y y Y y Y Y Y y y y 11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety function of the Y equipment?

Page lof12 Seismic WallcdolNl1 Checklist ($WC) Status: Y Equipment 10 No DC-2-9()..M-PNLMPM-l03 Equipment Class: .2.Q Equipment

== Description:==

Mecbanlca! Panel No PM-l03;Steam Generator No.1 Instrumentation) Comment: Includes subcomponent DC-2-04-I-T-PT-514. Evaluated by: tot SMM Page 2 of 12 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SVVC) Status: Y Equipment ID No DC-2-96-M-PNL-PM-185 Equipment Class: 2.Q Equipment

== Description:==

Mechanical Panel No. PM*18fICondensate Storage Tank Instrumentation) Location: Building: FloorE!. 1QQ Room, Area: 2-PM-185 Manufacturer, model r Etc. Instructions for Completing Checklist ThIs checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an Item of equipment on the SWEL. The space below each of the followIng questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchorage . 1. Is the anchorage configuration verification requIred (f.e, Is the Item one of the 60% of SWEL Items requIring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent. broken. miSSing or loose hardware?

No bent, broken, miSSing or loose hardware.

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

No corrosion observfJd.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks In the concrete near the anchors? No cracks noted near the anchors. 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies if the Item Is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification Is required.)

Anchorage Is consistent with drawing 101903 w 9 6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations. Is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions? Interaction Effect! 7. Are soft targets free from Impact by nearby eqUipment or structures? No Son targets. 8. Are overhead eqUipment, distribution systems. ceiling tiles, and lighting. and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment? Overhead cable trays and conduit are well supported. Adjacent cage partition Is anchored to the concrete wall. Lighting won't Impact the panel even If It falls. 9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? Attached conduIts are tied to the concrete wall. 10. Based on the above seismic Interaction evaluations, Is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic Interaction effects? Overhead fire water piping Is laterally braced. No Interaction Issues observed. Other Adverse Conditions N y y y NlA y y Y y y 11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety function of the Y equipment? Page 1 of 13 Seismic Walkdovvn Checklist (SWC) Status: Y ----------------------------- Equipment ID No Equipment Class: 2.Q Equipment

== Description:==

MechanIcal panel No PM-18flCondensate Tank Instrumentation) Comment: PM-18B/s a lightweight wall panel. The Interst components sie securely mounted Inside the panal. Includes DC--2-16 T-L T-40 Evaluated by; /0/11/m /0 Page 2 of 13 SE!lsm'"jC Walkdovvn Checklist Status: Y ------------.------------------- Equipment 10 No DC-2-96-M-PNl-PM-79 Equipment Class: 20 Equipment

== Description:==

Mechanical Panel No PM-7S (Reactor Leve!JWide Range Pressure Instrumentation) Location: Building: Auxiliary FloorE!. 85 Room, Area: 2-PM-79 Manufacturer, model, Etc. Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an item of equipment on the SWEL The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist f<;lf documenting other comments. . Anchorage

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (Le. is the item one of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)? 1 118/1& 2. Is the anchorage free of bent. broken, missing or loose hardware? ( I t I tAt> /1"'" Anchorage to the floor slab consisis of (3) 3/8" anchor boIts on either side. In additlon -f2f the back of the cabinet near the top comers Is bolted to a Unistrut section by 1121/ bolts ana spring nuts. The Unistrut section Is in tum bolted to the concrete wall by (3) 112"expansion anchors. 3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

N y y 4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Y 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies if the item is NfA one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions?

y Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures? The panel only houses (4) transmliters and there are no soft targets except for the stainless steel tubIng running tolfrom the panel. The tubing runs along the wall. B. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles. and lighting. and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the eqUipment? Piping, . conduit and Junction boxes are well supported. Room lighting fixtures are hung from pipe sections with robust hook or bafJ and socket connections.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? All cabinet electrical connections are rigid conduit Pneumatic lines afe small diameter stainless steel tubing that are adequately flexible.

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is eqUipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects? Other Adverse Conditions y y Y 11. Have you Jooked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety function of the Y equipment?

Page lof20 Seismic WalkdO\M1 Checklist (SWC) Status: Y Equipment ID No Equipment Class: 20 Equipment

== Description:==

Mechanical Panel No. PM-79 (Reactor LeyellWjde Range Pressure Instrumentation) Comment; In crudes Pressure Transmitter DC-2-07-/- T-PT-403 wfJich was reviewed. Evaluated by: Date: 10 I JBIZ/) /l-Page 2of20 1""""-,,!'UlIf..,;;p,,,, (SWC) Status: ..-N" y Equipment 10 No DC"2-99-1-PNL-RN01A Equipment Class: 18 pu." 'tjul;--nln/1tr Equipment

== Description:==

Process Control and Protection System -Process Control Racks Location: Building: Auxiliary floor EL 128 Room, Area: 2-Eagle21 Manufacturer, model, Etc. Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of an item of equipment on the SWEL. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. ' Anchorage

1. rs the anchorage configuration verification required (Le, is the item one of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?

Anchorage consists of (4) 3116" welds that are 2-112" long and spaced 6" on center both front and back. 3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidatiol1? 4: Js the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? 5. rs the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.) Anchorage is consistent with drawings 050053-66.

6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of potentially adverse seismic conditions?

Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby eqUipment or structures? Nearby panels also welded to false floor I-beams. 8. Are overhead equipment. distribution systems, ceiling tiles, and lighting. and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the eqUipment? N y y N/A NIA y y Overhead conduit and cable trays are rigidly supported. Two room lighting fixtures immediately in front ofthe panel are hung from the wiring conduit by very light Weight chains in a manner that makes the fixtures free to rotate J¢1t! pI(, relatively large distances. Rugged safety chains have been provided prevef!ting the fixtures from falling to the U!fQ{I'l;. "'11/1 2-floor. However they are oriented such that should the light weight chains break, the fixtures will swing and impact the upper portion of the front ofthe cabinet. For disposition see Attachment

1. . 9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? Electrical connections at the top or the cabinet are rigid conduit. y 10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects? . y Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety function of the Y equipment?

Large overhead junction box is anchored to the ceiling by (4) 112>1 expansion anchors. Page 1 of 24 Seismic Walkdown Status: ...f'( Y Equ1pnwnt ID No Equipment elas?: 1§ .....J4Ul-Equipment

== Description:==

Process Control and t:>ro1ectioD System -Process Control R"acks Comment: Evaluated by' IO{-U/Il.- ' Page 2 of 24 j. I I ! I I I I I ! I I I I I ! J . I f I ! I I I I I I I Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2. t:quipment No. DC-2-99-I-PNL-RN01A Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Attachment 1, Page 1 of 1 A potential seismical/y-induc(j)d interaction between Rack No. RNO 1 A and two light fixtures immediately in front of the rack was identified. Due to the very light-weight nature of some of the chains which support the light fixtures from the ceiling) an earthquake could break the chains; aI/owing the fixtures to swing and impact the front of the near its top_ Evaluation: Per SISIP Manual Figure No. 11, the rack is in Target Area No. 2H-127-01. The associated target description table indicates that this rack is a SISIP target. Therefore , the potential interaction must be addressed. Based on a revieW of the configuration of the light f i xtures (e.g., estimated weight, crushability, etc.) and the potential impact location (e.g., near top, fairly strong and stiff) it is judged that potential interaction will not da.mage the rack to an extent that will preven t performance of the required functions. Therefore, this interaction does not impact the safe operation of DCPP. However, the suppbrt configuration for the light fixture should be modified to prevent this potential seismically-induced interaction . . Required: Yes (50513649) Evaluated by: ---=.W...:....:....R.:.:....:...H __ ___ Reviewed by: __ p.-;fZ._G ___ .............. ,....;..:......#_;....;..:......--4f-,o+

-+_,z,, __________

____ _ Attachment J Unit 2: Area Walk-By Checklists AWC Number Number of AWC Number of Checklist pages LBEs 2-8700A 1 0 2-AFWP1 1 0 2-AFWP2 1 1 2-ASP1 1 0 2-SAT21 1 0 2-SF-2E-1 1 0 2-SFE4 1 0 2-SFS-33 1 1 2-STC21 1 0 2-CCP1 1 0 2-CCP3 1 0 2-CCWHE 1 0 2-CCWP1 1 0 2-CCWST1 1 3 2-CP-37 1 1 2-CR-37 1 1 2-DEG-21 1 0 2-DEG-23 1 1 2-DEG-ES-21 1 0 2-DEG-ES-23 1 1 2-E-45 1 6 2-EAGLE21 1 0 2-EJ2 2 0 2-FCV-365 1 0 2-FCV-37 1 0 2-FCV-41 1 1 2-FCV-641A 1 0 2-FCV700 1 0 2-HT -EH-29A 1 2 2-LCV-110 1 2 2-LCV-112S-1 2 2-LCV115 1 0 2-LD30 1 0 2-LPH79 1 0 2-L T-102 1 1 Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment J Page 1 of 2 Number of LBE pages 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 18 1 0 1 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 AWC Number Number of AWC Checklist pages 2-PCV-20 1 2-PD25 1 2-PM-101 1 2-PM-103 1 2-PM-185 1 2-PM-79 1 2-PNL-ARP 1 2-RHE1 1 2-RHRP2 1 2-RNAR-A 1 2-RV-13 1 2-SFPHE1 1 2-SFPP1 1 2-SIP1 1 2-SSPS 1 2-SWHE1 1 2-TE117 1 2-TRY21 1 2-VB1 1 Number of LBEs 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment J Page 2 of 2 Number of LBE pages 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note: Pages include applicable portions of the checklists and LBE required by EPRI 1025286 guidelines.

; Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y ... __ ._--_._..... . ...... _-_._. ---.---.-.. -.--..

Location: Building: FloorEI. Room, Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. . 1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) 2.00e8 anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y No degradation noted. a.Based on visuallnspeetion from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Ventilation duct is supported by two hangers over a 10 ft span. Judged not to have adverse affects due to fixed anchorage at both ends. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other eqUipment In the y area(e.g., celling tiles and lighting)?

5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? . No credible sources were Identified.

6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

Ladders are secured In place by a locked chain. Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y eqUipment In the area? Comments Includes Evaluated by: Date: Page 1 of5 Area Walk-By Checklist (AVtIC) Status Y -----Location: Building: Floor EI. 1O.Q. Room, Area: 2-AEWP1 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walkwbY near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

All anchorage 8ppears to be free from adverse conditions. 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y No degrade conditions were identified. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic condftlons (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? The cable raceways and HVAC dueling are free from potentially adverse seismic conditions.

4. Does It appear that the area fs free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the Y area(e.g., celling tiles and lighting)?

No adverse seIsmic interaction Issues were found. 5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y All hydrogen piping looks to be adequately secured. 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seIsmic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable eqUipment. and temporary Installations (e.g; scaffoldIng, lead shielding)? No temporary or portable eqUipment Issues were found. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismIc conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? No Issues. Comments Includes DC M 2 M 03 M MwPpMAFWP1 and Evaluated by: Page 1 of7 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y location: Building: Floor EI. .1Q.Q RQom. Area: 2-AEWP2 ----._------Instructions for Completing Checklist ThIs checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is provIded at the end of .hls cheokllst for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seIsmic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily openIng qab/nets) 2.Does anchorage of equIpment In the area appear to be free of slgnlflc?,nt degraded conditIons?

Y on visual Inspection from fioor, do cable/conduit raceways and HVAC duetlng appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismIc conditions (e,g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be InsIde acceptable limits)? 4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismIc spatial Interactions wIth oth.er equipment In the Y area(e,g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? There Is minImal clearanoe between this RV-537 and 8 nearby 2"-FWUnf1. Expeoted displacement oftne valve Is small and the fire water pipe Is rigidly supported. Therefore, interaction wl/1 not ooour during an See Attaohment 1 for disposItion , Speaker Is over a soft target on AFW 2-1, however it Is ahohored to wall with 41<wll< bolls and relatIvely lightweIght,' acceptable as Is. S. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause floodlng *or spray Y In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y 7; Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse selsmlo Interactions assoolated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shIelding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismIc conditions that could adversely affect the safety functipns of the Y equIpment In the* area? Comments Includes Evaluated by: Date: (() . .v-r . J 2.-Page 1 of 13 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.£ Building:

Auxiliary Floor EI. 100 Room, Row/Col: ------Attachment1 , Page 1 of 4 2-AFWP2 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: There appears to be minimal clearance between valve FW-2-RV-537 and a nearby 2" firewater line. Seismic motion could cause the RV to leak} causing a spray or flood issue. Evaluation: From a field walkdown, there is a minimum gap of %" (0.25 inches). The RV in question is mounted to the top of Aux Feed Water Pump Suction line K-238-8. The attached piping analysis run (pages 2-4) shows that the RV is attached at Node 523, and the deflections at this node in the x-direction (Le. the direction of the nearby firewater piping) are equal to 0.01)f when both the thermal and seismic displacements are added together (load cases THRM(N1) and SEISHX). Additionally, the firewater line has rigid supports both upstream and* downstream of the RV, so it's lateral displacements will be minimal. Therefore, there is more than adequate clear space to accommodate seismic motions and an interaction will not occur. Notification Required: No :valuated by: Reviewed by: __ _______ __ __ __ ____________ __

.. E 01 *c "!!!. B .. , l' ". r / it .: ; , -)4\"-Y :'., "","f.. z . ,,'" i .,. .... " N .f GLOBAL COORDlNAT£ I ! LEGEND. 0 NODAL POINT I-{ RESTRAINT SNUBBER '. SPRING HANGER 4. ANCHOR = GUIDE "

me DIS , . .. * > , I

lias eltt t-:m:PflII!.RD GIl IIIIIPIII!" 10m tt.EiIIPnIItt ok! .' il 3 2 " / .. *-.t-DESCRIP'llOtl I GWsP£C I Dl'tIf.lCEllCDd SUPV& IiE!lISlQHS

.. " ... ,:!. -ii*; .. . ..... . 4 t' KEY PLAN .lSIOIE..

_.

THESE ,SUPPORTS SHOULD.BE

=-" ._.DEstGNED fOR:..2S0

.. AOOJTIOf\lAL

.. '-.. ---_ . -. CONO'J.'0N.

_ ANALYsJS.fssue

lAW\!..NO. . /. *]AeV.

t .* ! : ! .dlECKER . \LAPPRQVED..

... DATI: :., LltCRoFlLM 8l1.t. OF MAn. DtIC USl" ,'" '. I!i l'\ i" , I ... ". *:.. ... 1 ;1(' :. X (NOR.-f.... . Tk}: Z :. ,;. GLOBAL COORDINATE ':.: I l:o I "' I" .. _--.... _'--:-----------' .. ' ....... * ..... 1... . 4 ___ *_1 " ..t\ .5_ *KEY PLAN ** ..... -=-NODAl.. POINT SNUBBER SPRING HANGER ANCHOR'

' 'FOR otJLY * " REF.DWGSs 2..PG&E ISO. 3.WALKODWN 10S003 SH4/.1._ 1"192SS'1t D7102Is2 t " , t.

-* .....---1

...... 1,: ... & .ioC I .;.;:, -' ... u_... .. .. __ i _.& _ IIIU.:!!.L IMTL " *. :,"'7 X;: ... . "

" Pacific Gas and Electriri CompanyfJ) Engineering-Calculation Sheet Project: Diablo Canyon Unit () 1 jA2 () 1 & 2 69-392110. Engineeril CALC. NO. 100;\ -l) i S-01, REY. NO. _____ _ SHEET NO. OF __ _ SUBJECT __ ___ .,..-- Area Walk-By Checklist (AW'C) Status y .. -.------. Location: Building: Floor EI. ::2J. Room, Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings, Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

No Issues were Identified other than those already addressed in SWC. 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y See notes from question 1. No other Issues were identified. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g .* condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? Conduit raceways and HVAC dueling appear to be adequately secured. 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment In the Y area(e.g .* ceiling tiles and lighting)? 1 Lights could Impact DC-2-23*M-BF-E-104 fan. It Is judged that the light Is Incapable of damaging the functionality of the fan. No seismic Issues, 5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? . No potential adverse seIsmic Interactions were Identified that could cause flooding or spraying.

6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismIc Interactions that could cause fire In the area? V No potenllal sources for fire In the area. 7. Ooas It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment.

and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No temporary equipment In the area. v 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y eqUipment In the area? No issues were Identified. Comments Includes DC-2-17-M-PP-ASP1 and DC-2-23-M-BF-E-104. Evaluated by: KIM . ,-y .. _ ..... _-------_ .... Date: 10/ I S/J.a' .sMM Page lof8 Area Walk-By Checklist (A\IVC) Status Y -_ .. __ ._. __ .. ------location: Building: Awilliao£ Floor EI. ill Room, Area: 2-BAT21 InstructIons for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEl items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y

without necessarily opening cabinets)

The equipment in the room Is adequately anchored 2.00e8 anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y No degraded conditions. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floOf, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditIons of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptabl,e limits)? Conduit and HVAC duct are well supported. Lfghting Is hung with chains but also each light has a safety chain. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment in the Y srea(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? The adjacent masonry walls have been strengthened for out of plane seismic loads 5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6 .. Doss It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seIsmic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y No significant fuel source 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? The eyewash station /s restrained to the adjacent masonry wall. B. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? Comments Includes DC-2-67-E-BT..f3A T21. Evaluated by: Date: .. ( 1//2.0 1'2-I()/17/ZfJI2-Page 1 of7 Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y ... >.,,_.-.-.. _-.-,_. --------------- Location: Building: Floor EI. .14Q Room, Area: 2-BE-2E-1 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

No adverse seismic conditions were identified. 2.Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y Mild surface corrosion on baekdraft dampers. No structural issues were identified. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? No HVAC dueting above the fan. Raceways In area are adequately supported.

4. Does It appear that the area Is rree of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

Lighting was rod hung with a ball and socket joint on one end and an S-hook on the oPPosite end of the fixture. Seismic Interaction is judged to be incapable of damaging equipment and soft targets. 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? No fire water piping in the room. 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No flammable sources were identified.

7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment.

and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? No temporary equipment In the area. Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? No issues were Identified. Room relaUvely open wfth minImal sources. Comments Includes DC*2-23-M-BF-2E-1. Evaluated by: KTM Date: \b/IS/d.O\;).. .sMM ("'h/'lAPIZ-- Page 1 of 7 Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status y Location: Building: Floor EI. llQ . Room, Area: 2-BFE4 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. 1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) The fan is the only equipment In the RevieWed conduit , cable trays, instrument tubing , room lighting , HVAC ducting, and HEPA Filter system. . 2.00es anchorage of eqUipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditiohS of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Conduit and HVAC ducling are rigidly supported. 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other eqUipment in the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? Room lighting is either wall mounted or hung from the ceiling by pipe sections with ball Bnd socket connections. HEPA filters Bre well restrained. 5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y 7. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? Area is clean. 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? Comments Includes Evaluated by: Date: /4>/14/ /u1Z. /O/IB /1O /'-Page lof 9 i i 1 i I it L. t i i I I I I I I i I I i I; r I Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y Bulfding: FloorEI. HQ Room. Area: 2-BFS-33 Instructions for Completl,nQ Checklist TI)t8 chec!<l,ist pe lis,e.d to of the are.a wal.k-by one' or SWE:L Items. The spaoe below of the follow!ng questions may be used to, record the of jl,ldgements and findings! Additional Is provided at the end of this checklist docum,entlng other comments.

1. Does the anchora,ge .of equipment In area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditiotlS (if Y without necessarily opening cabinets) 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant conditions?

Y Heavily corrQded the air filters and the Jan room J see photo on page 3. Frame abandoned In place (No,t s.afety felflted). Attachment 1 for resolution. or} viSulil from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC'ouctlng ,appear to be free of Y seismic conditions (e.g!1 condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions 6f cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? 4. Does It appear that the area fs free of potentially seismic spatial Interactions with other In the arE;la{e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? ' Lights In the room are well supported with no open hooks. A chain hung light Is outside* of the rdom (near the air fllters) but no Interaction Issues with nearby equipment.

5. Ooes It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray In the area? Fire piping In the room Is adequately supported.

6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could calise fire In the area? No sources In the room. 7. Does it appear that the area 1$ free of pptentially adverse s,elsmlc Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, pf portable e.qulpment.

and temporary Installations (e .. g. scaffordIng, lead shielding)? No temporary equipment or housekfJeplng Issues n,oted. Y y Y Y 8. Have YQu Iqoked for and found no other se!smlc cO,ndltlons that could affect tlJe functions of the Y equipment In area? Comments Includes DC*2-23-M-BF-S-33. \ Evaluated by: Page 1 of 4 Ar ea Walk By C hecklj st (AWe) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 140 Room , Row/Col: __ 2-_B_F_S_-3_3 __ Attachment 1 , Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Heavi/ycorroded frame between the air filters and the fan room housing fans 2S-33 and 2S-34. Evaluation of As-found Condition: System engineer that there is rio impact on the system function. Rusty frames do not inhibit the supply fans ability to petiorm their function. Aux bldg supply fans are not required per tech specs, not an operability concern (Ref. SAPN 50081388.) Two SAPNs 50081388 , and 50233539 already exist against the as-found condition. An order 60004590 has been prepared for the replacement OT the corroded filter frame. Notification Required: No ( )

. =====1 ==.====

Area Walk ... By Checklist (AWC) Status Y ._-------_ .. _ .. _-----Location: Building: Auxiliary FloorEI. ill Room, Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the followIng questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at (he end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

Anchorage of components in the room do not show adverse conditions. Warning light, PA speaker, small panels, junction I;"h+ (f;{)l; ') to /t'" 1tZ.. 2.Does anchorage of equipment In appear lc{ free of slgnlficaht degraded conditions? Y No degraded conditions observed 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueling appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g .* condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Conduit and cable trays are well supported. HVAC duct Is braced. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g., ceiling tites and lighting)? Lighting Is conduit hung with ball and socket and closed hook connections at the ceiling. The lights can sway but maIntaIn vertlcal/oad.

5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismip interactions that could cause flooding or spray""

y in the area? No likely flood or spray sources. 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire tn the area? Y No significant fuel sources 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

No temporary Items. The fire extinguIsher Is adequately restraIned. Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? The adjacent masonry wafl has been seismically strengthened. Comments Includes DC-2-65-E-LC-PY21, DC-2-65-£-UPS-/Y21, DG-2-67-E-BTC-BTC21, and DC-2-67-£-LC-SD21. Evaluated by: Date: 1 (j ( ('1 (/l-O I 'L /0 I 11/W rl., Page lof7 . i Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y Location: Building: Auxiliary FloorEI. .u Room, Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If vIsible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

AI/anchorage appears to be In good condition. 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of sIgnificant degraded conditions? Y No corrosion was seen In the area. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? All overhead distribution systems appear to be adequately restrained. HVAC dueling and firewater pipIng adequately restrained with sefsmlc supports.

4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seIsmic spatial interactions with other equipment in the Y area( e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

Piping extending from pump is about 1 II from monorail. Judged not to be a seismic concern due to the rugged supports of both the monorail and the piping. 5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? All fire water piping are adequately secured with no credible sources for Interaction at the sprinkler heads. 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire in the area? Y No flammable sources In the area. 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable eqUipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? Monorail crane had Its chain securely stowed In a wall mounted box. No other temporary or portable eqUipment.

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? No Issues. Comments Includes and subcomponent DC-2-08-M-PP*AP1.

Evaluated by: Date: I b/ f 5/ d..O I Page 1 of 7 , ( . __ . _____ .. Walk-By Checklist (AWC_)___ .status Y Location: Building: Floor EI. z.a Room. Area: for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this cJ:lecklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

All anchorage visible from floor appears to be adequate. 2.Does anchorage of equIpment In the appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y No degraded conditions in the area. 3.Based on vlsua! 'Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductlng appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Conduit In the area are anchored securely to the walls or ceiling. 4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatiallntera 'ctions with other equipment in the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? . No potentially

idverse seismic spatial interactions in area. S. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interaction.s that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No sources in the room were identified. 7. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices.

storage of portable equipment , and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? Overhead monorail has a support on the ceiling that is missing a rod that connects the monorail to the support, see photo on page 3. Another s(Jpport with .a roc[ attached Is adjacent to the support with the missing rod. The adjacent support with the rod attached was found to be an upgraded design and the original support was left abandoned In place. Comments Includes DC-2-0B-M-PP-CCP3. Evaluated by: 1ill1 -.-v: .. -..... .. --. -.... -....... __ .-_ ......... _-Date: lol 15/d-O I Page 1 of 5 ___________ Area ______ y Location: Building: Floor EI. 85 Room, Area: 2-CCWHE Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. 1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) Reviewed room lighting, emergency lighting , reinforced masonry wall , fire water piping, cable trays, conduit, and junction boxes. 2.00es anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visuallr)spection from the floot, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other eqUipment in the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? Virtually a/l components In this area have no soft targets or are located in places that preclude impact from falling hazards. The only credible falling hazard appears to be the fluori)scent tubes in the room lighting fixtures but these are of no Impact on the components of interest in this evaluation. 5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire in the area? y 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y eqUipment In the area? Reinforced masonry wall includes additional reinforcement at base and at tile top. Comments Includes DC-2-14*E-P-VOM-CCW-2*FCV

-4 30. OC-2-14-1-£-TE-6. DC-2-17-P-VOA*SW-2-FCV-602, and 0C-2-25-M-TK-BUAS-602. Evaluated by: Page 1 of 15 Area Walk ... By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y ..... _-_ ..... -......... . _._---------_..

Location:

Building: FloorEI. 73 Room, Area: 2-CCWP1 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of thIs checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment.

In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) \ No potentially adverse anchorage conditions In the ares. 2.008S anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of signIficant degraded conditions? y No con-os/on is present. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and flll conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? .' HVAC dueling and conduit appear to be adequately secured. Cable tray fill is minima/. 4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other eqUipment in the y area(e,g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? No adverse seismic spatial interactlon. Lights are chain hung and could Interact with monorail and piping supports but Judge to be Incapable of damaging the supports. See notes for question 5. 5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that courd cause flooding or spray y in the area? Sprinkler cover Is touching the support for K-2994-20 pipe. The pipe and the fire pIpIng are well supported near the point of contact. Interaction Is Judged not to be an issue. 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire In the area? y No flammable maierlal In the area. 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No temporary or portable equipment in the area. Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? No Issues to note. Comments Includes DC-2-14-M-PP-CCWP1 and subcomponent DC-2-20-M-PP-QCWAP1. Evaluated by: Date: Page 1 of 16 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status N Location: Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 163 Room, Area: 2-CCWST1 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. 1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) Tanl< Is oulslde on the roof. Reviewed CCW Surge Tenk Instrumentalion and supports. 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? N "':foderate corrosion on tank related pipIng, and suppor/s. See. Attachment No. 1 for disposition. 3.Based on visual Inspection froin the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of NlA potentially adVerse seismic condi.tions (e,g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentialiy adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equIpment In the Y' area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seIsmic InteractIons that could cause flooding or spray Y In the area? 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y 1. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

No housekeepIng Issues are noted. 8, Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safely functions of the Y equipment In the area? Surface corrosIon was noted on the clamps on numerous conduit supports In the area of the tanl<. See Attachment No. 2 (of disposition. . Cortosion was noted on CRPS duct and support to soutlleast of tank. See Attachment No.3 for disposition. comments Includes TJ(-CCWST1. Evaluated by: Date: Page lof7 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.2 Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 163 Room, Row/Col: Attachment 1, Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Moderate corrosion was noted on pipe supports, including base plates 1 for piping located on the east side of the CCW Surge Tank.* Evaluation

Based on a visual examination, the corrosion is considered to be surface corrosion, so it will not impact the structural integrity of the pipe supports at this time. Recommendation:

Prepared ano recoated pipe support steel, including base plates. Notification Required: Yes (50515145) Evaluated by: 1--f'Zt 1_/'2...---_ Reviewed by: .( Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.l Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 163 Room, Row/Col: _---'.:2---'.:-C_C_W'--ST_1'-- _ Attachment Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Surface corrosion was noted on the conduit clamps associated with numerous conduits on the roof to the east of the GCW Surge Tank. Evaluation

Based on the fact that the conduits are color-banded, they contain vital electric circuits.

Therefore, the conduit supports are Design Class I. Visual examination indicates that this is surface corrosion and will not impact the structural integrity of the clamps at this time. Recommendation: Replace clamps. Notification Required: Yes (50515146) n --q/2<L' Evaluated by: Reviewed by: ____ Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Building: Auxilic;iry Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit...2 163 Room, Row/Col: __ 2_-C_C_-W_ST_1 __ Page 1 of 1 Significant corrosion was noted on a support for the Control Room Pressurization Duct, south-east of the CCW Surge Tank} and surface corrosion was noted on the duct} on a weld adjacent to the support. The CRPS duct and supports are Design Class I and seismically qualified. Visual examination indicates that this is surface corrosion, and does not impact the structural integrity of the support or duct at this time. Recommendation

Duct and duct support be prepared and recoated. Notification Required:

Yes (50515170) Evaluated by: __ Reviewed by:.....-. ____ ___ _ Area Walk ... By CheckliSt (AWC) 'status ';r N -'--' ,-, ,--.<' ---.-,-"--,-. ---,_. -* '111'14/12-Location: Bunding: Floor EJ. 1M Room Area' ________ .. IlJstruQtloTlS for Completing may used to document, the resl.!lls 9f one or,more SWEL'ltems. The'space balow each of the followJrw may .used to record the results ofj4dgements and findings. Additional sp'a.ce Is provrded the end of this for d9cllQ1Elntlng pther . I ! i ! I i Ii I I ! I II/'ID/,"J..

1. Does the anchorage of equtplJlent In the to. be free of PQtentlally adverse*seismio conditlohs,.(lf Visible Without op'enlnp f Dampers. (or fan 8-38 end are ctmillevered ofrthe duciing. (2) lie..ctlons at 191bslft were added at the top 'and bottom' of the damp*er. See Attachment 1 for !llsposltloQ.

2.00e$

of equipment In area tQ be free of sl.gnlllcant conditions? Mild surface corrosJqn Is vIsible on some Bnchor bOlts for equIpment 8-38 and CP-:3{J. ;/u<!.ged f{) be ok. 3.Bs$ed em Vistia! from the l1oor, do the raceways and t;VAC 8p,pearto be-free of seIsmic con!'JiUo.ris (e.g".cooditloilPf supports fs adequate=al)d nil cbndiijons of ¢able to be inSide ,imlts)? and HVAC (Jucling are adequately sefiured., treys Bre within limits In terms-of IffJ conditions. '_ 4.,:00es it appear that area Is free of potentially seismic spatial Inter*lctlolis With other equipment in ceiling tiles IIghtlnQ)? Lfghts are [oj} hung with closed/'Jook and a pal/and socket cormeclfon, two ball and socket G,Qnneofions or B trapeze frame. AI/are Ndged to be adequate.

5. Does it appear that.thEi is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could flooding or spray in the area? 6. Does it E!Ppear that the area is tree of potentially adverse seismio interactiQns that could cause fire In the area? No credible sources that could cailse 8 (irF?

fdentined.

7.

it appear that area is free of potentially adverse'selsmic Interactions Vlitti practices, storage of p'ortable equipment, arid temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? $caffofd;ng in the'area has been propo.rIy. qualified Wit/l r)dequ.ate cfearanqes (soaffold handrail Is tQt}chlng CRVS dampe{#4 dueling fnsulaUon)\ Judged to be ok. I I I . 8. Have for and found no other seIsmIc conditions that could atlversely affect the safety functloris of the I I equfpment In the area? M t., "'nnl l N a" nel" Joetttme(t. ' I F' a..o,"" CQmments /' DC-2.23:M-B()..CP-3r, DC-. 2-23-P-D-VA0-2-MOD-9, an'd DC-2-23-P-FL-FU41. Equipment OP-37 and CP.;3l} .ere leaklng water. Both Items I / /. were alfeady iagge!1 with nQtff[qatfons. Oat.e: . y y y y y y y ¥N lJ /.z.o / I II a. I /?- y evalUated by: JO/ C)..&! d-o.. I -. --------_.- ... _-..., --. -.. -----.-----.-"-------. r------'.,-.. ,.------,--,-.----, Area Walkdown Checklist (A.WC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Bui l ding: Auxiliary Floor EI. 154 Room, Row/Col: __ 2_-C_P_-_37 __ Attachment 1, Page 1 of 18 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Motor Operated Damper DC-2-23-P-D-VAC-2-MOD-12 was modified at some time in the past by adding structural steel channel stiffeners on the top and bottom of the damper. The channel sections also extend 'fo and stiffen the damper immediately adjacent to MOD-12 (DC-2-23-P-D-VAC-2-MOO-12A). Reference PG&E Drawing 59353 for a layout of the dampers. The concern is that the heavy channel stiffeners may adversely impaGt the seismic qualification of the ducting/duct supports associated with the MOD Dampers. Evaluation: A review of the seismic calculation for the dueting/duet supports associated with the MOD Dampers (Calculation HV-86, Revision 0) shows that the additional mass from the channel sections was not considered in the qualification of the ductin , g/duet supports. A copy of this calculation has been revised (marked up) such that it now accounts for this extra mass. This markup is found under sheets 2 thru 18. The mark up demonstrates that the dueting/duct supports would remain seismically qualified (with significant margin) if the additional mass from the channel stiffeners is considered. Therefore, this condition has no impaCt on the safe operation of DCPP. Recommendation: -Revise Calculation HV-86 to account for the additional mass from the channel stiffeners. -Issue the appropriate Design Change Vehicle to update the affected drawing(s) Notification Required: Yes ____ _ Evaluated by: DRe ,jjJ fj. IO!18/r l ... ReViewed by: WRH (Z , t olw/I 7 Building: Auxiliary i-I. ,.I ! .. Area Walkdown Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.£ Floor EI. 154 Room, Row/Col: __ 2_-C_P_-_37 __ Attachment 1, Page 2 of 18 ,$ltr/*#- -'._,-_.,-----, .......... ... . _ 1.-HI'-l<. eE'N,UA1. COMPUTATION StlUT ::.£; _ 14-& IPt;r-t! Iet:r \lPf8'I'lTiWAW.,,,,,I-Ae/Jt!i,Mt ;((,.e! "11 f "" .Mil( _"'-h .-: n/!Z:n_ft --"' '. til 111.7# ' , , '. .. ,$ .tIS" L(!) f ., ... (1P,.ti)lt)(.P!IJ(&.;.1t1'fl/u)_ /JZ4:Jt t '( Il1r /JAMIE<< r (/Ir.o/: kJT..rJF@)

,17, a.l!.f " . . '. . . (lilT II, .15! f1fW'J") ,: . to.. ',$ :'8 ,J:;

..... : , f It II.-IR . ',' ..-: ",. fI); 'oC .,. 7tAf.# .. ' . p (fo. tI1I" f)F' ..fPII..s 71 JM* ,AliI!J11fJII8r.. ,.", "1IWfr:::I> ... , * * * * ..

ttt . ;.',!, -f,I5t>: = .

'# ' '. . . G . :. : : (fit..",.

-

ijlwi' +

s) o .p;. PI6' .. [('-*J{jlJ' /{uHl)(t¥.f/.J!9" + ,7/* r . S'f..e II . ,: +.

1'-, ...

.;. /fD P4.¢*# ' . ' 'r .,."",It i,,(. i4l!" ItU Ii: 11; '1'11

J,I 1':.f4.: J!..lI:. .: .

Ot: f; ""we! (M. t:Att:!D:eJ::Mt -'f)/#7 ;1 .* ft:F'(IIf .\ ' .*.. ' ft* 0#.) . 1-,q:.x

Ff!&:"

.!I

48i.flFl::.nKj

';!Jlft! I;;' ;. J::ff;:. '1.(.$4 .qz c, +J 17 .p.,(p.7 )' J<< *.. Mai1cups By: BM04 DaJe: 9!l1n2 Tn'lxllarv weight for Duct Support No. 3() P4 == 116.41bs. + 171bs.)::S2lbs.

.foPl}=

i' 13U lbs. + 391bs.}= 144.5 Ibs. 11U Ibs+ J04451Jls+ 52 3S1k =41U tbs. adding two 70" :lijfenm aty = 19"'" P' 30:;;: 41l.1lbs. + *<2 X 70"1ll X S221hs. %incIease= 527i4t 1.1 ==.l.m.! . Tnom Vleiglll fgrDactSopport No. 33N Pu =210.olbs. Y.!(P11 + PIS + P , 4)" + 133.4lbs. + 39 k) = 144.5 Ibs. Y4s+ P,+ P,)-*{11I.7 k + I3S.41.'bs.+391bs.)-144's Ibs. %(Pt>= 33.21bs. Ps'" 210.0 Ibs+ 2x 144.s Ibs + 38.21bs. = S37.2 lis. 4ddint two 70" JtifI'enm at w -191b:." r SO = S37.2lbs. + *(lx10 10 112x 19 W) = 64S Ihs. % incn:ase = 6481537.2 = 121% use 127%. Shcct3/11 OJ 5. 0:: :r CA .." 0" 0 IT! ....lo Cl :::tl 0 0 3 :::tl 0 { () g. i'.) I () "'0 I W -....J ;e Qr 0 ::::r 3 ('I) ::::J ..... "'0 !>> (C CD W a ....lo co .---------_._-_._ ...... _----------- >> CD 0 m tir 0-0' (") " S>> a. ::s 0 C3 ::s ::J 0 ('") ::r ..., CD -C 0 S>> 2S: ::s .r-_. C (J) ----;;:!. ); .-+ II\.) () '-" Area Walkdown Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit..£ Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 154 Room. Row/Col: ----------------- 2-CP-37 Attachment 1, Page 4 of 18 t:! 1J e g. 0 v :; 1 a::I 0 &i-II ,t i '" C'<l :: C>

... ". ... r' .... .. 1.."X--,,* ....

._ ",-",.1=1 , ;." ... f;t¢' t:.l. er. .... _" .* ...!!i:.A .. G -:r::..ID .. .. ,. et.:et;. ..$'93S!'_-.. .. _ , $y::-:.E?7I EW) .... . .... _, /j'::o' .4!!2 i.:: !Z3;:-.a' * ., .. ' . I tis!: "77!e \flir .. f.Z)4<J>r¥ r.m/?.! * .. I /oS . .£b(-0 i 0-...... .... _'-----------'-1 .. i ';'1' _ ...... . No,

M£'AkJ:."': $)'--Z::z It" _ ... t.cA*;c.* i I -----AX"". -.. ...... I.e -,!!OI". P, 67:"
.. .-1 /1/9 --', ,. '" .. _______ 1 /E:: e.o-

=' ./&.!i.: .. .. 37f.;t . . . -:=:::1 . L ,=, 7r'= . % ...: ;Fb..:.*4,/;' (;6-7) .,3.4;;,{;. t,../ '-. ..-.' .:z./J7f. .:r" , ( . ';.(-,.IJZ '. .... *) . .,i{ .. .. Ok Markups By: BM04 Interaction Equation: 0.14(1.27) = 0.18 < 1.0 ok. Dale: 9127112 Sbeet34!8t OJ Q: S-" 0' 0 ""'" !!! >> CD Q) ....... CJ 0'1 Q)' 0-0 Q) :::0 () " 0 m 0.. 0 ::J 0 3 '< 0 :::0 ::J 0 -0 ::J 0 () () g. ::r -; CD -0 (") m ='\ ::J r-t-N C en I .-+-() ::J -0 ;::::;: .....-" I c.v IN -.J () ---or 0 ::r-3 ro a -0 ru <0 ro 01 0 -1\ ....... <XI CD S. 0: :3" ... .. G E CO','PUT :,-t t'l., .. .. -!Z # . C *"*L.' ," -'ok ... __ I!?(..=--:.z.'!.2:-........ _ ,.. '.,.-.v.e* ... _ t:#a,t;; Po 1(".7, . .. .. .!: . *.. .,. e.'(:d ** t..I>AD,AJCo (mAIVt.*,J . : H-1=b . . .... _. . ---:.&;: ... ... rwo t:.!. Date:CJn:lI12 MarkupS By: BM04 Shcet3SIS1 11 0-0 -s !Il >> ___ ... ----_. : . H": : * .c-l.!""! 'of* '. 'I(. /.!; '3' ,-<:. .. . __ : " __ ._ ... ____ ___ CD Q) 0 C11 Q)' 0-0" :::0 () 0 n> 0.. 0 ::::J 0 ..3 '< 0 :::0 ::::J 0 "'U ::s 0 () () :E g. CD :::J'" ""'I CD -U () n> ::J ,... _. C CJ) ,.... ::J >> ;::t: IN () ----or 0 :J 3 CD -.. * -.-. ....t. .-............ -i .* 1.$ . J' :. _ .'. __ __ . -. .. ;----. .J : . r .....!.*-I ' ... ,,-' f-"-'1 Interaction &luation: I z, . .;r. ... y,:s. , (-, ... 'Ct!9 ... -"', . .. , -_. -.--... t .... -v",..*.."..,.""f;,., ... "VCJ h > .a,., t ! ':;,6; I. I _ =' < ,. .6 : _:--... __ ;_, 05>(127%) 0.70* LO .. .L' -.. -Check L3x3x5I1'6" =.

.-. 19.70(1.17)

= 15.0 ksi < 34$6 ksi oR:

__ _ ... _., r

!'l' -: :::J ,.... -0 0> co CD m 0 ...... (>> "" 7I r'I""-1,1" ,' .'a.t' ..... " _, " , I' " G :. :4 t. L C Q'-M P !J T 7' r O J.! :. H E E i :'::.; .. ".-. '" : ,,_ .er:::y *. t> h<' .&A'C- '2, . .s, JZ:,.j' ... ,/}c7 , .. u: , .. , r."" *. , ** I" ........... , , ... -.' -.. ", . ..... , .!.. -'" .CA!;Jfc.m{.

__ , ..... . .. -. , ,\ ":. .. ,

.:. ... C*,** __ -';f.£: .. .. -.. -. :--. : '-'1 I -f :J ! Markups By: 8M04 : , -_ ..... -........ '8 _Weld Req'd: ; __ .. _ .. .f.. .v.r: 1 . __ .;. , I 0.07"(1.27) = OJ)'}" < 0.25" die. Date: 911:i112 r-, :- ..e . -! _ * .. :_l.:iIi_... ..., , .... __ .. .. ._. *.. ]i2i: .. --Pull .. _lt=O.63I"(t.21)=0.86S'<3.6'ok. , 70' _:-:,u *. . .. 1_4. . I __ tlf J:.* : AS' -/I" 4 Dr 'Iff'C.!'G ...:/OIdN I TJIS &:;t:.7CC f?'r:-fNIY VO/Nr{ ,.?I(.../- J?;r.:_ f!.Y. /r'/t .... U!!;P.tr:t:P""'/ ' ;tJ?77I14 : . _ do'T-E .. .77fI'! ,WI.!: }!sr:(;?'lJ 77'l-I<"l!",d /,,/:7) CtJII1.t1tJE'tf""lno;..1 .J=R1'M-I5 ./hI//u*i.tJ.f 0,", .Jt> ... _ Sbeet3&81 OJ 5. 0:: ::;-" 0' 0 "'" !I! >> ., CD , D.) ....J. 0 0'1 Dr 0"' 0 Q) ::u () :::'\ 0 D) 0-0 ::l 0 3 '< 0 ::u :J 0 'lJ ::l 0 () () :E g. (1) ::r ..., CD "'0 iU 0 ::J 25: .r+ _. N C (J> I ,...... () :J "U ;::::;: I w If\) """ () '-'" ;e fir 0 :::r 3 ro ;a "U Q) (O-ro -...j 0 -., ....J. Q) Building: Auxiliary --" ... 0: \1/ ttl Area Walkdown Checklist (AWC) Floor EI. Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 154 Room, Row/Col: 2-CP-37 ----------------- ! * ! . .. I* I i' Attachment 1, Page 8 of 18 -1 'I. .,

I .. i I Area Walkdown Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Auxiliary 154 Attachment 1, Page 9 of 18 Room, Row/Col: -------------------------

Building: Floor EI. 2-CP-37 f .-I ?"-' 'I I I: .. ,t, 4J ! fQ , , '" V I" " ,... : 'Y .'( \ ."-.. It, ;1 '\S , '\, v. , II ':-;. to; * .. 1 }tJ I , .. : -'4 "l--I, ,>, 0' t ( 1\ \fI' 1 'f \ i\ II' . \ : )' l<!' I _. " : l.. .. \} I (, Area Walkdown Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2. Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 154 Room, Row/Col: __ __ Attachment 1, Page 10 of 18 N u tS id ..,. .S! V 0 i <:> i K; II :s. *1 .f! ¥ oS a , } ........ I Area Walkdown Checklist (AWe) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2. Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. _1_54_ Room , Row/Col: __ =-2-....::.C...:...P_-3:...:.:7 __ Attachment

1. Page 11 of 18 N <<:) i 5 o:t v 0 i 0 II In " I f .., .s d :1! (. ; I. .

Building: Auxiliary i j N ;:; S 0 lii A a eo f :; Area Walkdown Checklist (AWC) Floor EI. ,.J .!L 'Y, Q N"\ . v lJ :2 " :i 2 II c.1I ,. II " Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.£ 154 Room, Row/Col: _----.;2'--...;;.C'-P-'-3:....;.7 __ v C! C> II ii 1.1 I ..... 0 d . ,. " Attachment

1. Page 12 of 18 Area Walkdown Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit..£ Building:

Auxiliary Floor EI. 154 Room. Row/Col: __ __ Attachment

1. Page 13 of 18 r l , .... -'Co. GEl. :: L ::: 0 !.: ::' !.! T :. '7 . D I I , _. ,;Is;.,,!

c. .

or y --. . ." .. .. eu:>c, s9,">e, e ,..$, l' .... ." . " ./cot;;-: _ .***. ... .... ,-. 1I..1!.C-." *. _" , ....... _ -_. . ... - _. .:... . _ -. . . -£... = .p.tr .: ' .!-2. -f ,-, ._., .. : ... !I! /$.<>.. ! I --, J.' ...* ft.!>' _.r ff.P(. __ .?-P.9"".6 .... ! .... _ ...... .....,......-.;,..".. __ ........... .. ... 20*,.;0 , Jt:;,.r/ Markups By: SM04 D:rte: 912m2 Duct Sheet Stress t 1.7&9'ksi (1.27)= 1.5.0 ksi <'0;96*(30 ksi) or 28.80 ksi ok ... /$,.z l" --.-....

' '{": ' .. ---.......

SbcarS1ress "",78 -__ i ,i 0-783(1.21) = 0.991csi <O.58F; = 11.41csi ok. : -.:'_ I' .. 'L ;: .. -'1,z; I . . a --J ,.1 A /<:;.0 e l..!',,:J:: 7r:1 .. A-II/C <;.-:-. ". ./¢./, 'C ,.,J <;ucr .* " * . .. h; v _ _ .6.

, i '/: :.)<: ?B . A4.0. ..a'S9 .",/_:::' oCR.,.* J':;-r , V'= . 'd)'" --.---------. ---'" -.T. v'.I,J :-.. -v. ___ -. .. . =: !@-1'81-.5"_"'-',;' If

t ___ ._._.J Sheet 52181 CD . . 0: :r "T1 0" 0 -, II! >> --s CD $l) 0 en n)' r:s 0' $l) :::0 () ;\ 0 Q) 0.. 0 ::::s 0 3 '< 0 :::0 ::::s 0 '"0 ::l 0 () -() g. ::::T '"""1 CD "'U (') m ::::s .-+ '" c en I ,.-ta () ::::s -u ;:::;.: I I'" U> '"" () '-" or (') ::r 3 CD ::l _ -:0 III co CD 0 -+0 (X)

Area Walkdown Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2. Building: Auxiliary Floot EI. 154 Room , Row/Cot __ 2_-_C_P_-3_7 __ Attachment 1, Page 15 of 18 " N U ...!o.! 1:1 Q Q :.e on C> II C :.G en .9 Ii =B c;> 1\ '" p 1.i 1i .<i! 'G /. "'. G-.. , .". ,'": so., .. 8( " , . .,. ... l ,.' tJ" Markups By: BM04 Date: 9f27f12 "'",'>(1 1'" .... :.: ** GE,;!;':;'!.. . r/yAG. ,::;u/';P<:1 R-:r oS / .eLL)G..: -)J.:G:; r oW .... , ,. 1I!s1.. .. , .. .. -I . ---.. r'--'--_ .. ' .. " .. /, /S.b . .DC'?" Duct Sheet Stresses ;f.."JA:.I -I ..L..:: 'i-. .l'e:-h..-&-P .. I J I' , 5'¢9 i T .. 7.9S6kSi(I'Yn>lO.lOksi<0.96Fyor2t.8ksi ok ...... -_ . , ' . ..'. o,!:,;") oMl) i , til. /f.,.'Z _. * ' " : ........ T ShearStresses ...... ,t;, ,:::-Ij" ,S4.(j' *-/*;.4-,h/ ;', .. (!I-.c.:) ..... , 0 . j ",'(: .' _ .. ;. * ,,]).. ,,; =0.24(1.27) = 0.306 ksi<17.4ksi ok i-;...': ... $. .. .. ., ,. ....... -.:-. o A 77:>; .. =0.294(1.27) =0.373 t:si-< 17.4l:sick _ 771/! __ -..,':' \.o..e 4> .. _ * ..... .,_ 'Is., . ___ _ . vt.btITl. ,Ie)' .. Pdtz/ e.i(J*: .3.7 S K -=:

v ....

". <!'-¥'7"'--":: ' Z:-A'!.T-'15.S7* Csb.1 2) =: ', .!;PU 0(" * .1., 1'<> .:-(J'. ",,;; >I .ad" -*

IG II-{z. = . .$,/0 '" /$./;' ,-.-::. .

-

.. , ;,. .tJb'S ii. -'--";'-'1 -: -.. -----'BY .z..v.;. U()R.l:' ... ., Sbeet561S1 OJ !:. 0:: :5' " 0' 0 ...., IT! >> CD t\) -'" CJ CY1 iir .,I::l. Q: 0 ;U () " 0 m c.. 0 :J 0 3 '< 0 ;U :J 0 -0 ::J :t 0 () () g. ::r CD -0 n> (') :J 25: r-_. N C en I () ::s '1J ;:::;: >> I w IN ...... () or (") ::r 3 CD ;a. L....). '1J OJ <0 CD ....). Q) a ....). co .. (1: rr::t ;t l ::: ' ',_._'' Rt!?'r. d ,,,'"'<, ,". J3t.bG -'---

!:. g, ¢.I , ::" " 3!:A/ , ' ::;EtlEP.A L S/, E,E-._,... A*c.;" .

.*....*. " .* " '. A /e,D ; c:.:,"!;'..r. , ,<:: oDVt!.7 1 ,4,,, -;. ., /,'G:tt:: ,J.

KS;: .c

.,.. ec"s,,-/--.rl* .. I , . o./d A /5::;;': , .. . 1 '! .:;. . . .I_P3 f'.cu/(r/r.".n7(!J'!-' --"f t'i , t (:),1:' l)oCT.. 1 ! : IN,,!a .. bUGT -SUPPt:JA'n: ' A--P8' , *WIr;J .... ._ J'.J 77"'::1" C'EZ.O.;, _.1 ... : .. " .' , I * .$Mppr. d , "'1 tjc) I , A,s .Of,! ... 'rz' '4.f;.o i*, !.i:;3S?'- A-i<:IO E ..33'U . '" .], .' -'-"" --tJ,J FP' .4>/ .. ','1..-5'-cr. __ ... _._. I '1 t-Markups By: BM04 Date:-9127/12 Sheet 58181

Conclusion:

AfteJ"3ccoUDting forex.istingstiffenerweigbt on.HVAC spans 5 and 6, the ducting and associated doctStJppOTtS are ok. {l) E 0: :f '"T1 0' 0 ..., IT! ::u 0 0 3 ::u 0 () g. tv I () '"0 I w -....I ru (") ::T 3 Cl> 3-L->. '"0 ru (0 Cl> ...:I. -....I 0 -...:I. <>> >> -. CD 0 ru 0)" 0" 0 (') =" m 0... :J 0 '< 0 :J "U ::J 0 () :E CD ::r ..., CD "U 0 W-e: :J .-_. C en ,.... :J ;:::;: () '-"" ' A 11.0 Apply Seismic and Dead Loads to Duet Cbcck 70" x20" Rectmgular Dact (SpanS S aDd 6) Ver6c;alLoad Shear z = 0:;' lorsioml-O My::: 2.15 ;"1:(1.27)(3.10).:.: 8.46 W _Wen Load A:Dal P=Q.11t'(U1)(3.10) =O.r ShesrY=O Nor1b $outhLoad mlP=O Shear Y "" O.J7f(1.27)(2.20} == M ... == 2.15 fII.X (1.27)(.2.20) = 6.0 iIIooIt By comparison. the II10Te critical combimdion load win be . (l:V+NS) A 11.1.1. Bendigg stresses (See Sheet 7 ofBY..g6l lOts.044110-101.S itJ.3 Sr'" 89.897135::: 2S7 in' . f Pl=U6IIOl.S+6.0i2.57=2.42ksi A 11 t h Shear StR:ss: = 5.03 in:!. Au =2(20)0.03S9 == 1.44 in 2 (,. -0:1"11.44 + 0 = 0.49 hi fa, =0.5"'15.03 + 0::: O.099lcsi A 11.2.a Axial Str!:sses , == PlAt =CJ.1/o.9U -O.7S6 ksi A 11.2.0 A.lia! Buckling (See Sbeet 9 ofHV-4) f .. -At 2(h+w)t = 2(10 + lO)4U)3S9 -6.46irf f 2'" 0.7/6.46 ::: 0.11 ksi < 1.ora de A Ap,ply Pressure Load'sto Dn¢; II . == ..!..)=0796bi Fe 2..52

PMT -PJ,(+ PI) + PI"" 0.092 +0.0] 14 + 0.0359'" 0.1337 psi tfa:t-PIWI'F/ppc:O 0.1387(30.000)10.196

== 5.41 ksi A IS 4) Cl!eclc DnctStresp 5.41 + 0.756+ 2.42-8.59 ksi <28.80 ksi A 13.2 Shear Stttsses i, ... 0.49 + 0.099 = 5.89 Icsi or(i.c., < l'.4Icssl A 14.0 AWly P!gsure ,milS <See AISC 1" for angle and chsnne t pt't!Wti§) Llxlx,1.Ir' and Me 8d3.7 Stiffenertypc: MC8x18.1atoptwo angles. (above and below ddcting). . M.ct ... (3-f1trJPur(i'e'l 17O')0J3I7(24)7ot

1959'" i' :u Ss=I,(h.+t-y) where = height of composi1

stiffener =: I" + 2!r;:; 3.'" t=0.0359" 1, = 5.0 + 12(0.0359)(1.86 -0.03S9/l}! + 5.91(2.0 + 0.0359 -1.86f= 6.64 I, is about S.O by eugineeriogjudgemem b,.= 12 or 112j Y. ,.. 2.0 in by engiDeeringjudgment ,_12'4.,.,2 +S.96(2.0+0.OSS9) =U6 5.96+12--Ss:o 6.64(3.9 + 0.0359-1.86) = 13.19 bending stress on sti:ffener . fna=Mr.. ... L9S9flS.79 =0.142 ksi < 0.96 F:r ,.. 28.8 CD 5. a: ::r <R 'i1 0' 0 ..., IT! :J> ., CD CJ D) C1l $i)' C-O' m ;:u (") 0 Sl) c.. 0 :::l 0 3 '< w 0 :E ::0 :::l -U :::J -0 (') () g. CD :::T -os CD -U t\) O. ::::l c:: .r+ _ . N C (() I () ,-+ -0 S: >> l.> ""'" () ............ Q) 0 :r 3 CD ::l .-+ -0 Q) (Q CD CO 0 -.. -t. <XI Area walk-By Checklist (AWC) < ___ "_0 location: Building: Floor EI. 154' Room. Area: Status N ---_. ------------

"._--_

... Instructions for CompletIng Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEl items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings, Additfonal space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments . . ...

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

Reviewed room lighting, emergency lighting batteries, masonry wall, conduit, fire water piping, copper piping, and adjacent Class 2 CommunlcatlonRoom Chiller. 2.00es anchorage of eqUipment In the area appear to be f'ree of significant degraded conditions? N Moderate corrosion exists on pneumatic actuators, copper tublng , copper pIpIng and anchorage at various locations intha room. Corrosion at legs and braces of appears to be more than sufface corrosion, see photos on pages 8 and 9. See No, 1 for disposition 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g" condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? CondUit, and PipIng (fire water and copper) are waf! anchored.

4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seIsmic spatial interactIons with other equipment In the y sraaee.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

Room lighting Incltides safely chains. Batteries for outside emergency ligl1ting are supported by Unistrut members bolledto the concrete wall. 5.Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic InteracUons that could cause fire In the area? Y No credible sources could ca(lse 8 fire In the area. 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No temporary equipment In the area. B. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely Iaffect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? ' A relaJively large number of metal screws attac:hlng the access cover plates for the Communication Room Chiller are missing (Class 2 component). Even so the access plate Is adequately held In place. No otherls$ues were Identilied. Comments Includes OC-2-23-M-HX-CR37. Evaluated by: Date: 10/d-5/ Page lof22 Area Walk By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit..£ Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 154 Room, Row/Col: __ 2_-C_R_-_37 __ Attachment 1 , Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Severe corrosion was noted on the rear support legs and braces for the fHter housing of Condenser No. CR38. . Evaluation

This component is Design Class I and seismically qualified.

The seismic qualification of CR38 is shown in Calculation No. DHV-4.1. A review of this calculation indicates that the vertical legs are not credited in providing support to the filter housing, instead, all vertical and lateral loading is resisted by the triangular frames. The triangular frames, even in their corroded condition, adequately support the filter housing. Based on the evaluation, it can be seen that the corrosion has no adverse effects on the seismic qualification of CR38. Therefore, CR38 will perform its intended safety functions during a seismic event. Recom mendations: Replace or repair corroded members and .recoat. Notification Required: Yes (50518935) Evaluated by: ___ PW..;...;;..;....H_

........... ______ __ _ Reviewed by: __ ________ t __ _ Ale Walk-By Checklist (AVtIC) Status Y location: Building:!l..trbIne. . Floor EI. .a.5 Room. Area: 2-DEG-21 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWElltems. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. AddItional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) . Reviewed emergency lighting, lighting fixtures, Cardox fire suppression piping conduit, crane ralls, PA speakers.

Also reviewed electrical pS1Jels, wall mounted pane's, and compressor 2.00e8 anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visual Inspection from the fioor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueling appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? No cable trays or HVAC duct In the 2-DEG-21 room, conduIts are wef! supported

4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatlallnteract!ons with other equipment In the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? No likely sources 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire in the area? Y 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portabfe eqUipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-21-M-EN-DEG1, DC-2-21-E-PNL-GQD21, DC-2-21-E-PNL-SED21, DC-2-21-E-S-EQD-21.

DC-2-21-M-MISC-IS1, DC-2-21-M-TK-AR1A, DC-2-21-P-FL-CAF1, and DC-2-21-P-V-DEG-2-LCV-89. Evaluated by: Date: ID/11/tLbt 1.... ro{'1{rj)IL Page lof21 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y location: Building: Turbine FloorEI. ill! Room, AreCl: Instructions for Completing Checklist This cheCklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the follOwing questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seIsmic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabInets)

Reviewed room lighting f(xturos, emergenoy lighting, conduit, cable trays, Hafon system Inc/udlng signa/llgMing, crane ralls, water plpfng, Class lIafr start compressor ancl supporting equipment fire extingu/s/wrs, and speal<ers. 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on vis!.Ial inspeotion from the floor, do the cablelcondult raceways and HVAC ducllng appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? No HVAC duct/ng in rooin. Both cable trays and conduit are well supported.

4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interacUons with other equipment In the y area(e.g .* ceiling tiles and lighting)? . Room area lighting fixtures arB restrained by a carabiner-like link to supporling slructure boltad to tha ceiling. 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Qoes It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y The Lube 011 and Fuel 011 systems contain combustible materials.

The lube 011 piping runs are short and adequately supported. The fuel oil Is c;ontalned In a tank that /s contained within the framework of the s/(Id system. Again short piping runs are adequately supported.

7. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping y practices, storage of portable equipment.

and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? rlre extinguisher near door rests In a wall brac/(et with one bolt Into the concrete wall but is not restrained agaInst uplift. Could potentially lift out of bracket If vertical acceleration

/s greater than 1 g. ExtinguIsher could also fall if bracket is bent or If pryIng action causes anchor bolt to fall. For disposition see Aftachmenl1. Comments Inc/udes DC-2-21-E-PNL*GQD23, OC-2-21-E-PNI,..-SED23, DC-2-21-E-S-EQD-23, 00-2-21-M-M/SC-/S3, DC-2-21-M-TK-AR3A, DC-2-21-P-FL-CAF3, and DC-2-21-P-VOA-DEG';2-LCV-87. Evaluated by: Date:

I . /IJ/ Page lof27 Area Walk By Checklist (AWC) Di a blo Canyon Power Plant , Unit £ Building:

Tu r bine Floor EI. 85 Room, Row/Col: -----'--------'--------'--------'----- Attachment 1, Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: The support mounting configuration of the lire extinguisher located in Unit 2 EDG 2-3 room (FE .. T85.24-2) may cause the fire extinguisher to dislodge from its support and fall to the concrete floor. Since the fire extinguisher contains pressurized gas, impact with the floor could damage the valve, nozzle, or regulator, resulting in the extinguisher becoming' a self-propelled missile which could adversely interact with the adjqcent Excitation Cubicle and DG C.ontro/ Panel.. Evaluation: The fire extinguisher is supported per manufacturer design. It is hooked onto an "l" shape bracket which, in turn, is anchored to the concrete wall with multiple anchor bolts. The fire extinguisher is Design Class II and is hot seismically quali"fied. Therefore, a seismic evaluation has not been performed for this mounting deta i l. The fire extinguisher is located in the Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) Room at elev. 85' in the Turbine Building. Per DcM C .. 17, Attachment B, the Zero Period Acceleration (ZPA) of the floor response spectra for this location is 0.54 g in horizontal direction and 0.59 in vertical direction. Since the vertical acceleration is less than 1.0 g, the fire extinguisher will not uplift from its support. In addition, the horizontal acceleration at this elevation is not sufficiently large to cause rocking motion severe enough for the fire extinguisher to be dislodged from its support. Therefore, it is unlikely that the fire extinguisher will become dislodged from its support, impact the concrete floor and become a missile that could impact the Excitation Cubicle or Control Panel during a seismic event. Based on the above assessment, the fire extinguisher is adequately restrained. Recommendation

Acceptable Notification Required:

No Evaluated by: __ __ _ Reviewed by: ____ -A----'--@ ""-""i' ........ Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y -----Location: Building: FloorEI. 10Z Room, Area: 2-DEG-ES-21 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checkllst may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following quesUons may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily openIng cabinets)

No credible Interaction sources 2.00es anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of sIgnificant degraded conditions? y No significant degradation. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor. do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? No cable trays, no conduit, no HVAC duct, only small drain pipe over the exhaust pipe, overhead light fixture has safety chain restraint

4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse selsmio spatial interactions with other eqUipment in the Y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? No likely sources, Only a small overhead drain line ;s in the area. S. Does It appear that the area Is-free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y 7. Does It appear that the area Is' free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions assoolated with housekeeping Y practices.

storage of portable eqUipment. and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-21-M-M/SC-ES1.

Evaluated by: IlBQ ---r/J -_. " , ' Date: {d'l'1/V);z. 10/', /-ZO I'l,., Page 1 of 5 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) status Y location: Building: Turbine Floor EI. ill Room, Area: 2-DEG-ES-23 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area wall<-by near one or more SWEl items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. 1. Doe'S the anchorage of equipment iii the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) Fan exhaust o/Jamber Is low In profile and well anchored. Olhe/wise the room is empty of other than the silencer and Its exl1aust piping. anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of signifiqant degraded conditions? Some carros/ollin/ine (possibly conduit) over sf/enoer. Surface corros{on noted on lower anchor plate and connectiof} pin for 11orizonial strut support for piping exiting from the silenoer. The Web of the building column at Soutl} end of room, to which the anchor plate is allached, 118s an 8re8 of moderate corrosion. For disposition see Attachment

1. . Y 3.Based on visual from the floor, do the cable/condultraceways and HVAC ducling appear to be free of y potentially adverse Seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

No soft targets for /l8ms it room. 5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? . 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire in the area? Y 7. Does it appear that !he area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment i and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? Comments Inclades DC-2-21-M-M/SC-ES3.

Evaluated by: Page 1 of 12 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Building: Turbine Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit..£ 107 Room, Row/Col: 2-0EG-ES-23 Attachment 1, Page 1 of 1 Moderate corrosion was noted on Pipe Support 414-588R and minor surface corrosion was noted on the web of the building column to which this sway-strut type support is attached. More specifically, corrosion was noted on the following for Support 414-588R:

Lower end of sway strut
Paddle @ lower end of sway strut
Rear bracket @ lower end of sway strut, including the load pin Corrosion on web of building column is minor surface corrosion primarily confined to the region of the attachment point of the rear bracket for 414-588R.

Evaluation: Pipe Support 414-588R is a Design Class I, safety-related pipe support located on the exhaust line exiting from the Exhaust Silencer for DEG 2-3 (Line 4405). Both it and an adjacent sway-strut-type pipe support, both vertical and perpendicular restraint to the exhaust line. These supports are located immediately adjacent to the outside air louvers @ the south end of the Turbine Building (exhaust line exits through these louvers). The corrosion on the support components appears to be moderate, with insignificant material loss. Based on a review of the extent of corrosion, the current condition is not sufficiently severe' to impact the ability of the pipe support to perform its design function (providing restraint of the piping system). The surface corrosion on the web of the building column appears to be confined to the coating, with insignificant material loss. Therefore, these as-found conditions do not impact the safe operation of DCPP Recommendation: Clean and recoat pipe support including its attachment to the Turbine Building column on Line 35. Notification Required: Yes (50518936) Evaluated by: ----==d..:....::....rc ____ ------.-',o ,_'8.::.-..( IL ____ _ Reviewed by: _w.!.!.!f.!..!.h _' _____ ----'-O+_) 1....;:;.8+-1..:-1?:!o..-- ____ _ I . ' ;, i '! f ! I .J I "I *1 I I I* ..I V location: Building: tWX!lla,r:y, F-loorEI. ,:ma: RO.OM. Area: for Complellng . may pe USeQ:t9 of .the. .or-mp're 1)WE;.k QelQW to-T.ElcOro resUltS ofJud,ge'me'nts .. Additioi'ial'spMtHs p'rovfded 'iU*the* enchoflhls' . checklist for*dO'Cumelitilig' other.

1. Does 'the of fn ap'pear to be free ofpotentlally a'dverse selsm'lc.condIUons (it vlsfbie WUhci,ut na'cessar.ily . y The,nearby duct and fans are welf..suPPQiled

.. al19horema'.qf l;ippea.r te

y.

'¢orros/Q['t (qtHYA¢ No. () 6bsrJtVed, on. 'pon'tllilt ,thcHiroa. '$06 No.. 6. for uispqs/lfofl. .9!J fJ99-r. HVAO dQQllng ,te;; 'of

coi)ct!tlon'of SUPPb.rtS Is ad,Eiqualearid filttariditiQns of ci:ible:ti'aY$

8,pp.e* t6 limit$l? . well supPQrted. Plplrig is weJl.siiiiporled .. Conauli..fs Qi5.ii1ments sectkj;j.. . 4. If CJP*p6Etr. PQtenUaiiS' adverse'.sElIsmlc InleracUon:s wlffi In '{he cHid IIghth'!!;)? . y 5. Does that the area ts:free*of potentially adverse seismIc cause,f!oodirlQ or* spray y In' the'. area? . " 6. ItaPPE1ar \hat-the f;1rea ofpotenUally slitlsmio InteracliOns thahcQuld In area? y No slgnmcsn,l fuel-sources. 7,:00.es rt*appe:arthfl1 tl]a ar.ea Is Y $t9rage of and sca.(ft:)ltlln.g, stiletmng)?

8.

fOi' .. f;1IiO fou'nd rio condit!o.ris that fun'ctlcros of the Y eqUipment

In ,the a'rea? 'ComrilS'n'ts A' nufplJ a.neafbY,fire waler piPe' i$f!pport Js l!fgnfflcantly coiTodeci.

See. Attachment No.2. fOP*,d}sposiUon. '/$. 6P.$efYs(J. ()iJ ,rh,e YACi2.:,SQD4.6)

. ,The.

Pl damp,f!tunlls,Io the f}iJrfa'C.9:Coftb.sio{(frol!J:sta,nctlng The.p.osltl6n ofthe existing. drain hdles .periJf/f:.8 .small amount of starldiilQ, wate,: AttaohrrteilfNQ .. 3. for,disp.tisilion,; . 00 'contJult to :th'e ndith offE1ri 2-S45, two consElcu'Uve clamps are loose. See Attachment No. 4 for . .. hp; dfjcl{ng, . . Se-eAUpchihenl No. 1 for .. dJsposiUqh. . Evaluated by: lDate: /l)'l1-+l lD {z4{ ZO It.. Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit....6 163 Room. Row/Col: 2-E-45 ------Attachment

i. Page 1 of 1 Various degrees (surface to Significant) coating and material degradation on 2-FCV-5046.

Material corrosion was noted on the following: -supporting steel -mechanical linkages -ducting -base plates -top cover of the damper housing Evaluation: The conditions as noted do not affect seismic qualification of the component to perform its functions based on the current inspection. Recommendation: Coating/corrosion needs to be cleaned, inspected, and repaired. Notification Required: Yes (50510119) Evaluated by: __ ctr------;"r--H 0 f--/_o ___ ______ _ Reviewed by: __ --=-ID.:.....r-JI..J.f-!-V'-=-z..,_------- Area Walk-By Checklist (AWe) Diablo Canyon Power Plant , Unit.1 Building: Au x iliary Floo r E I. 163 Room, Row/Col: ___ 2-_E_-4_5 __ A tta chm e n t 2., P a ge 1 of 1 Licensing Basis E valuation Issue: The nut for a u-bolt on a fire water pipe running across the roof, near Fan No. E-45 was severely corroded. Evaluation: The firewater pipe is the supply header to the Unit 2 Outage Access Control Facility (Line No. 5959), which is Design Class IIINon-Seismic per the FLOC data. The extent of the corrosion will not compromise the ability of the u-bolt to transmit loading from the pipe to the support steel, so the support remains functional. Recommendation: Corroded nut should be replaced and pipe support cleanedlrecoated. Notification Required: Yes (50510142) Evaluated by: ___ _ Reviewed by: __ ..... =_-------'o_+1-/1_+_11-2.,------------ Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit..2 Building: Auxilia r y Floo r EI. 163 Room, RowfCol: ___ 2-_E_-4_5 __ Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Significant corrosion was noted on' the top and sides of 480V Switchgear Room ventilation system damper no. VAC-2-BDD-46 (associated with Fan No. E-46). Evaluation

The corrosion is considered to be limited to surface-type corrosion, which will not impact the seismic qualification of the damper. Therefore, the damper is still capable of performing its intended functions. Recommendation:

-clean and recoat corroded areas -provide provisions for the draining. of rainwater from the top of the damper housing Notification Required: Yes (50510457) Evaluated by: Reviewed by: Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.l Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 163 Room. Row/Col: 2-E .. 45 ------ Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: The conduit clamps on two conduit supports for a conduit located on the Auxiliary Building roof, to the north of Fan No. S-45 were found to be 10Qse and disengaged from the supporting Unistrut channel. Evaluation: Th(3 conduit is still attached to additional supports on the roof, and due to the support configuration, it is unlikely that the would falloff of its supports sufficiently to cause damage to the electrical conductors inside. Recommendation: Reattach condLiit clamps to the supports. Notification Required: Yes (50509961) Evaluated by: I L....&....-- )1.,-__ _ Reviewed by: ____ Area Walk-By Ch e cklist (AWC) Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant. Unit.2 163 Room, Row/Col: ___ __ Attachment Q, Page 1 of 1 Corrosion was noted on various HVAC duct supports (e.g. structural steel, base plates/ anchor bofts) attached to the roof in the vicinity of the Fan No. E-45. Evaluation: The condition is limited to surface corrosion at this time, so there is no impact on the structural integrity of the HVAC duct supports. Therefore, the functionality of the HVAC system is not affected. Recommendation: Prepare and recoat HVAC duct supports. Notification Required: Yes (50515601) Evaluated by: -+------=-. II 1_' r -+-'l 1-'-----"'""' }2 Reviewed by: __ v ( Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Build i ng: Auxil i ary Floo r E I. Licens i ng Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.l 16 3 Room , Row/Col: _____ 2-...;;.;;E_-4 ___ 5 __ Attachment 2 , Page 1 of 1 Corrosion was noted on the conduit clamps for various conduit supports attached to the roof in the vicinity of the Fan No. S-45. Evaluation

The condition is limited to surface corrosion at this time, so there is no impact on the structural integrity of the conduit supports. Therefore, the functionality of the electrical circuits inside the conduits is not affected. Recommendation:

Replace conduit clamps Notification Required: Yes (50515600) Evaluated by: l-+--" h:-=L __ _ Reviewed by: -__ Area Walk-By Checklist (AV\fC) Status Y --.----------

location:

Buifding: Floor EI. ill Room, Are,a: 2 .. Eagle21 InstructIons for CompletIng Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walkwby near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

... -_.-. __ ._-1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) Nearby panels are welded to the steel beams that support the raised floor 2.00e$ anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y No degradation observed. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floOf. do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducling appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seIsmic conditions (e.g" condition of supports Is adequate and flll conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Conduit, cable trays, and duct are well supported.

4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment In the Y areaCe.g.)

ceiling tiles and lighting)? lighting Is hung with 3/8" threaded rods In spring nuts In un/strut members embedded in the concrete slab above and with chains with closed s-hooks. Some lights have safety chains. 5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray Y in the area? No likely flood or spray sources. Fire protection In this room Is provided by a Cardox system. 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismIc Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No significant fuel sources 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? Good housekeepIng practices. Items with casters are restrained. Fire extinguisher Is clamped. 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-36-I-PNL-RNP1A and DC-2-99-f-PNLwRN01 A. Raised floor steel beams are anchored with 618" expansion anchors spaced at 24" on center. Cardox pipe runs very close to a cable tray. However pipe and cable tray are braced so Impact ;s not expected. Evaluated by: ... --Date: ( QBQ 10 I 11!ZOfl-Page lof10 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Sheet 1 of7 Status: Location; Bldg. Auxiliary Floor EI. __ Room, A rea 13 =2--=E=J=2'-- ______________ _ Instructions for Completing Checldist . This checklist may be used to document the results of the Area near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of the checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if Y visible without necessarily opening cabinets)?

Note: see "Comments" section of AWC for definition of sides:

West Side: There is no equipment in this area, but the massive Fuel Transfer Tube radiation shield blocks, anchored to the concrete walls, do not exhibit any adverse conditions.
East Side: There is not equipment at the bottom of the fuel transfer canal that is in-scope of the seismic walkdowns.

2. Is anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions?

Y

West Side: . The anchorage for the Fuel Transfer Tube radiation shield blocks shows signs of minor surface corrosion, but is acceptable.
East Side: There is not equipment at the bottom of the fuel transfer canal that is in-scope of the seismic walkdowns.

3. Based on a visual inspection fi'om the floor, do the cab1e/conduit raceways and HV AC dueting appear Y to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of SUppOlt s is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)?

West Side: There are several conduits attached to the ceiling in this area which visually appear to be adequate.

There are no HV AC ducts in this area.

East Side; There are various HV AC ducts and electrical conduits located above the Fuel Transfer Canal that are attached to the underside of the roof of the Fuel Handling Building Steel Superstructure.

There items are free of adverse seismic conditions.

4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the area (e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

West Side: There is one light fixture in this area, but there are no targets located near the fixture that could be affected by spatial interactions.

There Fuel Transfer Tube radiation shielding is adequately anchored to the concrete to prevent spatial interaction.

East Side: There are no ceiling tiles in this area, but there various Jight fixtures, HV AC ducts, and electrical conduits located above the Fuel Transfer Canal that are attached to the underside of the . roof of the Fuel Handling Building Steel Superstructure.

In addition, the reach rod for the Fuel Transfer Tube 20" dia. gate va1ve (SFS-2-50), is attached to the west wall of the Fuel Transfer Canal. These items appear to be adequately supported to prevent spatial interaction. Y 5. Does it appear that the area is fi'ee of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding Y or spray in the area?

West Side: The Fuel Transfer Tube, which is filled with water during fuel handling operations, is the only fluid containing pipe in the area. This is a Design Class I, seismically qualified pipe, and is designed to not break and leak during a seismic event.
East Side: There are no fluid-containing piping systems in this area, other than the pipe used to ftll the Fuel Transfer Canal. Since the Fuel Transfer Canal is designed to be fined with water during fuel handling activities, flooding is not an issue. 13 If the room in which the SWEL item is located is very large (e.g., Turbine Hall), the area selected should be described.

This selected area should be based on judgment, e.g., on the order of35 feet from the SWEL item. Area Walk-By Checklist (AWe) Sheet 2 of7 Status: _Y_ Location: Bldg. Auxiliary Floor El. __ Room , A rea 13 ______________ _ 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause a fire in Y the area?

West Side: There are no systems containing flammable liquids or gases in this area.
East Side: There is hydrogen piping (yellow) running along the west wall of the fuel handling area. These pipes are well supported and should not be damaged during an earthquake.

7. Does it appeal' that the area is fi'ee of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of equipment, and temporary installations (e.g., scaffolding, lead shielding)?

West Side: No issues noted.
East Side: No issues noted. 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety function of the equipment in the area? Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary) y y This A WC applies to the area around the Fuel Transfer Tube (FTT) expansion joint, which is divided into two sub-areas (see figure on sheet 3):
West (Seismic Gap Side) -this is a small empty room in the Auxiliary Building, located between the west wall of the Fuel Handling Area of the Auxiliary Building and the exterior shell of the Containment Structure.

This is the location where the walkdown of the expansion joint was performed (SWC no. DC-2-42-M-EJ-FTC-2-EJ2).

East (Fuel Transfer Canal Side) -this is a 40 foot deep, narrow channel adjacent to the Spent Fuel Pool, with the expunsionjoint located at the bottom of the canal (eJev. 99'-6"). This area is currently flooded and is not readily accessible, so the inspection was pelformed fi*om the floor at elev. 140'. Evaluated by: wrh Date: 13 If the room in which the SWEL item is located is very large (e.g., Turbine Hall), the area selected should be described.

This selected area should be based on judgment, e.g., on the order of35 feet from the SWEL item. Area Walk-By Checklist (A\AIC) Status Y Location: Building: FloorEI. Room, Area: 2-FCV-365 --.. ----------------.----Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk..;by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. . 1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seIsmic conditions (If visible Y without opening cabinets) 2.D08s anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visual. inspection from the floor, cfO the' cable/conduit racewC!ys and HVAC ductingappear to be free of y potentially conditions (e.g., condition of supports is ane! fiU conditions qf trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? 4. Does It appear that the areS Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other Eiqulpment In the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does It appearthat the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y 7. Does It appear that the area Is free cjf potentially adverse seismic Interactions ass.oclated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, slileldlng)?

8. tiave you looked for and found no other seisml,c conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Commehts Includes DC-2-14-P-VOA-CCW-2-FCV-365 and DC-2-09-VOM-SI-2-8805A.

Emergency lighting has no cable but It has been analyzed as-is. Evaluated by: Date: 10 -(9' IZ-Page 1 of 8 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y Location: Building: Floor EI. ill Room, Area:, Instructions for Completing CheckUst This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk"by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

No Issues were Identified. 2.00es anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y See DC-2"04-P"VOM*MS-2-FCV-37 SWC for corrosion. All other eqUipment In the area appear to be free of corrosion. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueting appear tO,be free of N/A potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g .* condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other eqUipment In the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? No spatial interaction Issues were found. 5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? The area Is free of potential adverse seismIc Interactions that could cause nooding or spray. 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse selsmlc Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y No credible sources that could cause a fire In the area. 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? Nearby scaffolding Is In accordance with plant procedures and Is properly se.cured. Small section of removed handrail Is adequately tied off. y . 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safely functions of the Y equipment In the area? No Issues were Identified. Comments Includes DC-2-D4-P-VOM-MS-2-FCV-S7 Evaluated by: Date: Page 1 of 5 Area walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y ------Location: Building: Floor EI. ill Room, Area: 2-ECVA1 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below eaoh of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabInets)

PipIng and conduit are well supported. 2.00e5 anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of sIgnificant degraded conditions? Y Minor surface corrosion observed on structural steel, valves, and supports. No significant issues. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be InsIde acceptable limits)? Conduit Is well supported. No ducts or cable trays In the area. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatlallnteractlons with other equipment in the Y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? FCV-41Is relatively protected from falling Items by structural steel, walkway grating, and piping. 5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray Y in the area? 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No likely sources 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic InteracUons associated with housekeeping practices. storage of portable equipment. and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? Scaffolding Is braced and clamped with u-bolts to the steel structure and handrails Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? Loose shim plate on rupture restraint found in area. See Attachment 1 for resolution. Comments Includes DC*2-04-V-MS-2-FCV*41. Evaluated by: Page 10f7 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2. Building: Pipeway 115 Room, Row/Col: ------Attachment

1. Page 1 of 1 Floor EI. 2-FCV-41 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: A loose shim plate was found on a rupture restraint in the area of FCV-41. This plate could become an S/SI source during a seismic event. Evaluation:

This loose shim is a 3/4" thick plate on Rupture Restraint 2025-8RT. This rupture restraint is on Main Steam Lead 2-2, approximately 20' downstream of FCV-41, and is shown in drawings 460076 and 443376. Subsequent review of these drawings shows that this restraint is inactive and abandoned in place. An ATMM was issued"to remove the shim plates at this restraint location, per NR A0623615 and associated EDT 29539 (SAP DJR 4000000039). Since this restraint is inactive and abandoned in place, the main steam system will not be adversely affected by the loss of this plate. The shim plate was found on the bottom north corner, and slid down in a slanted orientation towards the bottom of the restraint. There is floor grating on both sides of the restraint approximately l' below thE? shim location. The shim was removed from the slanted location and set on this grating nearby. greater than 5' from any SISf targets. The shim plate itself is therefore not an SISI source, and the as-left condition is acceptable. Therefore, this condition does not impact the safe operatiot:l of DCPP , but the loose shim plate should be removed and coatings repaired on the abandoned rupture restraint. Notification Required: Yes (50511722) Evaluated by: ___ __ __________ _ Reviewed by: _____ .. _____ __________ _ Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y ----_ ... -_._---------.. --... --------Location: Building: Auxiliary Floor EI . .62 Room, Area: 2-FCV-641A Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other , 1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentlally adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) Piping and RHR pump 2-1 are well supported 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y No significant degradation observed. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductlng appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Duct and conduits are well supported. No cable trays. Steel wall ladders are anchored.

4. Does i1 appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other eqUipment In the y area(e.g., ceiling files and lighting)? . Lights are conduit hung with balls and. socket connections at the ceiling. No Issues. 5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No likely sources 7. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment.

and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shIelding)? Good housekeepIng practices were observed In the room. Crane hoist chains are Testrained Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? No other concerns Comments Includes Evaluated by: Page 1 of 10 Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y Location: Building: FloorEI. 100 Room, Area: 2-FCV700 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. 1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y Without necessarily opening cabinets) Reviewed piping, conduit, cable trays, junction boxes. HVAC dueling and equipment, backup air bottle , and area lighting. 2.00es anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y HVAC axial fan is adequately suppa/ted. Backup air bottle for AOV is properly restrained. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cabJe trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? Piping, conduit and cable trays are rigidly supported. Some piping in the area is rod-hung and flexible j but no safety related components are underneath. Wall mounted junction boxes are small and adequately supported. Room lighting fixtures are hung by chains. ' 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potenlially adverse seismic spatial interactions With other eqUipment in the Y area , (e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause 'fire in the area? Y 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismiC interactions associated With housekeeping Y practices,storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding.

lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? , All conduit runs connected to both the Reactor Building wall and the Auxiliary Building room ceiling have flexible connections. Comments Includes DC-2-23-P-VOS-VAC-2-FCV-700. Evaluated by: Dale: /0/1'1/2-01'1-

/0/ i9/Z0rL ----------,.----

'-------Page 1 o f 18 I '\ j Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) -----location:

Buirding: Auxiliary FloorEt 100 Room, Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the fol/owing questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in lhe area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

Reviewed room lighting, piping, conduit, junclionboxes. HVA C duoling, filters, and blowers. Three sides of the room and the ceiling are formed from sheet meta! Insulated panels that are connected at the seams. 2.00es anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor. do Ihe cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueling appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismio conditions (e.g .* condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? No cable trays in room and conduit is generally well supported.

4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the y area(e.g'l ceiling tiles and lighting}?

Lighting fixtures are supported from lighting conduit whloh is adequately anchored from the sheet metal panels thai form the ceiling of the room. 5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potBniiafly adverse seismic inte,racHons that could cause ffre)n the area? y 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices. storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the / ...., equipment in the area? C. In the norlheastcorner; tbe roof ofmatal room is severely corroded.

A North-South running roof seam is also ..:JIl./t. 1)t, t&(IL degraded but to a lesser extent. For disposition see Attachment

1. A nearby pipe support has minor corrosion at 11/10;'.,.'\

'I fhe welds which appear to have remained unpainled since the support was Installed (does not impact Integrity of the support). For disposition see Attachment

2. comments Includes Evaluated by: Page 1of15 Area Walk By Checklist (AWe) Building:

Auxiliary Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.£ 100 Room. Row/Col: 2"HT .. EH .. 29A Attachment

1. Page 1 of 1 U-2 Post Accident Sampling Room (Mechanical Room at Elev. 100' Aux. Bldg) It was noted that the sheet metal ceiling panel is severely corroded In the northeast corner of the room and one batten section is corroded and hanging down from the ceiling. Evaluation:

In the current condition. it's judged that the ceiling panel section wirl remain in place as the remaining (3) panel battens remain Intact and capable of performing their Intended design function. This condition needs to be corrected to eliminate a potential SISllssue and a potential personnel hazard. This issue is within the scope of the Maintenance Rule Program. The Post Accident Sampling Room and its associated Mechanical Room @ Elevation 100' are required as part of the EOP (Emergency Operating Procedures). The corrosion, as found, does not affect the roomts ability to perform its function as related to the EOP. The System E.nglneer Indicated that the above condition (s similar to the past condition found In the Unit 1 Post LOCA Sampling Mechanical Room. The Unit 1 solution was to replace the entire Post-. LOCA Sampling Mechanical Room steel enclosure. Recommendation: Replace the Unit 2 Post-LOCA Sampling Mechanical Room steel enclosure. Notification Required: Yes (50511306)

==

Area Walk By Checklist (AWe) Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant J Unit £ 100 "Room, Row/Col: 2 M HTMEH-29A Attachment

g. Page 1 of 1 A nearby pipe support has mInor corrosIon at the welds which appear to have remained unpainted since the support was installed (does not impact integrity of the suppoit).

The Pipe Support number is 2EE-641. It is Design Class /I and Is located on Line 2-H-3108-2" (Auxiliary Building Steam Heater Return Header). Evaluation: The corrosion seems do not affect the structural integrity of the pipe support. The pipe support remains capable of performing its intended design function. Recommendation: Clean, prepare and recoat this pipe support Notification Required: Yes (50519965) Evaluated by: __ .. Reviewed by: __ ___ Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y Location: Building: FloorEI. ill Room. Area: 2-LCY*11Q Instructions .for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provIded at the end of thIs checklist for documenting other comments. 1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) Concrete anchors holding fluorescent lamp ballast on the containment wall are corroded. Degradation Is Judged to not significantly impact the oapaclty of the expansIon ancllors at Ihls time. See Attachment 1 for dl:>pos/tlon. 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? See question 1 above. Attachment 1 addresses corrosion of the anchors. Y 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductlng appear to be free of Y potentiallY adverse s9.lsmla conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be InsIde acceptable limits)? 4. Does It appear that ttte area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the y area(e , g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? . 5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactlons that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismIc Interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adv.ersely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Valves FW-2-LCV-106

& 07, FW-2-142 have corrosIon at base of yokes that may be slgnlflcent. Attacilment 2 addresses the corrosion. Comments Includes DC-2*03-P-VOH-FW-2-LCV-110 and DC-2-03-P-VOM-FW-2-LCV-106. Evaluated by: Date: rL Page 1 of 14 Area Walk-B y Checklist (AWe) Building: Pipeway Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant , Unit 2.. 115 Room, Row/Col: 2-LCV-110

Attachment 1, Page 1 of 1 Concrete anchors holding a fluorescent lamp on the containment wall are corroded.

Evaluation: The level of degradation due to the corrosion is currently not sufficient to compromise the structural integrity of the expansion anchor. Therefore, the light fixture is adequately support and will not become a SISIP source during an earthquake. Therefore, this condition does not impact the safe operation of DCPP, but the expansion anchor should be cleaned and recoated. Notification Required: Yes (50509188) Evaluated by: __ .....: t;"_---==<a+I:-d--t...:... 1 =----___ _ Reviewed by: __ _____ __ ___ _ Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.1 Bu i ld i ng: Pipeway Floor EI. 115 Room, Row/Col: 2-LCV-110 Attachmen t g , Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Significant corrosion on yokes for valve nos. FW-2-LCV-106, FW-2-LCV-107, FW-1-142. Evaluation

SAP Notification search located the following notifications which previously identified this corrosion:

50033778 -FW-2-LCV-106 Bonnet Replacement Request
50033779 -FW-2-LCV-107 Bonnet Replacement Request
50289375 -Clean and Paint FW-2-137
50289376 ..; Clean and Paint FW-2-142 Notifications have been updated to indicate current findings. Notification Required: No (documented in existing Notifications)

":valuated by: Reviewed by: _____ ....... "'-___ _ Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Location: Buitding: Auxiliary FloorEI. 1QQ Room, Area: Status Y 2-lCV1128 Instructions for CompletIng Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. .. --...

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (ifv!slble Y wlthollt necessarily opening cabinets)

No adverse condWons observed. 2.009S anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on vislialinspection fram the floor, do' the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueling appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g'l oonditlon of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be InsIde acceptable limits)? No cable trays. Conduit and pipe are all well supporled. HVAC duct is braoed. 4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment in the Y ares(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? Overhead lighting has a safely chain restraint. S. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seIsmiC Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire'ln the area? y No Ii/rely sources, 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and. found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-08-P-VOM-CVCS-2-LCV-112, DC-2-08-P-VOM-CVCS-2-8104, and DC*2 M 08*P-VOA-CVCS-2*FCV-110A. Some loose pipe Insu/afJon was obseJved on a pJpe at the south wall of the room (Line 1451-2). Valve on fhelfne Is CVS-2-8471.

See Attachmont No.1 for disposition. The emergenoy lighting does not have cable restraint. See Aflachment No. 2 for disposition. Evaluated by: Date: 1'2+( Page lof6 Area Walk By Checklist (AWe) Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.£ 100 Room, Row/Col: 2-LCV112B

Attachment

1. Page 1 of 1 Loose insulation was noted on nearby pipe line no. 1451 (Boric Acid Bypass to Charging Pumps). Specifically, the insulation has become loose along the bottom of the pipe, and is simply sitting on top of the pipe. Evaluation:

The affected pipe line is safety-related/seismically qualified, but the loose insulation does not impact the qualification of the pipe. Due to the light weight and flexibility of the insulation, it is not considered to be a potential SISIP source that could fall during an earthquake and cause damage to SISIP targets in the area. Recommendation; Repair/replace insulation. Evaluated by: ___ Notification Required: yems . /D !/...., Reviewed by: =t=:= /olz1 l z" Area Walk By Checklist (AWe) Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.£ 100 Room, Row/Col: __ The emergency lighting does not have cable restraint. Evaluation: page 1 of 1 The emergency battery operated lights have been seismically tested and documented in Legacy Calculation No ES-098. Test results show that the BOLs are seismically qualified in the Auxiliary Building up to elevation 163', and Turbine Building elevation 94.5'. No modification Is required in these areas (see Sheet 21 of the calculation.) Therefore, the cable restraint Is not required for the subject BOL. Notification Required: No Evaluated by: Reviewed by: ____ G ____ '_o ...... _________ _ location: Building: Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) ------Status Y 2.lCV115 FloorEI. 115 Rooms Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questfons may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of eqUipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

All anchorage In the area appears to be In good condition. 2.0088 anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y No corrosion or other degradation was Identified in the area. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducUng appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? All cable/conduIt raceways are properly anchored. No trays appear overfilled. No HVAC dueling In area. 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g'l ceiling tiles and lighting)? No seismic Interaotion Issues were identified.

5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? . All fire wate.r piping appears to be adequately secured. 6. Does It appear that "the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y Two hydrogen lines In area appear to be adequately secured. 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

Mobile cart (rad monitor) has Its wheels locked In place. AIr monitor Is small and located >5 (t from any targets. Portable fan has been tied off to 8 steel support. (6) Ladders next to cabinet 2-PM-205 are chained In designated ladder storage area. PaneI2-PM-205 was determined to be non safety related. No issues to report. y B. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the . Y eqUipment In the area? No issues were identified. Comments Evaluated by: Date: \0/ IS/;}.eJ l}.. {o/tl/tp/2-Page 1 of 12 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y ------Location: Building: Floor EI. ill Room. Area: . _. __ .*. _._ ... -.. _--------_. __ ._ .... _-....... __ ._-Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the foHowlng questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seIsmic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

All anchorage appears to be in good conditIon. 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y No corrosion is present. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g .* condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays' appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? All cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducflng appear to be properly secured. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismIc spatial Interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? Lights are rod hung and could Impact conduit and cable trays. Judged to be Incapable of damaging either the conduit or the cable trays. Ball and socket type joints restrain lights from falling. S. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? No fire water piping in the area. 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire In the area? y No credible sources that could cause 8 fire were found. 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices. storage of portable eqUipment. and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No temporary equipment in the area. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? No Issues were Identified. Comments Includes Evaluated by: Date: Page 1 of 10

i Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y ------. Location:

Building: Floor EI. 1QQ Room. Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

All anchorage appears to be in good condition. 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y No corrosion was Identified In the area. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? All conduit and HVAC dueling appear to be properly secured. 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other eqUipment In the y area(e.g., celling tiles and lighting)? Lights are rod hung and are Incapable of damaging nearby eqUipment or conduit. No ceiling tiles In the area. 5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in thaarea? No fire water piping in the area. 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No credible sources that could CBuse a fire were found. 7. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismiC interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No adverse seismic interaction conditions were found related to temporary equipment. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? No issues were Identified. Comments Includes DC-2-13 w SFPPTS. Evaluated by: Date: 16/ IS / Page 1 of 11 Area Wa l k-By C h eckl i st (A\I\IC) Status Y ----------------------------------Location: Building: Auxiliary FloorEI. ill Room, Area: 2-LT-l02 ----... -----------------------------------------------------------------------------Ins1ructfon s for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of ludgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this . checklist for documenting other comments. 1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) . Reviewed room lighting, overhead piping, cable trays, conduit, HVAC dueling, threaded lire protection piping , and junction box. All appear to be adequately restrelned. 2.00es anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductlng appea r to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the y areaCe.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray Y In the area? 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interaotions that could cause fire In the area? 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

An unrestrained trash can Is located near safety related components. Trash can does not pose an Interact/on hazard for tile transmitter OC-2-08*/-T-L T-102. For disposiflpn see Attachment

1. y y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? . Comments Includes DC-2-08-/-T-L T-1 02. Evaluated by: Date:

Page lofl0 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWe) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2. Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. . 115 Room , Row/Col: 2-LT-102 ------Attachment 1, Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Large, llnr(;Jstrained trash can was found adjacent to unistrut-type frame for tubing assQciated with Level Transmitter DC-2-08 TooL T-1 02. Evaluation: The trash can was found @ elevation 115' in the Unit 2 Auxiliary Building, approximately 4 feet to the sQuthe , ast 'of the exterior of Boric Acid storage Tank No. 2-2 and approximately 3 feet to the southeast of the unistrut-type frame for the tubing. The actual tubing and Level Transm itter 2-L T -102 are located hi9h enough such that a direct interaction hazard does not exist between them and the trash can. The unistrut-lype tubing support is fairly robust. It has a primary member comprised cif back-to-back unistrut channels as well as knee braces comprised of single unistrut channels. All three members are anchored to the 115' elevation floor with concrete expansion anchors. Based on the proximity of the trash can to these members and the relatively small, distributed mass of the trash can, it is judged that the impact load from the trash can during a seismic event would not compromise the structural integrity , of the tubing su'pport. Therefore, this condition does not impact the safe operation of DCPP. Acceptable as-is. No action required Notification Required: , No Evaluated by: __ ________ '_OI_'81-.11l, ___ _ Reviewed by: __ *B ............ ___ \ __ Area Walk-By Checklist (AlIVe) Status Y ............. -...... -._---Location: Building: Floor EI. ill Room, Area: 2*PCY-20 ----------------------- InstructIons for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. 1 *. 00es the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seIsmic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) Lights and conduit are well supported. Structural steel framing Is braced and rugged. Floor grating has anchor cOps. . 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y Some surface corrosion observed on. components. No sign/flcant Issues. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays . appear to be inside acceptable limits)? Conduit Is well supported.

4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Jnteractions with other equipment In the y areaCe.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

Lighting Is well supported

5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No likely sources. 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment.

and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? Good housekeeping practices In the area. Ladder;s tied off. Jib crane above Is tied off. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-04-P-VR-MS*2-RV-3 and DC-2-04-P-VR-MS-2-RV-8 and DC-2-04-P-VOA-MS-2-PCV-20 Evaluated by: Date: Page lof7 Status Location: Building: Turbine FloorEl. 85 Room,Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checldlst may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEl items, The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the resurts of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments, 1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic condilions (if visible without necessarily opening cabinets) Reviewed adjacent panels, conduit large and small diameter piping, room lighting fixtures, and oable trays. There are a lot of olass 2 systems overheadA clevis for the rod hanger for 8 2" oopper air line located Northeast of panel PD25 and behind MCC-221 (column line is loose and Is not carrying the dead load as expected. For disposition see Attachment

1. 2.0065 anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions?

3.Based on visual inspeotion from the floor. do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueting appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? Cable trays are rigidly supported from the ceiling and piping is rod or spring Iwng. y 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatiallnteracfions with other eqUipment in the y area(9.9 .* ceiling tiles and lighting)? A Room lighting fixlure Is secured to a suspended Unistrut beam by ball and socket connections which constitutes a very flexible system. Lighftng will certainly impact adjacent piping and may impact MCC 221 should it fall. However, the likely faffure will be falling of the fluorescent bulbs which may be jarred loose. Such a failure will have no impact on the panels. 5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray In the area? 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire in tne area? 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable eqUipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shIelding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic condiUons that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area? The Service Air line In lile area Is very ffexlble.

The 3 1t piping is rod hung behind MeG 221 and then runs upward where It rests on plates at the next two supports. This seems to be marginal even for class 2 piping where class 'f components are located below. If the pipe slips off the plates there will be approximately 60' of unsupported piping. For disposilion see Attachment

2. Comments Includes DC-2-67-E-LGPD25.

Evaluated by; Date: '2-IO/B/IL-y y Page lof12 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWe) Building: Turbine F l oor E I. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant. Unit-.£ 85 Room. Row/Col: __ Attachmen t 1. Page 1 of 1 The clevis on a rod hanger for a copper airline in the overhead was noted as being loose. The Airline runs north-south, just to the west of column line G. The rod hanger is near column line 23. Evaluation

The copper airline is non-safety related. Per SISIP Manual Figure No; 14, there are no SISIP targets in this area, so seismic interrlction is not a concern. Therefore, the loose cleVIS has rio impact on safe operation of DCPP. Recommendation

Clevis be tightened.

Notification Required: Yes (50513642). ===" ====== Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Building: Turbine Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.£ 85 Room, Row/Col: 2-PD25 ---'-----Attachment,2 , Page 1 o f 1 The supports for selVice air line no. 2149-3" are potentially inadequate for any lateral seismic loading. This air line is located in the overhead J running north-south just to the west of column line G J between column lines 23 and 28. The supports in-question provide vertical support through the 3" diameterpipe resting on top of a tube steel stanchion, without any proliisions 10 prevent the pipe frof!1sliding off during an earthquake. Support nos. include 334-4132R J 334-4134R J and 334-4135R. Evaluation

The airline is non-safety related. Per SISIP Manual Figure No. 14, there are no SISIP targets in this area, so seismic interaction is not a concern. Therefore, the support configuration has no impact on safe operation of DCPP. Recommendation:

The supports be modified to provide lateral restraint for the airline. Notification Required: Yes (50513646). Evaluated by: b l.f-J ...l-l q!....J-J....:........:: 1 L=---___ _ Reviewed by: __ ____ .. _____ I--+°1_11+-,II,--Z- __

_______ _

Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y Location: Building: Floo r EI. 85 Room. Area: 2-PM-101 In str uctions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y Without necessarily opening cabinets)

Reviewed pIping including large diameter CCW piping, conduit, stainless steel tubing , and minor housekeeping items. 2.00es anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Piping , including large diameter COW piping is well supported. Conduit is rigidly supported. Small diameter piping near ceiling is rod supported. Horizontal load will concentrate at short rods. 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismiC spatial interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismiC interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

Old fans are stored unrestrained in the room. Temporary lighting ;s clamped to nearby supports. Neither of these are expected to affect the function of components in the room. 8. Have you looked fo r and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the y equipment in the area? Comments Includes DC-2-96-M-PNL-PM-101. Evaluated by: Date: Pag e l of 1 5 ! i .1 -I I ! I ; ( I I !

Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) -------------------------------------

Location: Building: FloorEI. !m RooM,Area: Status Y 2*PM-103 ---------------------- -, .. -------InstructlOn$ for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk*by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklfst for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be rree of potentfaUy adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) 2.008S anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of slgnlfioant degraded conditions?

Y Piping anohors siloVi signs of corrosion. No issues, except for mild oorrosion on tl18 plate attaclling the panel to the frame end tile panel roof Identified in the SWC 3.Basad on visual Inspeotion from the floor. do the cablefcondult raceways and HVAC dueling appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to b$lnslde acceptable limits)? 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spaUallnteraollons with other equipment in the areeCe.g., ceiling tites and lighting)? Some cQndult are closely-spaoed but Judged not to have 8 signifioant adverse selsmJa effect. 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Jnteractions that could cause flooding or spray in the area? . 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentlally adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire In the area? y y y y 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions assoolated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment. and temporary Installatlons (e.g. scaffolding. lead shIelding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no *other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Security gral/ng sllows oorrosion, see photos on pages 3 and 4. A temporOlY fix was tagged whloh used rope to secure the grating. See Attachment 1 for disposition.

Two conduit lines are closely spaced but Judged not to Ilave potentially adverse seismic interaction effects due to the closely spaaed 811(1)0(age points. Flaking paint and oxidation were noted on conduits In the vicInity, Including vital oonduit no. K5882 and junotion box BJF19, see photo on page 2. See AttaclJment 2 for dispOSition. Comments Includes DC-2-96-M-PNL-PM403 end suboomponent DC*2-Q4*/- Evaluated by: Date; Jb/ Page lof6 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWe) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.£ Building: Pipeway Floor EI. 85 Room, Row/Col: __ 2-_P_M_-1_0_3 __ Attachment

1. Page 1 of 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: General corrosion of the Architectural/Security grating was noted in the vicinity of Panel No. PM-103. Loose portion ;s secured with a rope. Evaluation:

This condition has already been identified in Notification No. 50462075 (02/28/2012), which indicates that the degraded condition will not result in a hazard to SISIP targets in the vicinity (see Task No.3) and that funding for" repairs has been requested through the PHIP processes (see Task No.7). Therefore, not further action is required. Notification Required: No Evaluated by: __ ____ __ -=<B-+-l =--z,'?.!......J)L...:-) __ Reviewed by: __ ( \ Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diabro Canyon Power Plant, Unit 2. Building: Pipeway 85 Room, Row/Col: 2-PM-103 ------Attachment g, Page 1 of 1 Floor EI. Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Flaking paint and oxidation were noted on conduits in the vicinity; including vital conduit no. K5882 -and junction box BJF19. Evaluation

The extent of corrosion is not sufficient to compromise the integrity of the conduit, but should be cleaned and recoated in order to prevent further degradation. Notification Required:

Yes (50509235) Evaluated by: ---t: dili:::!...l' __ __ I'-'Z,,=------Reviewed by: ____ __ ___ _ Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y -------Location: Building:* Floor EI. 100 Room, Area: 2-PM-185 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk*by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the foHowlng questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

No adverse conditions observed (or c'Bble tray and conduIt supports. 2.ooes anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y No significant degradation observed. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismIc conditions (e.g .* condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be, inside acoeptable limits)? Cable trays and conduits are welf supported. Cable trays are not overfilled.

4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment in the y areaCe.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

The panel Is protected from overhead lighting.

5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? . The overhead fire water piping Is braced. G. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire In the area? y No significant fuel sources. 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable eqUipment,*

and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No house keeping Issues. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions 1hat could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? Comments Includes DC-2-96-M*PNL .. PM-185. Evaluated by; .IlKM Date: / ___ J oi ( i>J .zAl'1.. illll:< ,0 /'fl l{) /'z. Page 1 of 7 AInea Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status location: Building: Auxiliary FfoorEL 85 Room/Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the fonowing questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checJdist for documenting other comments. t Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible without necessarily opening cabinets) Reviewed pipings conduit, junotion boxes. room lighling, wall pane/sf adjaoent panel I sample station, sink and work storage cabinet floormounfed panels. air diffuser panels, fire extinguisher, and gas bottle. 2.Doe5 anchorage of equipment in {he area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Clean environment. 3.8ased on vlsuallnspeclion from the floor; do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cabre trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? Piping, HVAC ducfing are all well supported. Room lighting is adequately hung. Fire extinguisher and gas bolf/e are properly restrained.

4. Does it appear that the area is free of adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the area(e.g.t ceiling tiles and Hghting)?

What appears to be air deflector panels that are hung by thin wire from conduit running along the ceiling are clearly not seismicalfy quaflfied and could impact nearby panels should ifley faTi. The air diffusers are light weight and willlike/y have nol Impact on the funotion of the panels. 5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray in the area? y y y y y ! i I I I I I I I I I I i ! ! 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire in the area? Y I There are a number of combustible items related to tfle housel<eeping items. The potential for fire will be essentially eliminated if the housekeepIng Issues are resolved. For disposll/on see Attachment

1. 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housel<eeping practices, storage of portable eqUipment.

and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shIelding)? 1t appears that many of the items in the room may not be safely related. However there are numerous 110usekeeping issues in the room, some in the vioinity of safety relaled Items. These include unrestrained garbage cans, unrestrained items on an unrestrained cabinet whIch has a broken door resting alongside the cabinet (required to be 1211 horizontally Bnd 3 11 vertioally from any oomponent), unrestrained equIpment 011 wheels, a broom and an unrestrained bench in front of panels. For disposllion see Attschment1.

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the eqUipment In the area? Comments Incfudes Evaluated by: Date: , ;;. ji)/z5jUJ/Z-ID[lJ!ru i yv..p I ptu I 11(91 1"'1 \1\l1 tt-l ! 1 ! y Page lof15 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit.l.. Building: Auxiliary Floo r EI. 85 Room, Row/Col: 2-PM-79 Attachment

i. Page 1 o f 1 Licensing Basis Evaluation Issue: Various loose/unrestrained items were found in the Post-LOGA Sampling Room, including garbage cans, cabinets, broken cabinet door, equipment on wheels, loose items on top of cabinet, etc. Evaluation:

SISIP Manual Figure 18 indicates that the Post-LOCA Sampling Room is Target Area No. 2GW-85-03. The corresponding targets are identified in the associated table. Based on the locations of the unrestrained items, and the vulnerability of the targets (PM-78, PM-79, tubing, conduits, etc.), the unrestrained items' doe not present a hazard to the targets. However, the condition is not in conformance with AD4.ID3 (SISIP Housekeeping and should be resolved by the Area Owner. Notification Required: Yes (50513515) Evaluated by: /1"2 __ _ Reviewed by: _____ , t Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y .... ---..... --_ .. --' .. _._-----.-.--.. . . ---.---...

Location:

Building: FloorEI. Room. Area:" 2-PNL-ARP Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does 1he anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

Afl visible anchorage to cabinets are In good condition. 2.ooes anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y No degradation noted on any anchorage In the area. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floOf, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Equipment In the area appear to be within acceptable limits. 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g., calling tiles and lighting)? No potential adverse seismic spatia/Interactions In the room. 5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismIc Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? . There Is no fire piping in the room. 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y No fire or explosion sources found in the room. 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? There were no housekeeping Items or temporary installations In the room. y 8. Have you looked for and found no o,ther seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Block walls have been retrofitted with steel members as restraints. Comments Includes & DC-2-23-E-PNL-PCCFC1 . . Evaluated by: KIM Date: Page 1 of 2 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status y ._ ... _--.--_.---------_.---_. __ ._----._. . ... _-_ .. -. --_. ------location: Building: FloorEI * .za Room, Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this -checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

No adverse seismIc conditions were Identified. 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of signIficant degraded conditions? Y No anchorage issues In the area. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/condult raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? There are no cable/conduit raceways or HVAC ducling In the room. 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the -y area(e.g" celling tiles and lighting)? No ceiling tiles and no seismic interaction effects related to lighting.

5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seIsmic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? No fire piping in the area. 6. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire in the area? Y No sources In the area that could cause a fire. 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices.

storage of portable eqUipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? Temporary lighting was securely fastened to the handrails. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismIc conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y eqUipment In the area? No adverse seismic conditions In the area. Comments Includes DC-2-10-M*HX-RHE1. Evaluated by: Date: Page 1 of 3 1\ I ! Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y Location: Building: Floor EI. 60 . Room; Area: 2-RHRP2 -----_ .. ---..... . Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Addltlonal is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. ------...... _ ... _-----_ .. *. ----. ------------ _ .. _---... _----1. Does the anchorage of In the area appear to be free *of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) 2.Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/cond!,ilt raceways and HVAC ducling appear to be free of Y potentially aqverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Jnslde acceptable limits)? Lights are from junction boxes to the celllng. Attachment of suspende(l condl.lit to box appears to allow hinge rotation (ball joint). The lights would be expected to swing In a seismic event, but they are judged unlikely to fall. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the Y area(e.g., ceiling tiles .and lighting)?

5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray Y In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse sels.mlc interaotlons that could cause fire In the area? 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equJpment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

Some temporary rad monitors appear to be adequately restra/iled and no targets that would be affected by It failing. Y Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affeot the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-10-M-PP-RHRP2 and DC-2-10-P-VOM-RHR-2-FCV-641B Evaluated by: Page 1 of 10 Area Walk-By Cheddist (AVVC) Status Y Location: Building: Auxiliary Floor EI. 128' Room, Area: 2-RNAR-A Inst r uctions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. 1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) Reviewed conduit, cable trays, halon line , room lighting, HVAC dueling, and junction boxes. 2.00es anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inSide acceptable limits)? Cable trays are rigidly supported and tl1e fill level ;s acceptable. The various layers of conduit are also rigidly supported (Class 1). . 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the y areaCe.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? Tile halon piping is quite rigid but contacts larger conduit nms at several places. These impacts will not affect the function of the /la/on system. 5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire in the area? Y 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No significant housekeeping issues were noted. 8. Have you looked for and fbund no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? . Comments Evaluated by: Date: P-a g e 1 of 1 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y _ .... _--_.-. -------Location: Building: Floor EI. 1M! Room, Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) . , All the anchorage Is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

2.Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y Surface corrosion Is present on some valves and panels. Judged to be ok. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Conduit lines appear to be properly anchored. No HVAC dueling in the area. 4. Does It appear that the area is (ree of potentially adverse seismIc spatial interactions with other equipment in the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? No spatial InteractIon Issues were Identified.

5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray Y in the area? No sources for flooding or sprayIng In the area. 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire in the area? y No credible sources that could cause a fire were found. 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices.

storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? A box containIng I'MSSV gags* are properly tIed off to a handrail. Wrench near box Is laying on the grating. Judged to be ok. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? No Issues were Identified. Comments Includes and DC-2-04-P-VR-MS-2-RV-61. Evaluated by: Date: Page 1 of9 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y Location: Building: Floor EI. .1.00 Room, Area: 2-SEPHE1 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. . 1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentIally adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) No other adjacent equipment. 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be (ree of significant degraded conditions? Y No observed degradation. 3.Based on visuallnspectlon from the floor. do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? HVAC duct Is braced. Pipe and conduit are well supported. No cable trays. 4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the areaCe.g.t ceiling tiles and lighting)? Lighting Is conduit hung pendant lights, WarnIng light and PA speaker are supported.

5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray In the area? 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire In the area? No significant fuel sources 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding.

lead shielding)? Nearby cart Is tied off. The adjacent shielding door Is top restrained. y Y Y Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the sarety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-13-M-HX-SFPHE1 and DC-2-13-J-/-TI-653 Evaluated by: Date: ( 11-1(1/ I rum J -0. Wll?1 'to fL ....... ..........

.-.-

............. .............. __ ._-.. -Page lof7 j ! I i I t( f Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y ----_ ....... _._--------

Location:

Building: &OOli.m! Floor EI. .100 Room. Area: 2.SEPp1 Instructions for CompleUng Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each ofthe following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space [s provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

Anchorage of other pumps In the area hav6 no adverse conditions. 2.Doe5 anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y No significant degradation observed. 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductlng appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? HVAC duct Is braced. Pipe is well supported. ConduIt Is well supported. No cable trays. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the Y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? Lights are conduit hung pendant lights. No issues. Warning light and PA speaker are adequately supported. Overhead crane rail Is braced. 5. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? No likely sources. 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices. storage of portable equipment. and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. tead shIelding)? Wall mounted fire extinguisher is strapped. Y y Y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic condItions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y eqUipment In the area? Comments Includes DC.2-13-M-PP-SFPP1. Demln pipe behInd the pump almost touches (approx 3/16 in gap) the steel of pipe support 42-50R. Restraint of 3 Inch demln pipe will prevent Interaction. No Issue. Evaluated by: Page 10f8 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y ----------------------------- Location: Bullding: FroorEf. M Room. Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk .. by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchora"ge of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

All anchorage appears to be In good condition. 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y No corrosion is present. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the troor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueling appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to b,e inside acceptable limits)? All overhead distribution systems appear to be adequately secured. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the Y areaCe.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? No Interaction issues to note. 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? No fire water piping In the room. 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In the area? y No flammable sources In the area. 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of PQtentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices. storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shIelding)? Chain from monorail crane's properly stowed In wall mounted box to prevent swinging during 8 seismic event, 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functtons of "the Y equipment In the area? No Issues were Identified. Comments Includes DC w 2-09*M*Pp*SIP1 and Evaluated by: Date: Page 1 of 10 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y _._---------_ ..* _-----....*. -.-----.-.-. .---.-_ .. _-------,--------Location: Building: FloorEr. HQ Room. Area: 2-SSPS Instructions for Completing Checklist ThIs checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other commenfs.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

All visible anchorage In the room appears to be free of adverse ,seismic conditions. 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of Significant degraded conditions? y No corrosion or degraded conditions were found. a.Based on visual inspection from the floor. do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductlng appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptabte limits)? No HVAC dueling In the room. Conduit entered from ceiling, passed through a metal tray, and ran Into cabinets. No issues were identified.

4. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g .* ceiling tiles and lighting)?

Ceiling tiles have. been reViewed in 2-VB1 AWC. 5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? No fire piping In the room. 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No adverse seismic interactions that could cause a fire in the area were Identified.

7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable eqUipment.

and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No temporary equipment In the area. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? No Issues were identified. Comments Includes DC-2-38-/-PNL-RNSLA, DC-2-38-J-PNL-RNSOA, and DC-2-38+PNL-RNSTA. Evaluated by: Date: 16115/ Page 1 of 20 '{ Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y ----Location: Building: Floor EI. .eli Room, Area: 2-SWHEl ------_._---_ .... _---Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL Items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments:

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentiallY adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

All anchorage appears to be in good condition. 2.ooes anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? y No cOffos/on is present. 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor. do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? Conduit and HVAC appeared to be properly secured. 4. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the y area(e.g., celling tiles and lighting)? No seismic interaction Issues were Identified.

5. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactfons that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? No fire water piping In the room. 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause fire In the area? Y No credible sources could cause 8 Ore. 7. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping practices.

storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding. lead shielding)? No temporary equipment In the area. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismIc conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? No Issues were Identified. Comments Includes DC-2-08-M-HX-SWHE1. Evaluated by: Date: Page 10f6

Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) Status Y ------------

Location; Building: Floor EI. 115 Room,Area:

Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets) 2.00es anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of signifICant degraded conditions?

Y Only minor surface corrosion observed on structural members and connections In the area 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor. do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC dueting appear to be free of Y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g .* condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be InsIde acceptable tlmits)? Conduit and piping are well supported In the area. 4. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment In the Y area(e.g .* ceiling tiles and lighting)? 2-TE-117Is re/aUvely sheltered by It's location and the structural steel above. 5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire In area? Y No likely sources 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions associated with housekeeping practices. storage of portable equipment, and temporary Installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)? No housekeeping Issues observed. Scaffolding In the area Is braced and clamped to the structural steel and platform handrails. y 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismIc conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-03-/-E-TE-117. Evaluated by: Page lof8 Area Walk-By Checklist (A\IVC) Status Y location: Building: Floor EI. .1QQ Room, Area: 2-TRY21 Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEl items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments. -------_.----. ---._---------1. Does the anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (If visible V Without necessarily opening cabinets) Reviewed adjacent panels, room lighting fixtures, emergency fighting, fire extinguishers, HVAC Ducling, and speal<ers. 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? Y 3.Based on visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductlng appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g .* condition of supports Is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)? HVAC ducting Is rigidly supported.

4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the y area(e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? . All items attached to the masonry wall are anchored by Room lighting is supported by a pipe section with 8 ball and socket connection.

5. Does it that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y in the area? 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that. could cause fire in the area? y 7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices.

storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shielding)?

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment in the area? . Comments Includes TRY21 and DC-2-96-E-PNL-HSP.

Evaluated by: Page 1 of 10 Area Walk-By Checklist (AVVC) Status Y Location: Building: Floor EI. .14Q Room, Area: Instructions for Completing Checklist This checklist may be used to document the results of the area walk-by near one or more SWEL items. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results of Judgements and findings. Additional space Is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

1. Does the anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (if visible Y without necessarily opening cabinets)

Panels behind 2-V8-1 are anchored 2.Does anchorage of equipment In the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions? No degradation obseNed In the visible areas, nor were any signs of corrosion noted. The control room carpet was not puffed up. This Is a vety controlled environment so corrosion Is not expected. y 3.Based on visual Inspection from the floor, the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appear to be free of y potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g., condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appear to be Inside acceptable limits)? The suspended ceiling Is hung with a braced un/strut system. The HVAC duct Is braced and the registers are independently rod hung. 4. Does ft appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial Interactions with other equipment In the y area{e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)? The lighting over the control consoles and vertical boards Is Independently hung from the suspended ceiling. No Issues. 5. Does it appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray y In the area? 6. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismic Interactions that could cause fire in the area? Y No likely sources 7. Does It appear that the area Is free of potentially adverse seismIc Interactions associated with housekeeping Y practices, storage of portable eqUipment, and temporary installations (e.g. scaffolding, lead shIelding)? Good housekeeping practices In the area. No portable or temporary components nearby. 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the Y equipment In the area? Comments Includes DC-2-43-I-PNL-RNCI1 and DC-2-96-E-PNL-2VB1 and DC-2-96-E-PNL-2CC1 Evaluated by: Page 1 of 13 Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 1 of 12 Attachment K Summary Findings of the Peer Reviews Peer Review: SWEL-1 and SWEL-2 The peer review of the SWEL-1 and SWEL-2 was performed during several meetings held while these lists were being developed and during the performance of the inspections. A summary of the issues identified during the peer review, and their resolution, is provided in Table 1. Table 1: Peer Review Issues and Resolutions for SWEL-1 and SWEL-2 Issue Resolution SWEL development does not consistently Updated to include reference to the Q-List identify SSCs by their Q-List Item No. Item No. where applicable. SWEL-1, Screen No.2 allows exclusion of These valves were included to meet other valves associated with containment criteria. Discussion of Screen No. 2 penetrations, but the final SWEL-1 included exclusions updated to indicate that this certain CIVs. exclusion was not used in its entirety. SWEL-1 should consider safe shutdown The safe shutdown equipment identified in equipment identified in UFSAR Appendix UFSAR Appendix 9.5G was added to SWEL 9.5G "Equipment Required for Safe development documentation to address these components and their inclusion as candidates Shutdown." for the selection of SWEL-1. SWEL-1 should include AFW pump Valves LCV-111 through LCV-115 added to discharge to SG LCVs, since these are important to the AFW system operation. list of candidates for the SWEL-1. SWEL-1 should include RHR pump Valves FCV-641A and FCV-6418 added to list recirculation valve since these are important of candidates for the SWEL-1. to the RHR operation. SWEL-1 should include FCVs for the motor-Valves FCV-106, FCV-107, FCV-108, and driven AFW pumps since these are FCV-109 added to list of candidate for the important to the operation of the pumps. SWEL-1. SWEL-1 should include auxiliary building ventilation system supply and exhaust fans Fans E-1, E-2, S-31, S-32, S-33, and S-34 since these are important to the cooling of added to list of candidates for the SWEL-1. the auxiliary building and are subjected to a corrosive environment. SWEL-1 should include chemical and Valves 8145 and 8148 added to list of volume control system spray valves, since candidates for the SWEL-1. these are important to system operation. SWEL-1 should include valves in the RHR . Valves 8701, 8702, 8809A, 88098, 8700A, system normal shutdown cooling flowpath. 87008, HCV-637, and HCV 638 added to list of candidates for the SWEL-1. SWEL-1 should include valves in charging Valves 8107,8108, and HCV-142 added to list system flowpath to reactor. of candidates for the SWEL-1. Issue SWEL-1 should include valves associated with boric acid storage tank and transfer pumps. SWEL-1 should include the main annunciator. SWEL-1 should include SG level and pressure instrumentation. SWEL-1 should include wide range and source range neutron detectors. SWEL-1 assignment of five safety functions (Screen No.3) -certain seismically qualified SSCs do not perform any of these functions, so they will screen-out, but still may be added back-in under Screen No.4 (diversity) or under SWEL-2 (SFP-related SSCs). Risk significance is not well defined and must be addressed more clearly. SWEL-2 development uses 10 feet above top of fuel assemblies as an absolute number, but EPRI 1025286 states "for SFP penetrations below about 10 feet above the top of the fuel assemblies ... " This gives some latitude as to the exact elevation for drain-down. Operating experience report I ER L3-12-63, "Anti;.Siphon Devices in Spent Fuel Pool Missing" was recently received and should be addressed in the development of the SWEL-2. Question was asked if EPRI guideline requires consideration of SFP during various operating modes, specifically during refueling operations, when the SFP gate is open, transfer canal is flooded, etc. Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 2 of 12 Resolution Valves 8104, FCV-110A, and FCV-111A added to list of candidates for the SWEL-1. This is not seismically qualified, so it is excluded at Screen No.1. SG level transmitters (LT-516, LT-517, etc.) and pressure transmitters (PT-538, etc.) added to list of candidates for the SWEL-1. These detectors are included in the list of candidates for the SWEL-1, but were not selected in the finalization of the SWEL-1. This is addressed in SWEL development documentation. Risk significance data was received from the PRA group and incorporated into SWEL-1 SWEL-2 development documentation revised to be consistent with EPRI 1025286. I ER L3-12-63 added as an input reference for the SWEL-2 and verification of the presence of anti-siphon holes added as an inspection attribute for piping entering the SFP. The NEI frequently asked questions clarified this issue and it is addressed in SWEL-1. Issue During the 1980s, the blind flange on the Containment end of the fuel transfer tube was replaced with a QOTTC device. If the SFP gate (not seismically qualified) and the fuel transfer tube manual gate valve (not seismically qualified per the component data) were to fail during an earthquake, the QOTTC would act as a part of the SFP pressure boundary. The concern is whether the QOTTC has been designed to resist the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads associated with this scenario. The FLOC data for the SFP gate indicates that this SSC is not seismically qualified, and that the air supply and back-up nitrogen supply for the inflatable gate seals is not seismically qualified. However, it appears that the gate is very robust and even with deflation of the seals, the rate of leakage through the SFP gate into the fuel transfer canal will not allow the SFP to drain-down within 72 hours. Even though the SFP skimmers are anchored to the wall at the SFP water surface, we need to investigate possibility that they break loose (non-seismic support) and sink into the pool, allowing siphoning of the pool inventory. Monitoring of the SFP level is a key issue, so the SFP level monitoring instrumentation should be added to the SWEL-2. The SFP cooling water pump transfer switch (a local contactor) is key to the cooling of the SFP and should be added to the SWEL-2. Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 3 of 12 Resolution This concern was entered into the CAP. Development documentation for SWEL-2 updated to show gate as being seismically qualified. Review of the civil engineering calculation files located a seismic qualification calculation for the SFP gate. Therefore, gate can be credited to survive an earthquake. Request to update the FLOC data was entered into CAP. SWEL-2 updated to include check of the maximum depth based on hose/tubing length between wall penetration and skimmer to inspection attributes. This will address the maximum depth to which skimmers could sink. The SFP level instrumentation was considered for inclusion in the SWEL-2, but it was determined that this instrumentation is not seismically qualified, so it initially screened-out at Screen NO.1. SWEL-2 updated to include switch. Issue The various ways to provide pure water (to replace evaporation/boiling) or borated water (to replace leakage) to the SFP were discussed. OP AP-22 (Spent Fuel Pool Abnormalities), Appendix A (Addition of Water to the SFP) indicates that the condensate storage tank is the "only source of makeup water to the SFP with a flow path that is completely Design Class I." This flow path should be included in the SWEL-2. See OP B-7:11 for details of flow path The FHBVS is required to cool various SFP-related equipment. Portions associated with the mitigation of a fuel handling accident do not need to be included (e.g., filters), but other equipment should be considered for inclusion. SFP cooling system pressure instrumentation does not serve any earthquake function and can be exclude from the SWEL-2. Screen NO.3 of the EPRI guidelines for the development of the SWEL-2 require the inclusion of a diversity of equipment classes (similar to Screen NO.4 for the SWEL-1), but due to the limited scope of equipment associated with the SFP, it is not possible to include representatives of all 21 classes. Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 4 of 12 Resolution SWEL-2 development basis document enhanced to discuss this flow path. The SWEL-1 already includes the auxiliary building ventilation system, which has components that are similar to the FHB ventilation system. However, an FHB exhaust fan was added to the SWEL-2. Pressure instrumentation deleted from the SWEL-2. This is acceptable, since the SWEL-1 already includes a diverse selection of equipment classes. A discussion of this was added to the SWEL-2 development documentation. The following methods were selected for the verification of elevations: Difficulties associated with the verification of

the elevation of the various underwater pipe
penetrations through the walls of the SFP Underwater cameras Verification of the elevation of the pipe where it exits the concrete on the outside of the SFP were discussed.
Approximate visual verification from the water surface Issue Fuel transfer tube expansion joint has been included in SWEL-2 (failure could drain SFP, if SFP gate is open during a refueling outage). Suggest reviewing DCM C-28 (Seismic and LOCA displacements) to determine differential displacements.

SWEL-2 includes various pipes which penetrate the SFP wall that are potential rapid drain-down paths. How do we document the walkdowns of these pipes? Operating procedure AP-22 includes the use of a fire hose for emergency refilling of the SFP. The associated hose reel stations should be included in the SWEL-2. Document "Frequently Asked Questions on Seismic Walkdown Guidance" (August 10, 2012) was provided by the NEI, not the EPRI. Discussion of seismic classification system relative to Regulatory Guide 1.29 is not clear. EPRI definition of SFP rapid drain-down applies to the "top of fuel assemblies", and could result in exclusion of SFP gate from SWEL-2, while the "about 10ft above fuel assemblies" applies to penetrations through walls of SFP. Rationale for the exclusion of the fuel storage racks from the SWEL-2 is not adequate. SWEL-1 did not adequately address risk significance. Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 5 of 12 Resolution Review of DCM C-28 indicates that the seismic differential displacements (containment structure vs. auxiliary building) are small at this location (less than 0.2 inches), but the LOCA differential displacement is large (approximately 1 inch). The combination of seismic and LOCA displacements is enveloped by the vendor-allowed differential displacements for the expansion joint. The EPRI guidelines do not address this. Since these guidelines require the use of the SWC form, the walkdown will be documented on an SWC, with most of the inspection attributes marked as "N/A". The "comments" section will be used to describe any observations. Hose reel station FW-120-A38-1 added to the SWEL-2. The SWEL development documentation was revised. Clarified discussion in the SWEL development documentation. Clarified discussion to distinguish between two applications in SWEL development documentation. Expanded discussion to address criticality/spacing criteria, lack of anchorage, submersion in borated water, etc., in the SWEL development documentation. Risk significance data was received from the PRA group and incorporated into SWEL-1 Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 6 of 12 Peer Review: Seismic Walkdown Checklists and Area Walk-by Checklists Introduction In accordance with the guidance provided in EPRI 1025286, the results of the seismic walkdowns and area walk-bys were peer reviewed. Daily debrief of the walkdown team and peer review of a sample of SWCs and AWCs were performed early in the process to check the initial quality of the checklists and to ensure that any the general comments are incorporated in the remaining checklists prepared at later stages. In addition to the early peer reviews, all the SWCs and AWCs were reviewed to verify that the SWEs followed the guidance provided in EPRI 1025286 for performing the walkdowns. Peer Review Team The seismic walkdown and area walk-by results peer review team was led by the project team leader, with various individuals acting as team members. Peer Review Process The results of the seismic walkdowns and area walk-bys were peer reviewed in two steps: (1) Each completed SWC or AWC was reviewed by a peer review team member. This step included a review of the completed checklist and any attached photographs and in some cases discussion with walkdown team members. Depending on the complexity of the issue, this step included visiting the plant and visually inspecting the subject equipment or area. Any peer review questions or comments were discussed with the SWEs and after all the questions and comments had been resolved, the completed checklist was signed by both the SWEs. (2) All completed SWCs/AWCs were reviewed by peer review team leader for overall accuracy and consistency. Comments or questions from the team leader were discussed with the SWEs and resolved. Summary of Peer Review Findings and Resolutions The peer review findings are divided into two categories: generic findings and specific findings. The following are the general comments: (1) Problem Identification: Provide a clear and concise description of the problem/issue. Do not provide extraneous details or opinions. Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 7 of 12 (2) 'Redundant Problems: A specific problem should only be identified on one check list. If the problem is identified on the SWC for the specific SSC, do not describe the same problem on the AWC or assign a status of N or U on the AWC. It is okay to cross reference between the AWC and SWC for a problem. (3) Recommendations: The AWC/SWC should identify and characterize the potential issue. Do not include statements such as, "valve should be cleaned and painted", "means of anchoring should be improved," or "further evaluation is recommended." (4) Disposition of Problems: The goal is to not have any remaining open problems on the checklists. Therefore, as part of the checklist finalization, each problem should be linked to its disposition. Create supplemental sheets to be added to the checklists as attachments for this purpose. The AWC/SWC should reference these attachments (e.g., "See Attachment No. xx for disposition."). The SAP notification number is to be referenced on the attachment, not the checklist. (5) Final Checklist Status: Once all of the issues and comments on a checklist have been dispositioned, the "U" statuses in the checklist should be changed to either "Y" (the condition is acceptable) or "N" (the condition is not acceptable, but will be addressed in the CAP). It is not necessary for the checklist to address any follow-up on CAP actions. (6) Electronic AWC and SWC Templates: Some aspects of the electronic templates used to generate the hardcopies of the completed checklists from the Access database do not match the format of the checklist forms included in EPRI 1025286, Appendix C. The templates should be reviewed against Appendix C and corrected as necessary. (7) Description of Room, Area for AWCs: The AWC form (EPRI 1025286, Appendix C), includes a field for "Room, Area." DCPP has used this field for the AWC number (typically the unit number, followed by an acronym for the piece of equipment in the room -e.g., "1-ASP1"). Since this entry does not actually define the room/area covered by the AWC (as required by Footnote 13 in EPRI 1025286), it is recommended that a set of maps be developed to define the areas. Table 2: Specific Findings for Unit 2 -AWCs No. AWC/SWC Title Issue Resolution The AWC documents degradation Reference to the of the fan skid and corrosion of degradation of fan skid and 1 2-BFS-33 anchor bolts of the fan belt shroud corrosion of anchor bolts support. These were already deleted from the AWC. identified in the component SWC. No. AWC/SWC Title Issue Identify the specific conduit and junction box which are corroded. 2 2-PM-103 In the comments section include "corrosion was noted on damper 3 2-E-45 No. FCV-5046, including valve actuator, damper, ducting and miscellaneous steel. See Attachment 1 for disposition. Delete the AWC and incorporate 4 2-FCV-641 B the information in AWC 2-RHRP2, as this area is a subset of the area covered by 2-RHRP2. In response to Question 1, the SWE suggests "Further evaluation is needed to justify the structural 5 2-CP-37 integrity" of the identified issue. Delete the above mentioned statement, prepare a LBE to address the issue and refer to the LBE in the AWC. Loose shim plates on rupture restraints found in the area were not mentioned in the AWC. 6 2-FCV-41 Table 3: Specific Findings for Unit 2 -SWCs No. AWC/SWC Title Issue Response to question 2 1 DC-2-13-M-HX-SFPHE1 refers to Unit 1 anchorage "Same anchorage as DC-1-13-M-HX-SFPHX1". Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 8 of 12 Resolution Included the following in response to Question 8 "Flaking paint and oxidation were noted on conduits in the vicinity, including vital conduit no. K5882 and junction box BJF19. See Attachment 2 for disposition. " Comment incorporated as requested. AWC 2-FCV-641B is deleted and SWC for the component now refers to the Area 2-RHRP2. The suggestion for further evaluation is deleted, a LBE was performed, and Attachment 1 is referenced for disposition. Included the following observation in response to Question 8: "Loose Shim plate on rupture restraint found in area. See Attachment 1 for disposition. " Resolution Reference to Unit 1 component anchorage is deleted. No. AWC/SWC Title Issue The SWC does not identify the transformer anchorage non-conformance issue. 2 DC-2-65-E-UPS-IY21 Response to question 7 suggests that contact is possible between the air operator valve MS-2-FCV -DC-2-04-P-VOA-MS-2-25 and the support for the 3 FCV-41 limit switch MS-2-FCV-41. The Status of question 7 and the checklist is still shown as "Y" in spite of a possible impact on soft target. Include the observations on the ceiling tiles and space above false ceiling from 4 DC-2-38-I-PNL-RNSLA AWC 2-VB1 and delete "Further evaluation is needed to verify that the ceiling tiles are seismically restrained. " The inconsistency of the shim on the bumpers with the design drawings is not 5 DC-2-17 -M-PP-ASP1 identified on the SWC. In response to question 5, the anchorage details are 6 DC-2-10-M-HX-RHE1 explained in great detail. A reference to the original design drawing could be provided instead. Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 9 of 12 Resolution Included in response to question 11, "The mounting brackets for the transformers at the bottom left side of the panel have (8) locations for securing the transformers to the grating on the panel bottom. Only (6) of the holes have bolts. Similarly, only (5) of the (8) holes are utilized (have bolts) for securing the transformers on the bottom right side of the panel. See Attachment 1 for disposition. " The status of the checklist and question 7 changed to "N." Deleted the statement and included the following information from AWC 2-VB1 "The suspended ceiling is hung with a braced unistrut system. The HVAC is braced and the registers are independently rod hung." Included the following statement in response to question 5 "The shims on these bumpers are not consistent with the drawings. See Attachment 2 for disposition. " Reference provided to the design drawings. No. AWC/SWC Title Issue The SWC currently does not identify the corrosion on base plates associated with the lateral braces on the 7 DC-2-14-M-TK-CCWST1 east and west side of the CCW surge tank. This should be identified in response to question 3 of the checklist. In response to question 3, heavy corrosion is identified on the unit skid and it is 8 DC-2-23-M-HX-CR37 identified that a design change is in process for replacing the skid and no evaluation is performed of the existing condition. The status of question 5 is currently shown as "N" 9 DC-2-36-E-PNAL-RNARA although the component is not part of the 50% anchorage check. The room, row/column information on the SWC is 10 DC-2-23-E-PNL-PCCFC1 currently identified as "2-PCCFC1" although the area is now replaced with 2-PNL-ARP. Peer Review: Licensing Basis Evaluations I ntrod uction Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 10 of 12 Resolution Included the following in response to question 3: "Surface corrosion on base plates associated with lateral braces on the east and west sides of the CCW surge tank. See Attachment 1 for disposition. " Prepared a LBE for the existing condition. The status of question 5 changed to "N." Room, row/column information changed from "2-PCCFC 1 " to "2-PNL-ARP." A LBE was performed for each potentially adverse seismic issue identified on the SWC and AWC. The LBEs, which are documented in attachments to the individual checklists, include a determination of the need for entry of the issue into the CAP. Peer Review Team The LBE peer review team was led by the project team leader, with various individuals acting as team members. Peer Review Process Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 11 of 12 The LBE peer review was performed in two steps: (1) Each potentially adverse seismic condition was evaluated by a cognizant engineer and peer reviewed by a designated review team member. This step included a review of the completed checklist, review of the photograph (if applicable), discussions with the preparer of the LBE, review of the supporting documentation (e.g., drawings, design criteria memoranda, calculations) and, in some cases, discussions with the walkdown team members who performed the field inspections. The completed LBE was signed by the preparer and the peer reviewer. (2) All completed LBEs were reviewed by the peer review team leader for overall accuracy and consistency. Comments or questions from the team leader were discussed with the preparer and reviewer, and resolved as necessary. Summary of Peer Review Findings and Resolutions The peer review findings are divided into two categories: (a) generic findings; and (b) specific findings. The following provides an overall summary of the two categories of findings, and their resolution. Table 4: General Findings from the Licensing Basis Evaluation Peer Review Finding Resolution Each LBE should be self-contained within LBEs that were split between multiple the attachment and not reference other attachments were restructured to be self-attachments to the same checklist for contained. input. The seismic requirements for the SSC LBEs were updated, as appropriate. being addressed should be clearly stated, using DCPP's classification as defined in the FLOC data (i.e., design classification and seismic qualification requirement). A LBE for one unit should not reference Cross references between units the LBE for a similar issue in the other eliminated. unit. A LBE should provide specific reference References added to LBE, as to the source of information (e.g., appropriate. calculation number, drawing number, etc.) Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment K Page 12 of 12 Table 5: Specific Findings from the Licensing Basis Evaluation Peer Review LBE No. Finding Resolution 2-CP-37, The LBE recommendations did not Recommendation to update Attach. 1 address the need to revise the design the drawings added to the drawing to reflect the as-built LBE. configuration of the dampers. 2-CP-37, The LBE recommendations did not Recommendation to update Attach. 2 address the need to revise the design the drawings added to the drawing to reflect the as-built LBE. configuration of the dampers. 2-CR-37, The LBE did not clearly indicate the LBE updated to clarify Attach. 1 function of the vertical legs and the functions of these support triangular frames. components. 2-DEG-23, LBE used incorrect values for the LBE updated to reference Attach. 1 vertical and horizontal Hosgri DCM C-17 as source of earthquake accelerations for the accelerations and use the location of the fire extinguisher, and correct values. did not provide a source reference. 2-DEG-ES-LBE addressed the impact of the LBE updated to discuss 23, Attach. 1 corrosion on the functionality of the impact on building column pipe support, but did not address the function. impact on the building column. 2-E-45, LBE recommendation indicated that LBE recommendation Attach. 2 the corroded nut should be cleaned changed to request that the and replaced, but this is not practical, corroded nut be replaced. based on the extent of the corrosion. Peer Review: Submittal Response To meet this requirement, David Miklush, Philippe Soenen, and Tom Baldwin performed independent peer reviews of this submittal. In addition, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station personnel performed a review of the submittals. All comments were evaluated and resolved. Comments included: (1) Clarify how unique DCPP seismic categories compare to SC I. (2) Clarify independence of peer reviewers. (3) Clarify where engineering evaluations of potentially seismically adverse conditions are included in the submittal. (4) Indicate status of the walkdown observations entered in to CAP. 2R17 AC ACI AFW AISC ANSI ASW AWC CAP CCP CCW CF CFCU CIV dc DCM DCPP DEG DFODT DG DHR DIE EOC EPRI ESP FCV FHB FHBVS FLOC ft HEPA HVAC Hx ICE IEEE IER IPEEE LBE LCV LOCA LTSP Attachment L List of Acronyms Unit 2 Refueling Outage 17 Alternating current American Concrete Institute Auxiliary feedwater American Institute of Steel Construction American National Standards Institute Auxiliary saltwater Area walk-by checklist Corrective Action Program Centrifugal charging pump Component cooling water Containment function Containment fan cooler unit Containment isolation valve Direct current Design criteria memorandum Diablo Canyon Power Plant Diesel emergency generator Diesel fuel oil day tank Diesel generator Decay heat removal Damp indoor environment Extent of condition Electric Power Research Institute Equipment selection personnel Flow control valve Fuel handling building Fuel handling building ventilation system Functional location Feet High efficiency particulate air Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning Heat exchanger Inside containment environment Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Industry Event Response Individual Plant Examination for External Events Licensing basis evaluation Level control valve Loss of coolant accident Long Term Seismic Program Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment L Page 1 of 3 MIE MS MSSV N NEI No. NRC NTTF OE Ops PCV PE PG&E PHD PORV PRA Q-List QOTTC RC RCIC RCP RCPC RCS RCV RHR RRC RV RWST SC SF SG SFP SFPCS SI SISI SISIP SPRA SQUG SSC SSEL SSER SSPS SWC SWE Mild indoor environment Main steam Main steam safety valve No Nuclear Energy Institute Number Nuclear Regulatory Committee Near-term Task Force Outside environment Operations Pressure control valve Professional Engineer Pacific Gas and Electric Company Doctor of Philosophy Power operated relief valve Probabilistic risk assessment Quality classification list Quick opening transfer tube closure Reactor coolant Reactor coolant inventory control Reactor coolant pump Reactor coolant pressure control Reactor coolant system Radiation control valve Residual heat removal Reactor reactivity control Reactor vessel Raw water storage tank Seismic category Safety function Steam generator Spent fuel pool Spent fuel pool cooling system Safety injection Seismically induced system interaction Seismically induced system interaction program Seismic probabilistic risk assessment Seismic Qualification Utilities Group Structures, systems, and components Safe shutdown equipment IList Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report Solid state protection system Seismic walkdown checklist Seismic walkdown engineer Enclosure 1 PG&E DCL-12-119 Attachment L Page 2 of 3 SWIE TO SWEL U UFSAR UPS Y Saltwater interior environment Turbine-driven Seismic walkdown equipment list Unknown Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Uninterruptable power supply Yes Enclosure 1 PG&E OCL-12-119 Attachment L Page 3 of 3 Regulatory Commitments Enclosure 2 PG&E DCL-12-119 Pacific Gas and Electric Company is making the following regulatory commitments (as defined by NEI 99-04) in this submittal: Commitment Due Date Attachment H of this enclosure provides a listing of components Prior to the end of that were inaccessible in accordance with EPRI 1025286 and 2R17 could not be inspected prior to submittal of this response. These inaccessible items will be inspected prior to the end of the unit's next refueling outage for Unit 2 (2R17). 2R17 is currently scheduled to be completed in March 2013. An update from those inspections will be submitted within 60 days following 60 days following the completion of 2R17. completion of 2R17}}

ML12333A269

Contents

Text

. =====1 ==.====

Conclusion:

1959'" i' :u Ss=I,(h.+t-y) where = height of composi1

==

Navigation menu

ML12333A269

Text

. =====1 ==.====

Conclusion:

1959'" i' :u Ss=I,(h.+t-y) where = height of composi1

==

Navigation menu

Search