L-MT-13-051, MNGP Updated Final Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident

MNGP Updated Final Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident

ML13263A032
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	09/16/2013
From:	Fili K Northern States Power Co, Xcel Energy
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-MT-13-051
Download: ML13263A032 (197)

Text

CONTAINS SUNSI - WITHHOLD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.390 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant X~ceI nergy2807 W County Road 75 Xcel~ ergyMonticello, MN 55362 September 16, 2013 L-MT-1 3-051 10 CFR 50.54(f)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Docket No. 50-263 Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-22 MNGP Updated Final Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regardinq the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident

References:

1. NRC Letter, "Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident" dated March 12, 2012, ADAMS Accession No. ML12053A340.

2. NSPM Letter to NRC, "MNGP Final Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident," dated November 27, 2012, ADAMS Accession No. ML12342A025.

On March 12, 2012, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Staff issued a request for information regarding Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi accident, to all NRC power reactor licensees and holders of construction permits in active or deferred status (Reference 1). Enclosure 3 of the March 12, 2012 letter contains specific Requested Actions, Requested Information, and Required Responses associated with Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) Recommendation 2.3, Seismic. Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM), d/b/a Xcel Energy, on behalf of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP), submitted the required response to the Requested Information for NTTF Recommendation 2.3, Seismic, in a letter dated November 27, 2012 (Reference 2). In Reference 2, NSPM committed to complete seismic walkdowns of inaccessible components during the spring Refueling Outage (RFO) 26. NSPM also committed to provide an updated Letter and Enclosure 2 are decontrolled when separated from Enclosure 1

Document Control Desk Page 2 seismic walkdown report with the results of the walkdowns of the inaccessible components 60 days following the completion of RFO 26. The purpose of this letter is to submit, as an enclosure, an updated seismic walkdown report with a summary of the results from the walkdowns of the inaccessible components. provides the updated seismic walkdown report. It contains Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) of which the loss, issue, modification, or unauthorized access can reasonably be foreseen to harm the public interest, or the commercial or financial interests of NSPM. NSPM requests that this SUNSI information be withheld under 10 CFR 2.390(d)(1). Pages which contain SUNSI information have been marked with a header, and the sensitive information, such as locations and pictures of safety-related components, has been redacted. Enclosure 2 provides a redacted version of the updated seismic walkdown report for public disclosure.

During the performance of the inaccessible Seismic Walkdowns, it was determined that not all anchors were visible for electrical panel, C-03, due to numerous cables covering the anchors to the floor. This panel had been erroneously reported as complete in the Reference 2 report. This updated report addresses this error, and describes the substitute Seismic Walkdown that was completed for another similar panel, C-17, located in the Control Room.

If there are any questions, or if additional information is needed, please contact Ms.

Jennie Wike, Licensing Engineer, at 612-330-5788.

Summary of Commitments This report closes the commitments in Reference 2. This letter contains no new commitments and makes no revisions to existing commitments.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on September 16, 2013.

Karen D. Fili Site Vice President, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Northern States Power Company - Minnesota Enclosures (2)

Letter and Enclosure 2 are decontrolled when separated from Enclosure 1

Document Control Desk Page 3 cc:

Administrator, Region III, USNRC Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)

NRR Project Manager, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, USNRC Letter and Enclosure 2 are decontrolled when separated from Enclosure 1

CONTAINS R1 SIUl -WITHWHO'LD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSUi IR I IUNDER 2.390 ENCLOSURE 2 MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT NTTF RECOMMENDATION 2.3 - SEISMIC UPDATED SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT (REDACTED)

(193 Pages Follow)

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Contents L ist o f T a b le s.........................................................................................................

iii Executive Summary................................................................................................

iv 1

Introduction..................................................................................................................

1-1 1.1 B a c kg ro u n d...........................................................................................................

1-1 1.2 Plant Overview......................................................................................................

1-1 1.3 A p p ro a c h...............................................................................................................

1 -1 2

Seism ic Licensing Basis..........................................................................................

2-1 2.1 O v e rv ie w...............................................................................................................

2 -1 2.2 Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE).........................................................................

2-1 2.3 Design of Seism ic Category I SSCs......................................................................

2-1 2.3.1 Sum mary of Seism ic Design for Class I SSCs.............................................

2-2 2.3.2 Methods of Analysis for Class 1 SSCs.........................................................

2-2 2.3.3 Summary of Codes and Standards...............................................................

2-3 3

Personnel Qualifications..........................................................................................

3-1 3.1 O v e rv ie w...............................................................................................................

3 -1 3.2 W alkdown Personnel.............................................................................................

3-1 3.3 Personnel Qualifications........................................................................................

3-3 4

Selection of SSCs.....................................................................................................

4-1 4.1 O v e rv ie w...............................................................................................................

4 -1 4.2 SW EL Development..............................................................................................

4-1 4.2.1 SWEL 1 - Sample of Required Items for the Five Safety Functions............. 4-1 4.2.2 SW EL 2 - Spent Fuel Pool Related Items....................................................

4-4 4.2.3 SW EL 2 Development Conclusion...............................................................

4-5 4.3 Changes to the Final SW EL 1..............................................................................

4-6 5

Seism ic W alkdowns and Area W alk-Bys...............................................................

5-1 5.1 O ve rv ie w...............................................................................................................

5 -1 5.2 Seismic W alkdowns..............................................................................................

5-1 5.2.1 Adverse Anchorage Conditions....................................................................

5-2 5.2.2 Configuration Verification.............................................................................

5-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 5.2.3 Adverse Seism ic Spatial Interactions...........................................................

5-3 5.2.4 Other Adverse Seism ic Conditions...............................................................

5-3 5.2.5 Issues Identified during Seism ic W alkdowns................................................

5-5 5.3 Area W alk-Bys.......................................................................................................

5-5 5.3.1 Seism ically-Induced Flooding/Spray Interactions.........................................

5-6 5.3.2 Seism ically-Induced Fire Interactions...........................................................

5-6 5.3.3 Issues Identified during Area W alk-bys........................................................

5-7 6

Licensing Basis Evaluations..................................................................................

6-1 7

IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report..............................................................

7-1 8

Peer Review..................................................................................................................

8-1 9

References....................................................................................................................

9-1 Appendices A

Equipm ent Lists...........................................................................................................

A-1 B

Deferred Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWCs)..................................................

B-1 C

Deferred Area Walk-By Checklists (AWCs)...........................................................

C-1 D

Peer Review Report................................................................................................

D-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report List of Tables Table 2-1: List of Codes, Standards, and Specifications.................................................. 2-4 Table 3-1: Personnel Roles - Initial Seismic Walkdown Effort......................................... 3-1 Table 3-2: Personnel Roles - Post November 27, 2012 Walkdown Effort.......................... 3-2 Table 5-1: Anchorage Configuration Verification............................................................ 5-3 Table 5-2: CAP Status for SWCs................................................................................... 5-8 Table 5-3: CAP Status for AW Cs...................................................................................

5-10 Table 7-1: Monticello IPEEE Seismic Improvements........................................................ 7-2 Table A-I: Monticello Base List 1.............................................................................. A-2 Table A-2: Monticello SW EL 1................................................................................... A-32 Table B-1: Monticello Completed SWCs After November 27, 2012................................... B-2 Table C-1: Monticello Completed AW Cs After November 27, 2012................................ C-1 Table D-1: SWC and AWC Samples from Seismic Walkdown Inspection........................ D-1 iii

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Executive Summary Following the accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant resulting from the March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and subsequent tsunami, the NRC established the Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) in response to Commission direction.

The NTTF Charter, dated March 30, 2011, tasked the NTTF with conducting a systematic and methodical review of NRC processes and regulations and determining if the agency should make additional improvements to its regulatory system. Ultimately, a comprehensive set of recommendations contained in a report to the Commission (dated July 12, 2011, SECY-1 1-0093 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML111861807)) was developed.

On August 19, 2011, following issuance of the NTTF report, the Commission directed the NRC staff in a staff requirements memorandum (SRM) for SECY-1 1-0093 (ADAMS Accession No. ML112310021), in part, to determine which of the recommendations could and should be implemented without unnecessary delay. On September 9, 2011, the NRC staff provided a document to the Commission (ADAMS Accession No. ML11245A158) which identified those actions from the NTTF report that should be taken without unnecessary delay.

On March 12, 2012, the NRC issued a 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter that requested information to assure that these recommendations are addressed by all U.S. nuclear power plants (Reference 6). Every U.S. nuclear power plant is required to perform seismic walkdowns to identify and address degraded, non-conforming or unanalyzed conditions and to verify the current plant configuration with the current seismic licensing basis. This report documents the seismic walkdowns performed at the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP) as required to address, in part, the 10 CFR 50.54(f) information request issued by the NRC.

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) cooperated with the NRC to prepare guidance for conducting seismic walkdowns as requested in Enclosure 3 of Reference 6, titled, Recommendation 2.3: Seismic. The guidelines and procedures prepared by NEI and endorsed by the NRC were published through the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) as EPRI Technical Report 1025286, Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, dated June 2012 (Reference 1). The Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM),

doing business as Xcel Energy, confirmed that the EPRI seismic walkdown guidance would be used as the basis for conducting the seismic walkdowns and developing the needed information at the MNGP in a letter dated July 9, 2012 (Reference 3).

NSPM performed walkdowns in accordance with the EPRI Seismic Walkdown Guidance (Reference 1) and submitted a summary of the results of these walkdowns in a letter dated November 27, 2012 (Reference 13). In Appendix D of Reference 13, NSPM identified components that could not be inspected during the 180 day period following the NRC's endorsement of the EPRI Report (Reference 1) due to being inaccessible.

Inaccessibility of this equipment was either based on the location of the equipment (environment that posed personnel safety concerns while the unit is operating), or due to the timing of the issuance of the clarification on internal electrical cabinet inspections and the electrical safety hazards posed while the equipment is energized. In the iv

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Reference 13 report, NSPM committed to completing these inaccessible walkdowns during Refueling Outage (RFO) 26 and submitting an updated Seismic Walkdown report 60 days following the end of the outage. The end of RFO 26 was on July 16, 2013.

This updated Seismic Walkdown report provides the results of the deferred Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys performed at MNGP after November 27, 2012. All required Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys are complete. This report also documents any new discrepancies or potential seismic issues identified as a result of the deferred Seismic Walkdowns. Results from the Seismic Walkdowns completed prior to November 27, 2012, and any potential discrepancies or potential seismic issues, were submitted in the Reference 13 report. This report provides a status update of the corrective actions previously identified in Tables 5-2 and 5-3 of the Reference 13 report.

No adverse seismic conditions were identified at the MNGP as a result of the initial or deferred walkdowns. Corrective Action Program Action Requests (CAPs) were entered into the site's 10 CFR 50 Appendix B qualified corrective action program.

The EPRI Seismic Walkdown Guidance (Reference 1) was used for the engineering walkdowns and evaluations described in this report. In accordance with the guidance in Reference 1, the following topics are addressed in the subsequent sections of this updated report:

Seismic Licensing Basis

" Personnel Qualifications Selection of Systems, Structures, and Components (SSC)

Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys Seismic Licensing Basis Evaluations

" Independent Plant Examinations of External Events (IPEEE) Vulnerabilities Resolution Report

" Peer Reviews A majority of the information previously provided in the Reference 13 report on the seismic licensing basis, selection of SSCs, IPEEE vulnerabilities resolution report, and the methodology used for completing the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys has not changed since November 27, 2012. However, this information is repeated in this report for reference, and to re-iterate the process that has been used for the initial and deferred Seismic Walkdowns.

This report closes the commitments in Reference 13, and provides the supplemental information required for the final response to the Requested Information for NTTF Recommendation 2.3, Seismic (Reference 6). No additional Seismic Walkdowns are required.

v

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report I

Introduction

1.1 BACKGROUND

In response to NTTF Recommendation 2.3, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter on March 12, 2012 requesting that all licensees perform Seismic Walkdowns to identify and address plant-specific degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions (through the corrective action program) and verify the adequacy of monitoring and maintenance for protective features, and inform the NRC staff of the results of the walkdowns and corrective actions taken or planned. The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), with EPRI, prepared industry guidance to assist licensees in responding to this NRC request. The industry guidance document, EPRI Technical Report 1025286, Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, dated June 2012 (Reference 1), was endorsed by the NRC on May 31, 2012 (Reference 4). NSPM confirmed that the EPRI Seismic Walkdown guidance would be used as the basis for conducting the Seismic Walkdowns and developing the needed information at the MNGP in a letter dated July 9, 2012 (Reference 3).

1.2 PLANT OVERVIEW The Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP) is located within the city limits of Monticello, Minnesota on the south bank of the Mississippi River. The plant and approximately 2150 acres of land at the plant site are owned by NSPM. NSPM is a wholly owned utility operating subsidiary of Xcel Energy Corporation (Xcel Energy). The current MNGP renewed operating license (Renewed Facility Operating License No.

DPR-22) expires at midnight on September 8, 2030.

1.3 APPROACH The EPRI Seismic Walkdown Guidance (Reference 1) was used for the MNGP engineering walkdowns and evaluations described in this report. In accordance with Reference 1, the following topics are addressed in the subsequent sections of this report:

Seismic Licensing Basis (Section 2)

Personnel Qualifications (Section 3)

Selection of SSCs (Section 4)

Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys (Section 5)

Licensing Basis Evaluations (Section 6)

IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report (Section 7)

Peer Review (Section 8)

Section 1.0 - Introduction 1-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 2

Seismic Licensing Basis 2.1 OVERVIEW This section of the report summarizes the seismic licensing basis for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant. The safe shutdown earthquake and a summary of the codes, standards, and methods used in the design of Seismic Category I structures, systems, and components (SSC) are presented. This section does not establish or change the seismic licensing basis of the facility and is intended to provide a fundamental understanding of the seismic licensing basis of the facility.

2.2 SAFE SHUTDOWN EARTHQUAKE (SSE)

The maximum horizontal ground acceleration at the foundation level is 0.12g for the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) (Reference 2, Section 1.3.1.6). The vertical acceleration is 0.08g for the SSE (Reference 2, Section 12.2.1.9).

2.3 DESIGN OF SEISMIC CATEGORY I SSCs A full description of the SSE along with the codes, standards, and methods used in the design of the Seismic Category I SSCs for meeting the seismic licensing basis requirements is provided in the following MNGP Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR) (Reference 2) sections:

USAR Section 1.3.1.6, Seismology and Design Response Spectra USAR Section 2.5, Geology and Soil Investigation USAR Section 2.6, Seismology USAR Section 7.10, Seismic and Transient Performance Instrumentation Systems USAR Section 12.2, Plant Principal Structures and Foundations USAR Appendix A, Seismic Design Criteria USAR Appendix F, Containment Vessel Design Summary Design These USAR sections should be referred to for a detailed understanding of the seismic licensing basis.

Section 2.0 - Seismic Licensing Basis 2-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 2.3.1 Summary of Seismic Design for Class I SSCs The seismic design for critical structures and equipment for this plant is based on dynamic analysis of acceleration or velocity response spectrum curves which are based on a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.06g (Reference 2, Section 1.3.1.6).

The natural periods of vibration are calculated for buildings and equipment which are vital to the safety of the plant. Damping factors are based upon the materials and methods of construction used. Earthquake design is based on ordinary allowable stress as set forth in the applicable codes and is very conservative because the usual one-third increase in allowable working stresses due to loadings from the operating basis earthquake is not used. As an additional requirement, the design is such that a safe shutdown can be made following a safe shutdown earthquake assuming a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.12g (Reference 2, Section 1.3.1.6).

The 0.12g design criteria are for critical items only; that is, for Class I items (Reference 2, Section 1.3.1.6). For the design of Class I structures and equipment the maximum horizontal acceleration and the maximum vertical acceleration were considered simultaneously. Where applicable, the resulting seismic stresses for the two motions were combined linearly (Reference 2, Section 12.2.1.9). All Class I structures and equipment were analyzed to assure that a safe shutdown can be made during horizontal ground accelerations of 0.06g (operating basis earthquake) and 0.12g (design basis or maximum earthquake) (Reference 2, Section 12.2.1.4). Seismic loads were based upon the seismic investigation and data developed by John A. Blume & Associates, Engineers. The design earthquake established for the MNGP site is the North 690 West Component of the 1952 Taft earthquake, normalized to a maximum ground acceleration of 0.06g (Reference 2, Section 12.2.1.9).

2.3.2 Methods of Analysis for Class I SSCs A.

Equipment All rigid Class I equipment was analyzed using accelerations derived from the results of the analysis for the supporting structure at the appropriate elevation. Amplification factors were applied for the seismic analysis of non-rigidly mounted equipment. Typical amplification factors were 2.7 for the Reactor Pressure Vessel and 1.5 for the Recirculating Pump. The amplification factors were determined by using the results of the dynamic analysis; i.e., referring to Sheet No. 4, Earthquake Analysis, Reactor Pressure Vessel, in USAR Appendix A of Reference 2, the maximum acceleration of the top of the reactor vessel is 0.16 g, since ground acceleration is 0.06 g, the amplification factor is 2.7. The other amplification factors were calculated in a similar manner (Reference 2, Section 12.2.1.9).

B.

Piping Class I piping seismic analyses were performed for both operating basis and design basis (maximum) earthquakes as follows:

0 Mode superposition using a floor response spectra.

Section 2.0 - Seismic Licensing Basis 2-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report A static analysis was made using conservative static seismic coefficients. These static coefficients were determined in the following manner:

1. Horizontal static coefficients were determined by using the average of the peak values from the unsmoothed ground spectral curve of the normalized earthquake.

2. This average acceleration was then multiplied by the ratio of the building response acceleration at the installed elevation of the piping to maximum ground acceleration.

A vertical coefficient was taken at a constant value equal to two-thirds of the maximum base ground acceleration or 0.04 g.

For the response spectrum analysis of piping systems, the floor spectra near the points of pipe lateral restraint were considered. The spectrum usually selected to be used in the analysis was the one located nearest the point of lateral support of the majority of the mass of the pipe. For the recirculation lines, the spectrum used was the one occurring just above the elevation of the header, or about half way between the upper and lower elevation of the pipe. Most of the seismic restraints fall below this elevation, and the selection of the point was considered to be realistic for the seismic analysis.

When a static analysis was made, all piping systems above the 935 foot elevation used a horizontal static coefficient, 0.82g, and below this elevation a value of 0.53g was used.

These values represent an amplification factor of 13 and 9, respectively (Reference 2, Section 12.2.1.10).

C.

Devices All types of Class I devices (relays, switches, amplifiers, power supplies, sensors, etc.)

which make up the Class I systems were tested for proper performance under the simulated seismic accelerations of the Design Basis Earthquake. Each device tested is energized and, as applicable, has a simulated input signal applied; and has its output monitored during and after the test (Reference 2, Section 7.10.1.4).

D. Racks and Panels Class I racks and panels complete with all internal wiring and devices mounted were vibrated at low accelerations over the DBE frequency range and measurements made to determine the presence of resonances. If resonances were present which affect Class I devices, steps were taken to shift their frequencies out of the band of interest or dampen them to an acceptable level. Once this was accomplished, the panel can be considered a rigid body and analyzed statically (Reference 2, Section 7.10.1.4).

Addition of new systems or re-evaluation of existing systems is done using current methods of analysis and component qualification. See Section 12.2.1.10 of Reference 2.

2.3.3 Summary of Codes and Standards This section summarizes the codes, specifications, standards of practice, and other accepted industry guidelines, which are adopted to the extent applicable, in the design and construction of the Seismic Category I SSCs for meeting the plant-specific seismic Section 2.0 - Seismic Licensing Basis 2-3

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report licensing basis requirements. All of the applicable codes, standards, and specifications for Seismic Category I SSCs are listed in Table 2-1 below. These codes, standards, and specifications are also described in MNGP USAR Section 12.2.

Table 2-1: List of Codes, Standards, and Specifications Specification or Standard Title Designation American Concrete Institute Building Code Requirements for Reinforced (ACI)-318-63 Concrete, 1963 Edition American Institute of Steel Specification for the Design, Fabrication and Construction (AISC)

Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings - Sixth Edition American Welding Society Standard Code for Arc and Gas Welding in Building (AWS) D1.0 Construction, 8 th Edition American Society of Mechanical Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, VIII, IX, Engineers (ASME) and Xl American Petroleum-Institute, Recommended Rules for Design and Construction of Specification No. 620 Large, Welded, Low Pressure Storage Tanks ACI 505-54 Specification for the Design and Construction of Reinforced Concrete Chimneys USA Standard Code for Power Piping Pressure Piping, USAS B31.1.0- 1967 American National Standard Power Piping Code, ANSI B31.1 - 1977 American Society of Civil Wind Forces on Structures Engineers (ASCE) Transactions, Paper 3269 Section 2.0 - Seismic Licensing Basis 2-4

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 3

Personnel Qualifications 3.1 OVERVIEW This section of the report identifies the personnel that participated in the initial NTTF Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Walkdown efforts, as well as those personnel that participated in the deferred walkdown effort after November 27, 2012. This section also describes the qualifications of these personnel. A description of the responsibilities and minimum qualifications of each Seismic Walkdown participant's role(s) is provided in Section 2, Personnel Qualifications, of Reference 1.

3.2 WALKDOWN PERSONNEL Table 3-1 below summarizes the names and corresponding roles of personnel who participated in the initial NTTF Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Walkdown effort prior to November 27, 2012. The names and corresponding roles of personnel who participated in the NTTF Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Walkdown effort after November 27, 2012 are provided in Table 3-2.

Table 3-1: Personnel Roles - Initial Seismic Walkdown Effort*

Seismic Name Equipment Plant Walkdown IPEEE Peer Selection Operations Engineer Reviewer Reviewer (SWE)

B. Lory X

X W. Djordjevic X

D. Zercher X

S. Kaas X

S. Luckiesh X

J. Kindred X**

X*

R. Walstrom X

X T. Parker X

X D. Moore X

N* peersonnel listed as licensing basis reviewers because no licensing basis evaluations were performed.

• • Peer Review Team Leader.

Section 3.0 - Personnel Qualifications 3-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table 3-2: Personnel Roles - Post November 27, 2012 Walkdown Effort*

Name Equipment Plant Seismic Peer Selection Operations Walkdown Reviewer Engineer (SWE)

B. Lory X

X D. Zercher X

S. Kaas X

S. Luckiesh X

J. Kindred X**

X R. Walstrom X

X T. Parker X

X

• No personnel listed as licensing basis reviewers because no licensing basis evaluations were performed.

The IPEEE Review was completed prior to November 27, 2012.

• • Peer Review Team Leader.

Section 3.0 - Personnel Qualifications 3-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 3.3 PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS Summarized below are the qualifications for the personnel who participated in the NTTF Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Walkdown efforts. The personnel qualifications include applicable seismic training, education, and professional experience.

Bruce M. Lory

" Activities Performed: Equipment Selection, SWE Seismic Training Completed: Instructor for the Fundamentals of Equipment Seismic Qualification Training and EPRI NTTF Recommendation 2.3 - Plant Seismic Walkdowns Training Education: Bachelors of Science in Mechanical Engineering from the State University of New York at Buffalo Professional Experience: Over 30 years of experience in the commercial nuclear industry. Worked over 18 years in Seismic Qualification of equipment and components, and over 15 years of Environmental Qualification experience, in consulting services and in utility positions. Currently works as a senior consultant for Stevenson and Associates with specialization in Seismic and Environmental Qualification, as well as Single Failure-Proof crane design verification.

Dennis Zercher

" Activities Performed: Peer Reviewer (initial Seismic Walkdowns), SWE (post November 27, 2012 Seismic Walkdowns)

Seismic Training Completed: EPRI SQUG Training and Seismic Evaluation Training Course Education: Bachelors of Science in Civil Engineering from Michigan Technological University Professional Experience: Over 28 years of experience in the commercial nuclear industry. A registered Professional Engineer in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Worked as a Structural Engineer at FluiDyne Engineering and PaR Systems. Recently retired after working at the MNGP as a Design Engineer.

Steve Kaas

" Activities Performed: SWE

" Seismic Training Completed: EPRI NTTF Recommendation 2.3 - Plant Seismic Walkdowns Training Education: Bachelors of Science in Civil Engineering from North Dakota State University Professional Experience: A registered Professional Engineer in Minnesota, Iowa, and Michigan. Currently works as a Senior Civil Engineer at NSPM. President of Kaas Technical Services, Inc. Previously worked as Engineering Manager of Hanson Structural Precast, and a Field Engineer at Wells Concrete Products Company.

Section 3.0 - Personnel Qualifications 3-3

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Scott Luckiesh

" Activities Performed: SWE (initial Seismic Walkdowns), Peer Reviewer (post November 27, 2012 Seismic Walkdowns)

Seismic Training Completed: EPRI NTTF Recommendation 2.3 - Plant Seismic Walkdowns Training Education: Bachelors of Science in Architectural Engineering from Oklahoma State University, and a Masters of Science in Structural Engineering from University of Texas -

Austin.

Professional Experience: A registered Professional Engineer in Minnesota, and was formerly a registered Professional Engineer in Wisconsin, Oklahoma, and Florida. Over 17 years of experience with structural engineering at various companies. Currently works as a Design Engineer for NSPM at MNGP, in the areas of external flooding and structural/seismic design.

Jason Kindred Activities Performed: Peer Reviewer, Plant Operations Seismic Training Completed: N/A Education: Bachelors of Science in Mechanical Engineering from University of Wisconsin

- Madison Professional Experience: Over 12 years of experience in the commercial nuclear industry. Spent over 11 years in the United States Navy as a Naval Nuclear Officer.

Started in the commercial nuclear industry at the MNGP. Obtained Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) license at the MNGP. Worked as a Shift Support Specialist, Control Room Supervisor, Operations Department Training Supervisor, Operations Shift Manager, and Operations Support Manager. Currently works as the Engineering Plant and Systems Manager at MNGP.

Robert (Bob) Walstrom

" Activities Performed: Equipment Selection, Plant Operations Seismic Training Completed: N/A Education: Bachelors of Science in Physics from Winona State University Professional Experience: Over 34 years in Plant Operations at the MNGP. Maintained continuous active Reactor Operator (RO) or SRO license for 30 years. Worked as a non-licensed operator, a control room operator, shift supervisor and shift manager/shift technical advisor. Two years temporary assignment as Initial License Training class mentor/supervisor. Currently retired and supporting Fukushima lessons learned activities.

Section 3.0 - Personnel Qualifications 3-4

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Thomas (Tom) Parker

" Activities Performed: Equipment Selection, Plant Operations

" Seismic Training Completed: N/A Education: Masters of Science in Nuclear Engineering from Iowa State University Professional Experience: Over 34 years of experience working in the nuclear industry.

Spent four years in the United States Navy as a teacher at the Nuclear Power School.

Started in the commercial nuclear industry at Zion nuclear plant. After five years at Zion nuclear plant, started working for NSPM and has spent the remainder of career with NSPM at the corporate offices and MNGP. Obtained SRO at the MNGP and was also an RO at the UTR-10 reactor at Iowa State University. Currently retired and supporting Fukushima lessons learned activities.

David L. Moore

" Activities Performed: IPEEE Reviewer

" Seismic Training Completed: EPRI SQUG Training and Seismic Evaluation Training Course Education: Bachelor of Science in Physics from University of Texas; Masters of Science in Civil/Structural Engineering from University of Washington Professional Experience: Over 30 years of seismic PRA and SMA experience for the nuclear industry and NRC. Manager, Systems Task Leader, or Peer Reviewer for over 30 seismic PRAs, SMAs, or USI A-46 assessments. Tasks included development of seismic success paths and seismic equipment lists, performance of seismic walkdowns, quantification of seismic CDF and LERF, and performance of uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. Currently works as a Consultant for several seismic PRA projects, including NRC sponsored research project on treatment of seismic correlation.

Walter (Wally) Diordievic

" Activities Performed: SWE Seismic Training Completed: EPRI SQUG training and EPRI NTTF Recommendation 2.3

- Plant Seismic Walkdowns Training Education: Masters of Science in Structural Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professional Experience: Over 37 years of seismic experience serving the nuclear industry. Managed and led seismic walkdowns and fragility analyses of structures and components for use in probabilistic risk assessments. Performed more than twenty USI A-46 and IPEEE projects in response to the requirements of Generic Letters 87-02 and 88-20. Currently works as a senior Consultant and serves as President of Stevenson and Associates with specialization in the dynamic analysis and design of structures and equipment for seismic, blast, fluid, and wind loads.

Section 3.0 - Personnel Qualifications 3-5

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 4

Selection of SSCs 4.1 OVERVIEW This section of the report describes the process used to select SSCs that were included in the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL). The actual equipment lists that were developed in this process are found in Appendix A of this report and are as follows:

Table A-I, Monticello Base List 1 Table A-2, Monticello SWEL 1 4.2 SWEL DEVELOPMENT The selection of SSCs process described in EPRI Technical Report 1025286, Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, dated June 2012 (Reference 1), was utilized to develop the SWEL for the MNGP.

The SWEL is comprised of two groups of items:

SWEL 1 is a sample of items required to safely shut down the reactor and maintain containment integrity.

SWEL 2 is a list of spent fuel pool related items.

4.2.1 SWEL 1 - Sample of Required Items for the Five Safety Functions The process for selecting a sample of SSCs for shutting down the reactor and maintaining containment integrity began with the safe shutdown equipment list (SSEL) utilized for the Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) effort completed as part of NSPM's resolution of USI A-46 (Reference 12). The SQUG SSEL was then subjected to the following four screenings to identify the items to be included on the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List 1 (SWEL 1):

1. Screen #1 - Seismic Category I As described in Section 3 of Reference 1, Screen #1 narrows the scope of SSCs in the plant to those that are classified as Seismic Category (SC) I, because only such items have a defined seismic licensing basis against which to evaluate the as-installed configuration. Each item on the MNGP SQUG equipment list was reviewed to determine if it had a defined seismic licensing basis. All items identified as Safety Class 1, as defined in Section 12 of the MNGP USAR (Reference 2), were identified as being SC I. Electrical enclosures containing Class 1E devices were identified as SC I.

Section 4.0 - Selection of SSCs 4-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report

2. Screen #2 - Equipment or Systems As described in Section 3 of Reference 1, this screen narrowed the scope of items to include only those that do not regularly undergo inspections to confirm that their configuration is consistent with the plant licensing basis. This screen further reduced the SWEL 1 by screening out any Safety Related SC I structures, containment penetrations, SC I piping systems, cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductwork.

3. Screen #3 - Support for the 5 Safety Functions This screen narrowed the scope of items included on the SWEL 1 to only those associated with maintaining the following five safety functions:

A.

Reactor Reactivity Control B.

Reactor Coolant Pressure Control C.

Reactor Coolant Inventory Control D.

Decay Heat Removal E.

Containment Function These five safety functions were defined in Section 3 of Reference 1. The first four functions are associated with bringing the reactor to a safe shutdown condition. The fifth function is associated with maintaining containment integrity.

Utilizing the information in Appendix E of Reference 1, the safety function for each item on the SQUG SSEL was identified. Equipment that did not serve or support one of the five safety functions listed above were excluded from the SWEL 1. Plant Operations staff was involved with the development of SWEL 1, and identified additional systems not included on the SQUG SSEL which were associated with maintaining the five safety functions above. Based on the reviews by Plant Operations, equipment for the Standby Liquid Control, Primary Containment Hard Pipe Vent, Control Room Ventilation, and Emergency Filtration Train systems were added to SWEL 1. The results of this screen are provided in Appendix A of this report as Table A-1.

4. Screen #4-Sample Considerations This screen is intended to result in a SWEL 1 that sufficiently represents a broad population of plant SC I equipment and systems to meet the objectives of the NRC 10 CFR 50.54(f) Letter (Reference 6). The final SWEL 1 for MNGP is presented in Appendix A of this report as Table A-2. The following attributes were considered in the selection process for items included on SWEL 1:

Section 4.0 - Selection of SSCs 4-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report A.

A variety of types of systems The system is identified for each item on SWEL 1. The equipment included on SWEL 1 is a representative sample of 29 systems in the plant that perform one or multiple safety functions.

B.

Major new and replacement equipment The equipment included on SWEL 1 includes several items that have been modified or replaced over the past several years. Each item on SWEL 1 that is new or replaced is identified.

C.

A variety of types of equipment The equipment'class is identified for each item on SWEL 1. The equipment included on SWEL 1 is a representative sample from 19 of the 21 classes of equipment listed in Appendix B, Classes of Equipment, of Reference 1. Where appropriate, at least one piece of equipment from each class is included on SWEL 1.

Screens #1, #2, and #3 resulted in no equipment in equipment class number 13 for motor generators and class number 2 for low voltage switchgear and breaker panels. There were no motor generators in the plant which performed one of the five safety functions defined in Reference 1. As for the low voltage switchgear, no planned out-of-service maintenance was scheduled in the last refueling outage for Class I load centers to allow inspection.

D.

A variety of environments The equipment included on SWEL 1 is a representative sample from a variety of environments (locations) in the station. To ensure an adequate sampling of equipment was selected to represent the Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC), and High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) systems, additional equipment from these two systems was added to the SWEL 1.

Equipment was also reviewed for accessibility. Equipment that is inaccessible without the use of scaffolding or portable ladders was excluded from SWEL 1.

Also, equipment located in high radiation areas was also excluded from SWEL 1 with the exception of three components in the Steam Chase and the Dry Well. These items were walked down during the last refueling outage.

E.

Equipment enhanced due to vulnerabilities identified during the IPEEE program The equipment included on SWEL 1 includes items that were enhanced as a result of the IPEEE program. Each item on SWEL 1 that was enhanced to correct a vulnerability from IPEEE is identified.

Section 4.0 - Selection of SSCs 4-3

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report F.

Contribution to risk To determine the relative risk significance of equipment for inclusion on SWEL 1, the Risk Achievement Worth (RAW) and Fussell-Vesely importance from the internal plant Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) models were used to create a list of the top forty risk-significant components. Initiating events, maintenance events and human error events were not considered in the generation of this list.

In selecting equipment for SWEL 1 that met the above attributes, the equipment in the draft SWEL 1 had to first pass through Screens 1 through 4 before being assessed for being risk significant. Then risk significant equipment was identified based on the above criteria, and a subset of the more risk-significant equipment was selected to be on the final SWEL 1.

Additionally, the list of risk-significant equipment from internal plant PRA was compared with the draft SWEL 1 to confirm that a reasonable sample of risk-significant equipment (relevant for a seismic event) was included on SWEL 1.

4.2.2 SWEL 2 - Spent Fuel Pool Related Items The process for selecting a sample of SSCs associated with the spent fuel pool (SFP) began with a review of the station design and licensing basis documentation for the SFP and the interconnecting SFP cooling system. The following four screens narrowed the scope of SSCs to be included on the second Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL 2):

1. Screen #1 - Seismic Category I Only those items identified as Class 1 (SC I) are to be included on SWEL 2 with exception to the SFP structure. As described in Reference 1, the adequacy of the SFP structure is assessed by analysis as a SC 1 structure. Therefore, the SFP structure is assumed to be seismically adequate for the purposes of this program and is not included in the scope of items included on SWEL 2. Within the SFP system, MNGP identified several manual valves and check valves classified as Class 1 equipment.

2. Screen #2 - Equipment or Systems This screen considers only those items associated with the SFP that are appropriate for an equipment walkdown process. Appendix B of Reference 1 lists the classes of equipment that are appropriate for the equipment walkdown process.

All of the Class 1 SFP equipment identified in Screen #1 was determined not to be suitable for the Seismic Walkdown process. The equipment identified in Screen #1 included manual valves and check valves which are not listed as classes of equipment appropriate for the walkdowns in the EPRI Report (Reference 1).

3. Screen #3 - Sample Considerations This screen is similar to Screen #4 used for SWEL 1. It represents a process that is intended to result in a SWEL 2 that sufficiently represents a broad population of Section 4.0 - Selection of SSCs 4-4

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report SFP Seismic Category 1 equipment and systems to meet the objectives of the NRC 10 CFR 50.54(f) Letter. All of the Class 1 equipment identified for the SFP was determined not to be appropriate for an equipment walkdown process in Screen #2.

Therefore, Screen #3 was not necessary for MNGP.

4.

Screen #4-Rapid Drain-Down This screen identifies items that could allow the spent fuel pool to drain rapidly.

Consistent with Reference 1, the scope of items included in this screen is limited to the hydraulic lines connected to the SFP and the equipment connected to those lines. For the purposes of this program it is assumed the SFP gates are installed and the SFP cooling system is in its normal alignment for power operations. The SFP gates are passive devices that are integral to the SFP. As such, they are considered capable of withstanding a design basis earthquake without failure and do not allow for a rapid drain-down of the SFP.

The SSCs identified in this screen are not limited to Class 1 (SC I) items, but is limited to those items that could allow rapid drain-down of the SFP. Rapid drain-down is defined as lowering of the water level to the top of the fuel assemblies within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> after the earthquake.

The design and licensing basis for the SFP and its cooling system was reviewed, and it was determined that there are no penetrations below ten feet above the top of the fuel assemblies in the SFP. Additionally, the spent fuel storage pool has been designed to withstand earthquake loadings as a Class I structure. It is a reinforced concrete structure, completely lined with seam-welded, stainless steel plates welded to reinforcing members (channels, I-beams, etc.) embedded in concrete.

The stainless steel liner prevents leakage even in the event the concrete develops cracks. To avoid unintentional draining of the pool, there are no penetrations that would permit the pool to be drained below a safe storage level and all lines extending below this level are equipped with valves to prevent syphon backflow.

The passage between the spent fuel storage pool and the refueling cavity above the reactor vessel is provided with two double-sealed gates with a monitored drain between the gates (Reference 2, Section 10.2.1.2). Therefore, no items which could rapidly drain-down the SFP were included on SWEL 2 for MNGP.

4.2.3 SWEL 2 Development Conclusion MNGP identified several manual valves and check valves within the SFP system that are classified as Class 1 equipment. However, these components are not listed in Reference 1 as classes of equipment appropriate for the walkdowns. Additionally, there are no penetrations below ten feet above the top of the fuel assemblies in the SFP which could rapidly drain-down the SFP. Therefore, no items were identified for SWEL 2 for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant.

Section 4.0 - Selection of SSCs 4-5

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 4.3 Changes to the Final SWEL 1 After the November 27, 2012 report (Reference 13), a few changes were made to the final SWEL 1. A description and justification for the changes made to SWEL 1 since the Reference 13 report are described in the following paragraphs.

The seismic walkdown team questioned whether or not all of the anchors for SWEL 1 item C-03 had been visually inspected. As a result of these questions, SWEL 1 item C-03 was re-inspected during the refueling outage and it was determined that not all anchors were visible due to numerous cables covering the anchorage to the floor. This panel had been erroneously reported as complete in the Reference 13 report. This error has been entered into the Corrective Action Program (CAP) under action request 01385442. Even though some of the anchors were not visible, a sufficient number of anchors and structural supports were visible for the team to conclude that the control board was well anchored and posed no seismic concern. Item C-03 was deleted from the SWEL 1 list provided in Table A-2 of the Reference 13 report, because not all of the anchors were visible to perform a complete inspection. A similar panel located in the Control Room, C-17, was added to the SWEL 1 list to replace C-03. The seismic walkdown team was able to inspect all of the anchorage for C-1 7, and no seismic concerns were identified.

In addition to item C-03, two deferred items (C-93 and G31) were removed from the SWEL 1 list originally provided in Table A-2 of the Reference 13 report. These items were not inspected because anchorages for these items were not visible. Therefore, Table A-2 of this report has 98 items rather than the 100 items reported in Table A-2 of the Reference 13 report. Deletion of these two items did not impact the diversity and variety of the systems, equipment, and environments represented in SWEL 1.

Additionally, the number of components selected for inspection continues to meet the minimum requirements specified in Reference 1. A representative sampling of affected components has been achieved; and therefore, the intent of the Reference 1 guidance has been met.

Section 4.0 - Selection of SSCs 4-6

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 5

Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5.1 OVERVIEW Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys were conducted by two-person teams of trained Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWE), in accordance with Reference 1. The Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys are discussed in more detail in the following sections.

Consistent with Section 4, Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys, of Reference 1 the Seismic Walkdown Engineers used their engineering judgment, based on their experience and training, to identify potentially adverse seismic conditions. Where needed, the engineers were provided the latitude to rely upon new or existing analyses to inform their judgment.

The Seismic Walkdown Engineers conducted the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys together as a team, in accordance with Reference 1. During these evaluations, the Seismic Walkdown Engineers actively discussed their observations and judgments with each other. The results of the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys reported herein are based on the comprehensive and consensus agreement of the Seismic Walkdown Engineers.

5.2 SEISMIC WALKDOWNS The Seismic Walkdowns focused on the seismic adequacy of the items in SWEL 1, provided in Table A-2 of Appendix A in this report. The Seismic Walkdowns also evaluated the potential for nearby SSCs to cause adverse seismic interactions with the SWEL items. The Seismic Walkdown teams focused on the following adverse seismic conditions associated with the subject item of equipment:

Adverse anchorage conditions Adverse seismic spatial interactions Other adverse seismic conditions The results of the Seismic Walkdowns have been documented on the Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWCs) and Area Walk-by Checklists (AWCs). The results of all of the 98 Seismic Walkdowns were documented on Seismic Walkdown Checklists. The Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWCs) completed before November 27, 2012 were submitted in Appendix B of Reference 13. Those completed after November 27, 2012 are provided in Appendix B of this document. Photos have been included with most Seismic Walkdown Checklists to provide a visual record of the item along with any comments noted on the Seismic Walkdown Checklist. Drawings and other plant records are cited in some of the Seismic Walkdown Checklists, but are not included with the Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Seismic Walkdown Checklists because they are readily retrievable documents through the station's document management system.

The following subsections describe the approach followed by the Seismic Walkdown Engineers to identify potentially adverse anchorage conditions, adverse seismic interactions, and other adverse seismic conditions during the Seismic Walkdowns.

5.2.1 Adverse Anchorage Conditions Guidance for identifying anchorage that could be degraded, non-conforming, or unanalyzed relied on visual inspections of the anchorage and verification of anchorage configuration. Details for these two types of evaluations are provided in the following two subsections.

The evaluation of potentially adverse anchorage conditions described in this subsection applies to the anchorage connections that attach the identified item of equipment to the civil structure on which it is mounted. For example, the welded connections that secure the base of a Motor Control Center (MCC) to the concrete floor would be evaluated in this subsection. Evaluation of the connections that secure components within the MCC is covered later in the subsection "Other Adverse Seismic Conditions."

Visual Inspections The purpose of the visual inspections was to identify whether any of the following potentially adverse anchorage conditions were present:

Bent, broken, missing, or loose hardware Corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation Visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors Other potentially adverse seismic conditions Based on the results of the visual inspection, the SWEs judged whether the anchorage was potentially degraded, non-conforming, or unanalyzed. The results of the visual inspection were documented on the SWC, as appropriate. If there was clearly no evidence of degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions, then it was indicated on the checklist. However, when it was not possible to judge whether the anchorage was degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed, then the condition was evaluated and entered into the Corrective Action Program to determine if there was a potentially adverse seismic condition.

5.2.2 Configuration Verification In addition to the visual inspections of the anchorage as described above, the configuration of the installed anchorage was verified to be consistent with existing plant documentation for at least 50% of the items on the SWEL, per the guidance in Section 4 of Reference 1.

Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Line-mounted equipment (e.g., valves mounted on pipelines without separate anchorage) were not evaluated for anchorage adequacy and were not counted in establishing the 50% sample size, per the guidance in Section 4 of Reference 1.

Examples of documentation that were considered to verify that the anchorage installation configurations were consistent with the plant documentation include the following:

Design drawings IPEEE or USI A-46 program documentation, as applicable Table B-1 in Appendix B documents which deferred SWCs had anchorage confirmation performed. Additionally, Table 5-1 below shows the final count of the 50% anchorage configuration verifications.

Table 5-1: Anchorage Configuration Verification No. of SWEL Line-Mounted Required to Anchorages SWEL List Items Items Verify?

Verified (A)

(B)

(A-B)/2 1

98 18 40 44 5.2.3 Adverse Seismic Spatial Interactions An adverse seismic spatial interaction is the physical interaction between the SWEL item and a nearby SSC caused by relative motion between the two during an earthquake. An inspection was performed in the area adjacent to and surrounding the SWEL item to identify any seismic interaction conditions that could adversely affect the capability of that SWEL item to perform its intended safety-related functions.

The three types of seismic spatial interaction effects that were considered are as follows:

Proximity Failure and falling of SSCs Flexibility of attached lines and cables Detailed guidance for evaluating each of these types of seismic spatial interactions is described in Appendix D, Seismic Spatial Interaction, of Reference 1.

The Seismic Walkdown Engineers exercised their judgment to identify seismic interaction hazards. Section 5.2.5 provides a summary of issues identified during the Seismic Walkdowns.

5.2.4 Other Adverse Seismic Conditions In addition to adverse anchorage conditions and adverse seismic interactions, described above, other potentially adverse seismic conditions that could challenge the seismic Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-3

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report adequacy of a SWEL item could have been present. Examples of the types of conditions that could pose potentially adverse seismic conditions include the following:

Degraded conditions Loose or missing fasteners that secure internal or external components to equipment Large, heavy components mounted on a cabinet that are not typically included by the original equipment manufacturer Cabinet doors or panels that are not latched or fastened Other adverse conditions Any other adverse seismic conditions that were identified during the Seismic Walkdowns are documented on the items' SWCs in Appendix B and Table 5-2, as applicable.

In September 2012, a revised position from the NRC Staff in regards to Seismic Walkdowns of electrical cabinets or panels was sent to all licensees by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). In this document from NEI, it was communicated that it is expected that all electrical cabinets on the SWEL that can be reasonably opened without undue safety or operational hazard will be opened during the walkdown, whether or not it is necessary to look inside to check the anchorages. The NRC Staff described the visual inspection that should be made while viewing the interior of the cabinet through the door opening as including the following checks:

Visually check whether there is evidence that internal components are not adequately secured to the cabinet, Check whether fasteners that secure adjacent cabinets together are in place, if such fasteners are needed to prevent potentially adverse seismic interaction between the cabinets, and Look for "Other Adverse Seismic Conditions," as described on page 4-4 of the Seismic Walkdown Guidance (Reference 1).

Prior to the issuance of the revised NRC position on internal cabinet inspections, NSPM had completed and signed seismic walkdown checklists (SWC) for some of the SWEL I electrical cabinets and panels. NSPM completed SWCs for the following electrical cabinets and panels prior to the revised position on internal cabinet inspections:

C-253D D-11 MCC-134 MCC-312 MCC-313 N3346A N3347 N4301A P-73A Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-4

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Instead of re-performing the external visual inspections of the cabinets and panels for these components, NSPM completed a second seismic walkdown checklist (SWC) to document the results of the internal cabinet inspections performed during the refueling outage. These electrical cabinets and panels have two seismic walkdown checklists (SWC) in Appendix B of this report. The first SWC documents the results of the initial external visual inspection completed prior to November 27, 2012. The second SWC documents the results of the internal inspection completed during the refueling outage.

The results of the internal cabinet inspections for these components are documented in the Comments section of the second SWC.

5.2.5 Issues Identified during Seismic Walkdowns Table 5-2 at the end of this section provides a summary of issues identified during all the equipment Seismic Walkdowns. The table includes an update on the status of the corrective actions for the issues previously identified in the Reference 13 report. One additional concern, a missing fuse holder screw in a Bus 15 cubicle, was identified in completion of the deferred Seismic Walkdowns. Therefore, the equipment Seismic Walkdowns resulted in a total of ten concerns. The new concern was assessed for operability and it was concluded that the missing fuse holder screw would not prevent the associated equipment from performing its safety-related function(s). None of the concerns identified by the SWEs during the equipment Seismic Walkdowns were judged to be potentially adverse seismic conditions that could affect the safety-related functions of equipment.

5.3 AREA WALK-BYS The purpose of the Area Walk-Bys is to identify potentially adverse seismic conditions associated with other SSCs located in the vicinity of the SWEL items. Vicinity is generally defined as the room containing the SWEL item. If the room is very large (e.g.,

Turbine Hall), then the vicinity is identified based on judgment, e.g., on the order of about 35 feet from the SWEL item. Three Area Walk-Bys were completed after November 27, 2012. Therefore, a total of 39 Area Walk-bys were performed for MNGP.

The Area Walk-By Checklists (AWC) completed before November 27, 2012 were submitted in Appendix C of Reference 13. The three completed after November 27, 2012 are provided in Appendix C of this document.

The key examination factors that were considered during Area Walk-Bys include the following:

Anchorage conditions (if visible without opening equipment)

Significantly degraded equipment in the area A visual assessment (from the floor) of cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting (e.g., condition of supports or fill conditions of cable trays)

Potentially adverse seismic interactions including those that could cause flooding, spray, and fires in the area Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-5

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Other housekeeping items that could cause adverse seismic interaction (including temporary installations and equipment storage)

Seismic housekeeping was examined to meet site procedure (Reference 7).

Scaffold construction was inspected to meet site procedure (Reference 8).

The Area Walk-Bys are intended to identify adverse seismic conditions that are readily identified by visual inspection, without necessarily stopping to open cabinets or taking an extended look. If a potentially adverse seismic condition was identified during the Area Walk-By, then additional time was taken, as necessary, to evaluate adequately whether there was an adverse condition and to document any findings on the AWCs.

A separate AWC was filled out for each area inspected. The three AWCs completed during the refueling outage are provided in Appendix C of this report.

Additional details for evaluating the potential for adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding, spray, or fire in the area are provided in the following two subsections.

5.3.1 Seismically-Induced Flooding/Spray Interactions Seismically-induced flooding/spray interactions are the effect of possible ruptures of vessels or piping systems that could spray, flood or cascade water into the area where SWEL items are located. This type of seismic interaction was considered during the IPEEE program. Those prior evaluations were considered, as applicable, as information for the Area Walk-Bys.

Examples where seismically-induced flooding/spray interactions could occur include the following:

Fire protection piping with inadequate clearance around fusible-link sprinkler heads Non-ductile mechanical and threaded piping couplings can fail and lead to flooding or spray of equipment Long, unsupported spans of threaded fire protection piping Flexible headers with stiffly supported branch lines Non-Seismic Category I tanks The SWEs exercised their judgment to identify only those seismically-induced interactions that could lead to flooding or spray. Any seismically-induced flooding/spray interactions that were identified during the Area Walk-Bys are documented in Table 5-3 below, as applicable. No new seismically-induced flooding/spray interactions were identified during the Area Walk-bys completed during the refueling outage.

5.3.2 Seismically-Induced Fire Interactions Seismically-induced fire interactions can occur when equipment or systems containing hazardous/flammable material fail or rupture. This type of seismic interaction was considered during the IPEEE program. Those prior evaluations were considered, as applicable, as information for the Area Walk-Bys.

Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-6

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Examples where seismically-induced fire interactions could occur include the following:

Hazardous/flammable material stored in inadequately anchored drums, inadequately anchored shelves, or unlocked cabinets Natural gas lines and their attachment to equipment or buildings Bottles containing acetylene or similar flammable chemicals Hydrogen lines and bottles Another example where seismically-induced fire interaction could occur is when there is relative motion between a high voltage item of equipment (e.g., 4160 volt transformer) and an adjacent support structure when they have different foundations. This relative motion can cause high voltage busbars, which pass between the two, to short out against the grounded bus duct surrounding the busbars and cause a fire.

The Seismic Walkdown Engineers exercised their judgment to identify only those seismically-induced interactions that could lead to fires. Any seismically-induced fire interactions that were identified during the Area Walk-bys are documented in Table 5-3 below, as applicable. No new seismically-induced fire interactions were identified during the Area Walk-bys completed during the refueling outage.

5.3.3 Issues Identified during Area Walk-bys Table 5-3 at the end of this section provides a summary of the issues identified during the Area Walk-Bys. The table includes an update on the status of the corrective actions for the issues previously identified in the Reference 13 report. No new issues were identified as a result of the deferred Area Walk-Bys. Therefore, 16 issues were identified in total during the Area Walk-Bys and entered into the site's CAP. All of the previously identified concerns were assessed for operability and it was concluded that the issue would not prevent the associated equipment from performing its safety-related function(s). None of the concerns identified by the SWEs during the Area Walk-Bys were judged to be potentially adverse seismic conditions that could affect the safety-related functions of equipment in the area.

Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-7

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table 5-2: CAP Status for SWCs Equipment Description of Issue CAP No.

Status ID AO-4539 SWE's noted 2G4007 conduit 1346939 This condition was determined not used as anchor point to tie other to be an adverse condition, power cables using tie wraps. Also however, WR 83827 was written to noted electrical tape used to hold re-support the cable for AO-4539.

up power cables at connection point on valve.

BUS 15 A missing fuse holder screw was 1377713 CAP 1377713 was initiated to noticed in an upper cubicle of BUS address this concern and

15.

determined it was not an adverse seismic condition. The missing fuse holder screw was replaced under WO 440490.

CRD HCU W CST line is in contact with CRD 1259196 This condition is being addressed in structural column. WR 62289 was the work order process under WR initiated as part of CAP 1259196 62289 and WO 417791. It is not an to address rubbing.

adverse seismic concern.

D31 Plant drawing inaccurate with 1350165 The anchorage configuration was installation of anchors. SEWS determined to be acceptable as evaluation on anchors uses found. The plant drawings were correct "as found" configuration.

revised to match the anchorage configuration. EC 21029 completed this change.

D31 Plant drawing inaccurate with 1346890 The anchorage configuration was installation of anchors. SEWS determined to be acceptable as evaluation on anchors uses found. The plant drawings were correct "as found" configuration.

revised to match the anchorage configuration. EC 21029 completed this change.

P-203A Tall scaffold is constructed above 1347002 The engineer responsible for the pump. Verify the seismic scaffolding evaluations reviewed assessment of this scaffold.

the scaffold and determined it was adequately braced to prevent sliding and overturning during a seismic event..

Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-8

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table 5-2: CAP Status for SWCs Equipment Description of Issue CAP No.

Status ID P-209 There are eight 1" CIP anchor 1346272 The anchorage configuration was bolts per NX-8292-43 while the determined to be acceptable as walkdown only found six 1" CIP found. The plant drawings were anchor bolts.

revised to match the anchorage configuration. EC 21337 completed this change T-200 There is a discrepancy between 1347243 The anchorage configuration was Drawing NX7879-8-1 and what is determined to be acceptable as installed in the plant.

found. The plant drawings were revised to match the anchorage configuration. EC 20980 completed this change.

T-200 Verify the seismic assessment for 1347002 The engineer responsible for the scaffold near tank.

scaffolding evaluations reviewed the scaffold and determined it was adequately braced to prevent sliding and overturning during a seismic event. The condition was evaluated, and actions are complete.

V-SF-9 Drawing NX-9290-3 anchor bolt 1345975 As documented in the SEWs, there configuration does not match field.

is no seismic concern, however, the Bolt pattern does match 1995 drawing was updated to reflect field SEWS.

conditions. EC 22150 completed this change.

Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-9

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report ThbIA 5-3: CAP St~tu~ for AWC~

Area Walk-Description of Issue CAP No.

Status By Designation 2

Fire station contains victaulic couplings.

1346922 This line was determined to be Station is bolted to wall. FP line runs up adequately supported. This condition to roof of this floor and into the floor. No was evaluated in the Corrective sign of lateral bracing. Three victaulic Action Program and determined not couplings are spaced closely together. Is to be a seismic concern.

this line adequate for seismic loads? Line is charged with water. Line is also in contact with conduit N43158 and in contact with HVAC duct support. (SWEs could not see lateral support above for FP line).

7 In the Intake Structure, Sodium 1346885 This issue is being addressed by the Hypochlorite residue was found on valve work management process. It is not a SHC-28 as well as from the ceiling, seismic concern.

indicating a leak.

10 Cable tray MP404 & MP403 appears to 1345963 This issue has been previously be in contact with C-27.

analyzed and was determined not to be a seismic issue.

12 In the "A" RHR room, South wall, No. 11 1346654 This condition is being addressed by RHR pump seal cooling water supply the work management process. It is (RBCCW), line support, there is a U-bolt not an adverse seismic concern.

that is missing a nut and the other nut is not fully engaged. On a second support, one nut is not fully engaged and the other nut is partially missing.

12 Vertical tube support (3") has two anchor 1346643 This condition is being addressed in bolts into the floor. Nuts are not tight to the work management process. It is the base plates. Located next to RHR-not an adverse seismic concern.

18-1 handwheel.

14 Also compressed bottle on cart is within 1346030 Plant operations moved the cart to a few inches of MCC-312. Wheels are comply with housekeeping locked.

procedures. It is not a seismic concern.

15 Reddish deposit noted on one of two 1346642 The bolts were cleaned under WR anchor bolts on vertical support of 82134 and found to be in good structural angle supporting two pipelines, condition. It is not a seismic concern.

The lines are 1" diameter connecting SV-WR 82134 is complete.

2849 to contaminated drain line and RCIC - (14) (2" diameter line) - "To RCIC pump suction". SWE's cannot judge condition of one anchor bolt that is covered over with corrosion deposits.

Other anchor bolt is not corroded.

19 Tie wrap used to anchor electrical cable 1346939 This condition was determined not to to conduit 2G4010.

be a condition adverse to quality and it is not a seismic concern. WR 83827 and WO 472742 were initiated to re-support the extra cable length for AO-4539.

Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-10

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table 5-3: CAP Status for AWCs Area Walk-Description of Issue CAP No.

Status By Designation 20 Cable ties are fastening a flexible conduit 1346170 This condition was determined not to to a cable tray support.

be a condition adverse to quality and it is not a seismic concern. This condition was evaluated under AR 1346170 and is complete.

25 At the SBLC pump and tank area, there 1347002 The engineer responsible for is a large amount of scaffolding, some of scaffolding evaluations reviewed the which is one level (-7' high), some of scaffold and determined it was which has two levels (-14' high). Are the adequately braced to prevent sliding lateral attachments and overturning and overturning during a seismic restraints adequate to achieve 2 over 1?

event. This action is complete.

27 Hoist is resting on LC-101 480V Load 1349068 It was determined not to be an Center. It also poses an impact hazard, adverse seismic condition. This and has open s-hooks.

condition was evaluated under AR 1349068 and is complete.

27 Fire extinguisher near non safety 4.16kV 1349068 It was determined not to be an 4kVB-06 cubicle is an interaction hazard adverse seismic condition. This as it can fall off hook.

condition was evaluated under AR 1349068 and is complete.

27 Hoist restraint on non-essential LC-109 1349068 It was determined not to be an should be replaced with a restraint more adverse seismic condition. This appropriate than wire.

condition was evaluated under AR 1349068 and is complete.

28 Lighting is pendant-hung and can swing 1349068 It was determined not to be an into MCC-133B. Cable trays are adverse seismic condition. This supported by strut systems which are condition was evaluated under AR adequate.

1349068 and is complete.

28 Pendant light is an interaction hazard to 1349068 It was determined not to be an conduit connected to MCC-133A.

adverse seismic condition. This condition was evaluated under AR 1349068 and is complete.

31 FP line is in contact with DO fuel line.

1345971 This condition was found to be acceptable as any potential failures would not have any negative impact on the ability of the plant to safely shutdown. This condition was evaluated under AR 1345971 and is complete.

Section 5.0 - Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5-11

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 6

Licensing Basis Evaluations Section 5, Seismic Licensing Basis Evaluation, of Reference 1 provides a detailed process to perform and document seismic licensing basis evaluations of SSCs identified when potentially adverse seismic conditions are identified during the equipment Seismic Walkdowns or Area Walk-Bys. The process provides a means to identify, evaluate and document how the identified potentially adverse seismic condition meets the site's seismic licensing basis without entering the condition into the site's Corrective Action Program (CAP). Further, the process directs that if a condition cannot be readily shown to meet the seismic licensing basis, then the identified condition should be entered into the station's CAP where it will be determined that the condition does or does not meet the seismic licensing basis.

All potentially adverse seismic conditions that were identified during the equipment Seismic Walkdowns or Area Walk-Bys were entered into the station's CAP. Therefore, no seismic licensing basis evaluations were completed in accordance with industry's understanding of the guidance documented in Section 5 of Reference 1 and the training provided by EPRI for the performing the Seismic Walkdowns. Tables 5-2 and 5-3 at the end of Section 5 of this report, and at the end of Section 5 of the Reference 13 report, provide a summary of the issues identified in both the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys for the walkdowns reported in the Reference 1 report and for the deferred walkdowns reported in this supplement/update.

Section 6.0 - Licensing Basis Evaluations 6-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 7

IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report In the NRC 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter (Reference 6), the NRC requested that licensees provide a list of plant-specific vulnerabilities (including any seismic anomalies, outliers, or other findings) identified by the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) and a description of the actions taken to eliminate or reduce them (including their completion dates), as part of NTTF Recommendation 2.3 - Seismic.

Section 7, IPEEE Vulnerabilities, of Reference 1 provides guidance for addressing and reporting the evaluations related to the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) program and the actions taken in response to the vulnerabilities that were identified during that program. According to the guidance in Reference 1, the submittal report should describe the actions taken to eliminate or reduce the IPEEE seismic vulnerabilities, and the date the actions were documented as complete. Table 7-1 and the following paragraphs provide this information.

NRC Generic Letter 88-20, Supplement No. 4, "Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) for Severe Accident Vulnerabilities," dated June 28, 1991 (Reference 9),

requested licensees to complete an IPEEE. The purpose of the IPEEE is to (1) develop appreciation of severe accident behavior, (2) understand the most likely severe accident sequences that occur under full power conditions, (3) gain a qualitative understanding of the overall likelihood of core damage and radioactive material release, and (4) to identify potential plant enhancements to reduce the overall likelihood of core damage and radioactive material releases. By letter dated March 1, 1995 (Reference 5), Monticello forwarded the report documenting the results of the Monticello Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) as requested by Generic Letter 88-20. In addition to seismic events, this report addressed internal fires, high winds, floods and other credible external events. By letter dated November 20, 1995 (Reference 11),

Monticello submitted revised information concerning the evaluation of internal fires as well as the seismic event evaluation.

The NRC review of information for the submittals related to IPEEE determined that no vulnerabilities associated with aspects of external events were identified and that the staff considers these issues resolved for Monticello (Reference 10). The NRC Staff made this conclusion on the basis that (1) the US1 A-46 program would upgrade the plant to the SSE level, and (2) assuming the failure of all seismic equipment list (SEL) equipment that were not screened at the review-level earthquake level, the plant would still be able to achieve safe shutdown. The following three plant improvements, which were stated by MNGP to be made as part of the US1 A-46 program, were necessary in order to make the statement that the plant would be capable of safe shutdown after an SSE:

" Fastening of U-bolts on diesel generator starting air receivers.

Eliminating the potential impact of an HVAC duct on a relay panel.

Section 7.0 - IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report 7-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Upgrading light fixtures in the control room to have a means of anchorage independent of the T-bar supports.

Table 7-1 below lists the resolutions for these three IPEEE plant improvements, and when these resolutions were completed. Of the three IPEEE improvements listed in the table below, the DG 11 and DG 12 air receivers were selected for MNGP SWEL 1. The equipment tags for the air receivers are T-79D and T-80A, respectively. Anchorage configuration verifications were performed for both of these components, and no adverse seismic conditions were identified. In addition to performing Seismic Walkdowns on the 11 DG and 12 DG air receivers, an Area Walk-by was performed in the cable spreading room. No seismic issues for the C-32 relay panel were identified as a result of the Area Walk-by.

Table 7-1: Monticello IPEEE Seismic Improvements Equipment Potential Failure Mode Resolution Date Description Completed Analysis determined that a torque value of 15 ft-lb would apply adequate tension to assure that friction forces DG 11 and 12 Air Sliding-induced pipe failure. Pre-would adequately restrain the tanks in December of Receivers tension of U-bolts not reliable, an axial direction.

1996 Work Order 9603068 and Work Order 9603069 applied a torque value of 15 ft-lb to the U-bolts.

Work Order 9602745 and modification 96Q035, Resolution of SQUG Outliers, trimmed the flanges of the HVAC duct Relay Panel C32 Relay chatter due to impact with so that it could not make contact with December of HVAC duct behind panel.

the panels. This eliminated the 1996 potential for the duct to impact the panels and cause essential relays to chatter.

It was originally thought that all of the lights were not safety wired, however when trying to resolve this outlier it was found that the 2'x4' lights directly above the main control boards were supported from the ceiling by rods.

Ceiling collapse. Ceiling system The other ceiling lights were not Control Room unbraced, vulnerable T-bar independently supported from the December of Ceiling connections, light fixtures not ceiling.

1996 safety-wired.

Work Order 9602920 and Modification 96Q035, Resolution of SQUG Outliers, installed safety wires on all of the lights over the listed panels to assure that they are independently supported and will not be a seismic interaction hazard.

Section 7.0 - IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report 7-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 8

Peer Review A peer review team consisting of two individuals was assembled and peer reviews were performed in accordance with Section 6, Peer Review, of Reference 1. The Peer Review process for the deferred walkdowns included the following activities:

• Review of the selection of SSCs included on the SWEL

• Review of a sample of the checklists prepared for the deferred Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys

• Review of Licensing basis evaluations, as applicable

• Review of the decisions for entering the potentially adverse conditions into the CAP process

• Review of the updated submittal report The peer reviews were performed independently from this report. The summary Peer Review Report is provided in Appendix D of this report.

Section 8.0 - Peer Review 8-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report 9

References

1)

EPRI Technical Report 1025286, "Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic," dated June 2012.

2)

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR),

Revision 29.

3)

NSPM (M.A. Schimmel) Letter to NRC, "Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant's 120-Day Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f)

Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendations 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident," dated July 9, 2012.

4)

NRC Letter, "Endorsement of Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Draft Report 1025286, 'Seismic Walkdown Guidance,"' dated May 31, 2012, ADAMS Accession No. ML12145A529.

5)

Northern States Power (W.J. Hill) Letter to NRC, "Submittal of Monticello Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) Report," dated March 1, 1995.

6)

NRC (E Leeds and M Johnson) Letter, "Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident" dated March 12, 2012, ADAMS Accession No. ML12053A340.

7)

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant procedure 4 AWI-04.02.01, Housekeeping, Revision 21.

8)

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant procedure 4 AWI-04.05.10, Scaffolding Controls, Revision 8.

9)

Supplement 4 of Generic Letter 88-20, "Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) for Severe Accident Vulnerabilities," issued June of 1991.

10) NRC (C.F. Lyon) Letter to NSP (M.F. Hammer), "Review of Monticello Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) Submittal (TAC No. M83644)," dated April 17, 2000.

11) NSP (W.J. Hill) Letter to NRC, "Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) Report, Revision 1; Seismic Analysis, Revision 0 and Internal Fires Analysis, Revision I (TAC M83644)," dated November 20, 1995.

Section 9.0 - References 9-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report

12) NSP (W.J. Hill) Letter to NRC, "Response to Supplement 1.to Generic Letter 87-02, Submittal of USI A-46 Seismic Evaluation Report (TAC M69460)," dated November 20, 1995.

13) NSPM Letter to NRC, "MNGP Final Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident," dated November 27, 2012, ADAMS Accession No. ML12342A025.

Section 9.0 - References 9-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report A

Equipment Lists Appendix A contains the equipment lists that were developed as part of the equipment selection for the SWEL. Table A-2 from the Reference 13 report has been updated to include the substitution of item C-17 for the item C-03, and the deletion of G31 and C-93.

The substitution and deletion of the SWEL 1 items are explained in Section 4.3 of this report. Note that MNGP did not identify any items which required walkdowns for SWEL 2, so a Base List 2 and SWEL 2 are not provided in this appendix.

The following contents are found in Appendix A:

Table A -I, M onticello Base List 1.................................................................... A -2 Table A -2, M onticello SW EL 1....................................................................... A-32 Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report A. 1 Equipment Selection - Base List 1 Table A-1 is a list of the equipment resulting from Screen #3 and entering Screen #4.

The screens utilized for selecting equipment for the SWEL is described in Section 4 of this report. This list of initial equipment is called "Base List 1," per the guidance in Reference 1.

Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Safety2 System3 Tag Function 152-503 4KV BREAKER P-202C (03) Medium Voltage 3, 4, 5 4KV Switchgear 152-504 4KV BREAKER P-202A (03) Medium Voltage 3, 4, 5 4KV Switchgear 152-505 4KV TO P-208A 11 Core Spray Pump (03) Medium Voltage 3

4KV Switchgear 152-605 4KV TO P-208B 12 Core Spray Pump (03) Medium Voltage 3

4KV Switchgear AO-2-2-1 1A 11 RECIRC PUMP SEAL LEAKOFF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 5 REC AO-2-2-11B 12 RECIRC PUMP SEAL LEAKOFF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3,5 REC AO-2377 ALT N2 B (21) Tanks and Heat 5

AN2 Exchangers AO-2377 DW & TORUS PURGE OTBD ISOL (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT AO-2378 ALT N2 A (21) Tanks and Heat 5

AN2 Exchangers AO-2378 TORUS PURGE INBD ISOL (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT AO-2379 VACUUM RELIEF DAMPER (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT AO-2380 VACUUM RELIEF DAMPER (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT AO-2381 ALT N2 A (21) Tanks and Heat 5

AN2 Exchangers AO-2381 DW PURGE INBD ISOL (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety 3

Tag Function2 System AO-2383 ALT N2 A (21) Tanks and Heat 5

AN2 Exchangers AO-2383 TORUS PURGE EXH INBD (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT AO-2386 DW PURGE EXH INBD (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT AO-2386 ALT N2 A (21) Tanks and Heat 5

AN2 Exchangers AO-2387 ALT N2 B (21) Tanks and Heat 5

AN2 Exchangers AO-2387 DW OTBD VENT (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT AO-2-80A INBOARD MSIV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2, 3, 5 MST AO-2-80B INBOARD MSIV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 5 MST AO-2-80C INBOARD MSIV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 5 MST AO-2-80D INBOARD MSIV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 5 MST AO-2-86A A MSIV OUTBD (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 5 MST AO-2-86B B MISV OUTBD (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 5 MST AO-2-86C C MSIV OUTBD (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 5 MST AO-2-86D D MSIV OUTBD (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 5 MST AO-2896 ALT N2 B (21) Tanks and Heat 5

AN2 Exchangers AO-2896 TORUS PURGE EXH OTBD ISOL (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT AO-4539 HARD PIPE VENT INBOARD ISOLATION (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 5

PCT VALVE AV-3147 11 RHR SW PUMP P-1 09A AUTO AIR (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4,5 RSW VENT AV-3148 14 RHR SW PUMP P-1 09D AUTO AIR (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4, 5 RSW VENT Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-3

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Safety 2 System3 Tag Function AV-3149 13 RHR SW PUMP P-109C AUTO AIR (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4,5 RSW VENT AV-3150 1 ESW PUMP P-i 0A ARGE AIR (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4,5 RSW VENT AV-3156 12 ESW PUMP P-1i1 B DISCHARGE AIR (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3,4 ESW VENT AV-3156 12 ESW PUMP P-111 C DISCHARGE AIR (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5SW VENT VENT AV-4026

~~VENT (7

li-prtdVle

,4 S

BPM-1, DC-BOOSTER PUMP MOTOR (05) Horizontal Pumps 1, 3,4,5 DGN Location: 11 DG BPM-1, Location:

DC-BOOSTER PUMP MOTOR (05) Horizontal Pumps 3, 4, 5 DGN 12 DG BPM-2, Location:

DC-BOOSTER PUMP MOTOR (05) Horizontal Pumps 3, 4, 5 DGN 11 DG BPM-2, Location:

DC-BOOSTER PUMP MOTOR (05) Horizontal Pumps 3, 4, 5 DGN 12 DG BUS 15 4160 SWITCHGEAR (03) Medium Voltage 1,2,3,4,5 4KV Switchgear BUS 16 4160 SWITCHGEAR (03) Medium Voltage 1, 3,4, 5 4KV Switchgear RX AND CTMT COOLING AND ISOL (20) Instrumentation and C-03 BENCH BOARD Control Panels and Cabinets 2, 3, 4, 5 MSC C-04 RWC RECIRCULATING BENCH BOARD (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 1, 3 MSC C-05 REACTOR CONTROL BENCH BOARD (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 1, 3 MSC C-06 FEEDWATER AND CONDENSATE (20) Instrumentation and NONE MSC BENCHBOARD Control Panels and Cabinets Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-4

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List 1 Equipment Description Class Safety uncon System3 Tag Fnto C-07 TURBINE BENCH BOARD (20) Instrumentation and NONE MSC Control Panels and Cabinets C-08 GENERATOR AUXILLARY POWER (20) Instrumentation and NONE MSC BENCH BOARD Control Panels and Cabinets C-121 JET PUMP INSTRUMENT RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 3

REC C-122 JET PUMP INSTRUMENT RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 3

REC C-129A RHR INSTRUMENT RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 3, 4, 5 RHR C-129B RHR INSTRUMENT RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 3, 4, 5 RHR C-15 CHANNEL A PRIMARY ISOL AND RPS (20) Instrumentation and 1,3,5 PPS VERTICAL BOARD Control Panels and Cabinets 1

C-17 CHANNEL B ISOL AND RPS VERTICAL (20) Instrumentation and BOARD Control Panels and Cabinets 1, 3, 5 PPS C-18 FEEDWATER AND RECIRCULATION (20) Instrumentation and NONE CFW Control Panels and Cabinets C-19 PROCESS INSTRUMENT VERTICAL (20) Instrumentation and NONE CMP BOARD Control Panels and Cabinets C-20 TURBINE PLANT INSTRUMENT (20) Instrumentation and NONE MSC VERTICAL BOARD Control Panels and Cabinets C-21 NUCLEAR STEAM SUPPLY (20) Instrumentation and NONE RPV TEMPERATURE RECORDING Control Panels and Cabinets C-242 EFT NON-1 E PANEL (20) Instrumentation and NONE EFT Control Panels and Cabinets C-243A EFT FLOW CONTROLLERS PANEL.DIV (20) Instrumentation and NONE EFT I

Control Panels and Cabinets C-244B EFT FLOW CONTROLLERS PANEL DIV (20) Instrumentation and NONE EFT II Control Panels and Cabinets (20) Instrumentation and 2

APR C-253A SRV Panel Control Panels and Cabinets (20) Instrumentation and C-253B SRV Panel Control Panels and Cabinets 2

APR Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-5

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List 1 Equipment Description

Class, Safety StM 3

Tag Function2 yse C-253D DIV 11 LOLO SET BYPASS PANEL (20) Instrumentation and 2

APR Control Panels and Cabinets C-27 RPIS CABINET C-27 (20) Instrumentation and NONE RPI Control Panels and Cabinets C-289A SPOTMOS PANEL (20) Instrumentation and NONE PCT Control Panels and Cabinets C-289B SPOTMOS PANEL (20) Instrumentation and NONE PCT Control Panels and Cabinets C-290A SRV BLOWDOWN INST PANEL (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 3 APR C-290B SRV BLOWDOWN INST PANEL (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 3 APR C-292 ASDS BENCHBOARD (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 1, 2, 3,4, 5 ASD C-292 INSTRUMENT RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 1, 2, 3, 5 ASD C-293 ASDS RELAY PANEL (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 1,2, 3, 5 ASD C-30 RCIC CABLE SPR RM CONTROL (20) Instrumentation and 3

RCl PANEL Control Panels and Cabinets C-303A ECCS DIV I ANALOG TRIP SYSTEM (20) Instrumentation and 3

PPS Control Panels and Cabinets C-303B ECCS DIV II ANALOG TRIP SYSTEM (20) Instrumentation and 3

PPS Control Panels and Cabinets C-304A RPS-A1 AND ISOLATION ANALOG TRIP (20) Instrumentation and UNIT Control Panels and Cabinets 1, 5 PPS C-304B RPS-B1 AND ISOLATION ANALOG TRIP (20) Instrumentation and UNIT Control Panels and Cabinets 1,5 PPS C-304C RPS-A2 AND ISOLATION ANALOG TRIP (20) Instrumentation and 1,5 PPS UNIT Control Panels and Cabinets C-304D RPS-B2 AND ISOLATION ANALOG TRIP (20) Instrumentation and UNIT Control Panels and Cabinets 1, 5 PPS C-311 SRV BACKUP AIR SUPPLY (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 2, 3 APR Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-6

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Safety System3 Tag Function2 C-32 A RHR, CORE SPRAY, ADS CONTROL (20) Instrumentation and PANEL Control Panels and Cabinets 2, 3, 5 RHR C-33 B RHR, CORE SPRAY, ADS CONTROL (20) Instrumentation and PANEL Control Panels and Cabinets 2, 3, 5 RHR (20) Instrumentation and C-39 HPCI RELAY PANEL Control Panels and Cabinets 3

HPC C-41 INBOARD ISOLATION RELAY PANEL (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 3, 5 C-42 OUTBOARD ISOLATION RELAY PANEL (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 3, 5 C-55 RX LEVEL & PRESSURE RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 1, 2, 3, 5 RPV C-56 RX LEVEL & PRESSURE RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 1,2,3,5 RPV C-65 Fuel Pool Vent Control Panel (20) Instrumentation and NONE HTV Control Panels and Cabinets (20) Instrumentation and NONE FPC C-88 Fuel Pool Control Panel Control Panels and Cabinets C-91 11 DIESEL GEN ELECTRICAL (20) Instrumentation and 1,3,4,5 DGN Control Panels and Cabinets (20) Instrumentation and C-92 12 DIESEL GEN ELECTRICAL Control Panels and Cabinets 3 4, 5 DGN (20) Instrumentation and 1,3,4,5 DGN C-93 11 DIESEL GEN CONTROL Control Panels and Cabinets 412 DIESEL GEN CONTROL (20) Instrumentation and C-94 12IESLENONTOControl Panels and Cabinets 3 4, 5 DGN CRD HCU E CRD HYDRALIC CONTROL UNITS EAST (18) Instruments on Racks 1

CRD SIDE CR0 HU E

~CRD HYDRALIC CONTROL UNITS EAST CRD HCU E FV SIDE (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1

CRD CR0 HCU W CRD HYDRALIC CONTROL UNITS (18) Instruments on Racks 1

CR0 WEST SIDE Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-7

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment' Description Class Safety System 3 Tag Function CRD HCU W FV CRD HYDRALIC CONTROL UNITS (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1

CRD WEST SIDE CRD16A SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME (21) Tanks and Heat 1,3 CR0 Exchangers 1

R CRD16B SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME (21) Tanks and Heat Exchangers 1, 3 CR0 CV-1728 11 RHR HX RHRSW OUTLET (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4, 5 RSW CV-1729 12 RHR HX RHRSW OUTLET (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4, 5 RSW CV-1994 11 RHR PUMP MINIMUM FLOW (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3,4,5 RHR CV-1995 12 RHR PUMP MINIMUM FLOW (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR CV-1996 13 RHR PUMP MINIMUM FLOW (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3,4, 5 RHR CV-1997 14 RHR PUMP MINIMUM FLOW (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR CV-2043 HPCI STEAM LINE DRAIN TRAP (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3

HPC BYPASS CV-2046A STEAM LINE DRN TO MAIN CDSR (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3

HPC CV-2046B STEAM LINE DRN TO MAIN CDSR (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3

HPC CV-2369 FLANGE LEAK OFF CONTROL VALVE (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3

RPV CV-2370 FLANGE LEAK OFF CONTROL VALVE (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3

RPV CV-2371 REACTOR HEAD VENT TO CRW (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3

RPV CV-3-32A WEST SDV VENT (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1, 3 CRH CV-3-32B EAST SDV VENT (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1, 3 CRH CV-3-32C WEST SDV VENT (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1, 3 CRH CV-3-32D EAST SDV VENT (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1,3 CRH CV-3-33A SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME DRAIN (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1,3 CRH LINES Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-8

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety 2 System3 Tag Function SCRAM DISCHARGE VOLUME DRAIN CV-3-33B LINES (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1, 3 CRH CV-3-33C WEST SDV DRAIN (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1, 3 CRH CV-3-33D EAST SDV DRAIN (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 1, 3 CRH D1

1. 11 BATTERY 125VDC (15) Batteries on Racks 1,2,3,4, 5 125 D10 125 VDC CHARGER FOR #11 BATT (16) Battery Chargers and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 125 Inverters DIV 2 125/250 VDC DISTRIBUTION D100 PANEL (14) Distribution Panels 1,2, 3,4, 5 250 D101 DIV 2 125/250 VDC ALARM SYSTEM (20) Instrumentation and PANEL Control Panels and Cabinets 3, 4, 5 250 D102 DIV 1 125/250 VDC ALARM SYSTEM (20) Instrumentation and 3,4,5 250 PANEL Control Panels and Cabinets D11 DIV I 125VDC DISTRIBUTION CENTER (14) Distribution Panels 1, 2,3,4, 5 125 D111 DIV 11125 VDC PANEL (14) Distribution Panels 3,4,5 125 D2

1. 12 BATTERY 125VDC (15) Batteries on Racks 3,4, 5 125 D20 125 VDC Charger (16) Battery Chargers and 3,4,5 125 Inverters D21 DIV 1125 VDC DISTRIBUTION PANEL (14) Distribution Panels 3, 4, 5 125 D211 DIV II 125 VDC PANEL (14) Distribution Panels 3,4,5 125 D31 DIV 1125/250 VDC DISTRIBUTION (14) Distribution Panels 1,2, 3,4, 5 250 PANEL D33 125 VDC DISTRIBUTION CENTER (14) Distribution Panels 3, 4, 5 125 D3A

1. 13 (DIV 1) 125/25OVDC BATTERY "A" (15) Batteries on Racks 1,2,3,4, 5 250 D3B

1. 13 (DIV 1) 125/25OVDC BATTERY "B" (15) Batteries on Racks 1,2, 3,4, 5 250 D40 125 VDC Charger (16) Battery Chargers and 3,4,5 125 Inverters Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-9

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Safety System3 Tag Function D52 CHARGER, D3A (13) BATTERY (16) Battery Chargers and 1,2,3,4, 5 250 Inverters D53 CHARGER, D36 (13) BATTERY (16) Battery Chargers and 3,4,5 250 Inverters D54 CHARGER, SWING D3A,D3B (13)

(16) Battery Chargers and 3, 4, 5 250 BATTERY Inverters D6A

1. 16 (DIV 2) 125/25OVDC BATTERY "A" (15) Batteries on Racks 3, 4, 5 250 D6B

1. 16 (DIV 2) 125/25OVDC BATTERY "B" (15) Batteries on Racks 3,4,5 250 D70 CHARGER, D6B (16) BATTERY (16) Battery Chargers and 1, 2,3,4, 5 250 Inverters D80 CHARGER, D6A (16) BATTERY (16) Battery Chargers and 3,4,5 250 Inverters D90 CHARGER, SWING D6A,D6B (16) Battery Chargers and 3,4,5 250 (16)BATTERY Inverters DM-8089A1 V-SF-9 SUPPLY DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 1,_3,4,5 HTV DM-8089A2 V-SF-9 SUPPLY DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 3,4, 5 HTV DM-8089A3 V-SF-9 SUPPLY DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 3, 4, 5 HTV DM-808913 V-SF-9 EXHAUST DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 3, 4, 5 HTV DM-8089B12 V-SF-9 EXHAUST DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 3, 4, 5 HTV DM-8089J1 V-SF-10 SUPPLY DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 1,3, 4, 5 HTV DM-8089J2 V-SF-10 SUPPLY DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 3,4, 5 HTV DM-8089J3 V-SF-10 SUPPLY DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 3, 4, 5 HTV DM-8089K1 V-SF-10 EXHAUST DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 3,4, 5 HTV DM-8089K2 V-SF-10 EXHAUST DAMPER (10) Air Handlers 3, 4, 5 HTV DPT-10-91A 11 RHR HX TUBE/SHELL DP CONTROL (18) Instruments on Racks 4, 5 RSW DPT-10-91B HR HX 12 TUBE/SHELL DP CONTROL (18) Instruments on Racks 4, 5 RSW Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-1I0

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Safety System3 Tag Function2 DPT-7845A RHR 11 PUMP DIP (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RHR DPT-7845C RHR 13 PUMP D/P (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RHR E-200A 11 RHR HEAT EXCHANGER (21) Tanks and Heat 4 5 RHR Exchangers E-200B RHRI RHR B HXER (21) Tanks and Heat 4,5 RHR Exchangers FE-10-121C RHR PUMP 13 MIN FLOW ELEMENT (00) Other 3, 4, 5 RHR FI-10-136B FLOW INDICATOR RHR (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RHR FI-14-50B CS LOOP 12 FLOW (18) Instruments on Racks NONE CSP FI-4104 CORE SPRAY FLOW B (18) Instruments on Racks NONE CSP FI-4295B 14 ESW PUMP EFT-ESW HEADER (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RSW FLOW INDICATOR FMT-1 (DG-12) 12 DG FUEL TRANSFER PUMP #1 (05) Horizontal Pumps 3, 4, 5 DGN FMT-2 (DG-1 1) 11 DG FUEL TRANSFER PUMP #2 (05) Horizontal Pumps 3, 4, 5 DGN FMT-2 (DG-12) 12 DG FUEL TRANSFER PUMP #2 (05) Horizontal Pumps 3, 4, 5 DGN FT-10-109B RHRJ RHR B LPCl INJ FLOW (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RHR FT-10-11 1A RHR LOOP A CONT COOLING FLOW (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RHR FT-10-97A RHR HX 11 SW INLET FLOW (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RSW FT-10-97B RHR HX 12 SW INLET FLOW (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RSW FT-14-40B CS LOOP 12 FLOW (00) Other NONE CSP FT-23-82 HPCI PUMP FLOW TRANSMITTER (18) Instruments on Racks 3

HPC FT-6-51A FW MST FLOW "A" TO LVL CONTROL (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RLC FT-6-51 B FW MST FLOW "B" TO LVL CONTROL (18) Instruments on Racks 3, 5 RLC FT-6-51C FW MST FLOW "C" TO LVL CONTROL (18) Instruments on Racks 3, 5 RLC Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-1 1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description futio 2 System3 Tag Class 1 Fetion FT-6-51 D FW MST FLOW "D" TO LVL CONTROL (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RLC FY-4106 RHR CONTAINMENT COOLING FLOW (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RHR G31

1. 11 DG NEUTRAL GROUNDING (04) Transformers 1,3,4,5 DGN CABINET G-3A 11 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR (17) Engine-Generators 1, 3,4, 5 DGN G-3B 12 EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR (17) Engine-Generators 1, 3,4, 5 DGN G41

1. 12 DG NEUTRAL GROUNDING (04) Transformers 3,4,5 DGN CABINET IR-5A-K30A RACK FOR 5A-K3YA & 5A-K3OB (18) Instruments on Racks 1

PPS RELAYS IR-DPT-7845A RHR 11/13 PUMP D/P RACK (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RHR IR-FS-10-121A RHR PUMP 11 MIN FLOW CONTROL (18) Instruments on Racks 3,4,5 RHR RACK IR-FS-10-121B RHR PUMP 12 MIN FLOW CONTROL (18) Instruments on Racks 3, 4, 5 RHR RACK IR-FT-10-111A RHR LOOP A CONT COOLING FLOW (18) Instruments on Racks NONE RHR INSTR RACK IR-LS-7428A SDV WATER LEVEL HI RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 1, 3,5 CRH IR-LS-7428C SDV WATER LEVEL HI RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 1, 3, 5 CRH IR-PCV-4879 ALT N2 A RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 IR-PCV-4881 ALT N2 B RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 IR-PI-3051 TORUS INSTRUMENT RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 5

PCT IR-RB1001-01 Fuel Pool Instrument Rack (18) Instruments on Racks NONE FPC IR-SV-3-29 EAST/WEST SDV VENT/DRN VLVS AIR (18) Instruments on Racks 3,5 CRH SUPPLY SOL VLV RACK IR-SV-3-31C OUTBOARD VENT/AR RPS CH A RACK (18) Instruments on Racks 1, 3, 5 CRH Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-12

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class 1 Safety 2 System3 Tag Function J1010 SECURITY JUNCTION BOX (14) Distribution Panels NONE SIN J1012 SECURITY JUNCTION BOX (14) Distribution Panels NONE SIN J1013 SECURITY JUNCTION BOX (14) Distribution Panels NONE SIN K-10A RHRSW AUX AIR COMP (12) Air Compressors 4,5 RSW K-10B B RHR AUX AIR COMPRESSOR (12) Air Compressors 4, 5 RSW 11 EDG ELECTRIC/DIESEL AIR K-8A STARTER COMPRESSOR #1 (12) Air Compressors 1,3, 4, 5 DGN K-8B 11 ELECTRIC AIR STARTER (12) Air Compressors 1,3,4,5 DGN COMPRESSOR #2 K-9A 12 ELECTRIC AIR STARTER (12) Air Compressors 3,4,5 DGN

. COMPRESSOR #1.

12 EDG ELECTRIC/DIESEL AIR K-9B STARTER COMPRESSOR #2 (12) Air Compressors 3, 4, 5 DGN LC-103 480 V LOAD CENTER (02) Low Voltage Switchgear 1, 3, 4, 5 480 LC-104 480 V LOAD CENTER (02) Low Voltage Switchgear 1, 3, 4, 5 480 LT-2-3-72A LO LO REACTOR LVL ECCS INITIATION (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 3 RPV LT-2-3-72B LO LO REACTOR LVL ECCS INITIATION (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 3 RPV LT-2-3-72C LO LO REACTOR LVL ECCS INITIATION (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 3 RPV LT-2-3-72D LO LO REACTOR LVL ECCS INITIATION (18) Instruments on-Racks 2, 3 RPV LT-2996 TORUS WATER LEVEL (18) Instruments on Racks 5

PCT LT-7338A TORUS WIDE RANGE LEVEL (18) Instruments on Racks NONE PCT LT-7338B TORUS WIDE RANGE LEVEL (18) Instruments on Racks NONE PCT MCC-133A 480 V MCC (B33A)

(01) Motor Control Centers 1, 3, 4, 5 480 MCC-1 33B 480V MCC (01) Motor Control Centers 1, 3, 4, 5 480 Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-1 3

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List 1 Equipment Description Class 1 Safety Tag Function2 System3 MCC-134 480 V MCC (B34)

(01) Motor Control Centers 1, 3, 4, 5 480 MCC-142A 480 V MCC (B42A)

(01) Motor Control Centers 1, 3, 4, 5 480 MCC-142B 480V MCC (01) Motor Control Centers NONE 480 MCC-143A 480 V MCC (B43A)

(01) Motor Control Centers 1, 3,4, 5 480 MCC-143B 480V MCC (01) Motor Control Centers 1,3, 4, 5 480 MCC-144 480 V MCC (B44)

(01) Motor Control Centers 1, 3,4, 5 480 MCC-311 DIV 1 (RCIC) 250V DC MOTOR (01) Motor Control Centers 3

250 CONTROL CENTER 311 MCC-312 DIV 2 (HPCI) 250V DC MOTOR (01) Motor Control Centers 3

250 CONTROL CENTER 312 DIV 1 250V DC MOTOR CONTROL MCC-313 CENTER 313 (01) Motor Control Centers 2,3,5 250 MO-1741 11 CS PUMP TORUS SUCTION (08) Motor-Operated and CSP Solenoid-Operated Valves (08) Motor-Operated and CSP MO-1742 12 CS PUMP TORUS SUCTION Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-1749 11 CORE SPRAY TEST LINE TO TORUS (08) Motor-Operated and CSP Solenoid-Operated Valves (08) Motor-Operated and CSP MO-i1750 12 CS TEST LINE TO TORUS Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-1751 11 CS INJ OUTBOARD ISOLATION VLV (08) Motor-Operated and CSP Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-1752 12 CS INJ OUTBOARD ISOLATION (08) Motor-Operated and CSP Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-1753 11 CS INJ INBOARD ISOLATION VLV (08) Motor-Operated and CSP Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-1 754 12 CS INJ INBOARD ISOLATION VALVE (08) Motor-Operated and CSP Solenoid-Operated Valves Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-14

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class 1 Safety 2 System3 Tag Function (08) Motor-Operated and MO-1986 11 RHR SUCTION FROM TORUS Solenoid-Operated Valves 3

RHR (08) Motor-Operated and 3,5 RHR MO-i1987 B RHRI TORUS SUCTION Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-1988 11 RHR SHUTDOWN COOLING (08) Motor-Operated and 4

RHR SUCTION Solenoid-Operated Valves (08) Motor-Operated and 4

RHR MO-i1989 RHRI B SDC SUCTION Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2002 1I RHR HX BYPASS (08) Motor-Operated and 3

RHR Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2003 RHRIRHR B HXER BYPASS (08) Motor-Operated and 3

RHR Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2006 11 RHR DISCHARGE TO TORUS (08) Motor-Operated and 5

RHR Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2007 RHR/RHR B DISCH TO TORUS (08) Motor-Operated and 5

RHR Solenoid-Operated Valves (08) Motor-Operated and 5

RHR MO-2008 TORUS COOLING ISOL Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2009 RHRJ RHR B TORUS COOLING TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 5

RHR RTN Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2010 TORUS SPRAY VLV (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 4, 5 RHR MO-2011 RHRP RHR B TORUS SPRAY INJ (08) Motor-Operated and 5

RHR Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2012 11 RHR LPCI OUTBOARD INJECTION (08) Motor-Operated and 3,4 RHR Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2013 RHR/RHR B LPCI INJ OUTBD (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 3

RHR MO-2014 11 RHR LPCI INBOARD INJECTION (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 3, 4 RHR MO-2015 RHR B LPCl INJ INBOARD (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 3,4 RHR Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-15

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Safety 2 System3 Tag Function MO-2020 11 RHR CONTAINMENT SPRAY (08) Motor-Operated and OUTBOARD ISOLATION Solenoid-Operated Valves 5

RHR MO-2021 "B" RHR CTMT SPRAY OUTBID ISOL (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 5

RHR MO-2026 RHR HEAD SPRAY OUTBOARD (08) Motor-Operated and ISOLATION Solenoid-Operated Valves 4

RHR MO-2030 RHR SHUTDOWN COOLING SUPPLY (08) Motor-Operated and 3,4 RHR OUTBOARD ISOLATION Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2032 RHR DISCHARGE TO WASTE SURGE (08) Motor-Operated and 5

RHR TANK Solenoid-Operated Valves (08) Motor-Operated and 3

RHR MO-2033 RHR LOOPS CROSSTIE Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2034 HPCI INBOARD STEAM SUPPLY (08) Motor-Operated and 3,5 HPC Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2035 HPCI OUTBOARD STEAM SUPPLY (08) Motor-Operated and 3,5 HPC ISOLATION Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2063 HPCI CST SUCT (08) Motor-Operated and 3

HPC Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2075 RCIC STEAM SUPPLY INBOARD (08) Motor-Operated and 3,5 RCl ISOLATION Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2076 RCIC STEAM SUPPLY OUTBOARD (08) Motor-Operated and ISOLATION Solenoid-Operated Valves 3, 5 RCl (08) Motor-Operated and MO-2078 RCIC TURBINE STEAM SUPPLY Solenoid-Operated Valves 3

RCl MO-2106 RCIC PUMP DISCHARGE OUTBOARD (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 3

RCl MO-2373 INBID MS LINE DRN UPSTREAM MSIVS (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 3, 5 MST MO-2374 MAIN STEAM LINE DRAIN - OUTBOARD (08) Motor-Operated and 2,3,5 MST Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2397 RWCU INLET INBOARD ISOL (08) Motor-Operated and 3,5 RWC Solenoid-Operated Valves Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-16

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List 1 Equipment Description Class1 Safety 2 System3 Tag Function MO-2398 RWCU INLET OUTBOARD ISOL (08) Motor-Operated and 3,5 RWC Solenoid-Operated Valves (08) Motor-Operated and MO-2-43A 11 REClRC PUMP SUCTION Solenoid-Operated Valves 3

REC (08) Motor-Operated and MO-2-43B 12 REClRC PUMP SUCTION Solenoid-Operated Valves 3

REC (08) Motor-Operated and MO-2-53A 11 RECIRC PUMP DISCHARGE Solenoid-Operated Valves 3

REC MO-2-53B 12 RECIRC PUMP DISCHARGE (08) Motor-Operated and REC Solenoid-Operated Valves N3346A 11 EDG AIR CMPSR 1 (K-8A) LOCAL (20) Instrumentation and 1,3,4,5 DGN DISCONNECT SWITCH Control Panels and Cabinets N3346B 12 EDG AIR CMPSR 2 (K-9B) LOCAL (20) Instrumentation and 3,4,5 DGN DISCONNECT SWITCH Control Panels and Cabinets N3347 MOTOR STARTER FOR K-10A (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 4, 5 DGN N4301A 11 EDG AIR CMPSR 2 (K-8B) LOCAL (20) Instrumentation and DISCONNECT SWITCH Control Panels and Cabinets 1, 3, 4, 5 DGN N4301 8 12 EDG AIR CMPSR 1 (K-9A) LOCAL (20) Instrumentation and 3,4,5 DGN DISCONNECT SWITCH Control Panels and Cabinets N4454 MOTOR STARTER FOR K-10B (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets 3 4, 5 DGN P-109A 11 RHR SW PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 4, 5 RSW P-109B 12 RHR SW PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 4

RSW P-109C 13 RHR SW PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 4

RSW P-1 09D 14 RHR SW PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 4

RSW P-11 DIESEL OIL XFER PUMP (05) Horizontal Pumps 1, 3, 4, 5 DOL P-111A 11 ESW (EDG-ESW) PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 1,3, 4, 5 ESW P-111B 12 ESW (EDG-ESW) PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 ESW Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-17

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety2 ytM Tag Function P-111C 13 ESW PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3,4,5 FSW P-111D 14 ESW PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 FSW P-202A 11 RHR PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 RHR P-202B RHRJ RHR B PUMP # 12 (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 RHR P-202C 13 RHR PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 RHR P-202D RHR/ RHR D PUMP # 14 (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 RHR P-203A 11 SBLC Pump (05) Horizontal Pumps 1

SLC P-208A 11 CORE SPRAY PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3

CSP P-208B 12 CORE SPRAY PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3

CSP P-209 HPCI PUMP (05) Horizontal Pumps 3

HPC P-222A 11 DG FUEL TRANSFER PUMP #1 (05) Horizontal Pumps 1, 3, 4, 5 DGN P-73A 480V POWER PANEL (14) Distribution Panels 4, 5 480 P-88A ECCS AREA DRAIN PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 LRW P-88B ECCS AREA DRAIN PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 LRW P-88C ECCS AREA DRAIN PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 LRW P-88D ECCS AREA DRAIN PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 LRW 11/13 RHRWSW PUMP MOTORS PCV-3004 COOLING WATER HEADER INLET (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RSW PCV-3005 12/14 RHRSW PUMP MOTORS (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3,4,5 RSW COOLING HEADER INLET PCV-4879 ALT N2 A (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 PCV-4881 ALT N2 B (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 PCV-4897 ALT N2 A (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-18

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety Tag Function2 System 3 PCV-4898 ALT N2 B (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 PCV-4903 ALT N2 A (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 PCV-4904 ALT N2 A (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 PCV-4905 ALT N2 B (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 PCV-4906 ALT N2 B (18) Instruments on Racks 2, 5 AN2 PS-23-97A HPCI HI TURB EXH PRESS TURB TRIP (18) Instruments on Racks 3

HPC PSX5 X PAGE 5 VOLT POWER SUPPLY RPIS (16) Battery Chargers and NONE RPI Inverters PSX6 X PAGE 6 VOLT POWER SUPPLY RPIS (16) Battery Chargers and NONE RPI Inverters PSY5 Y PAGE 5 VOLT POWER SUPPLY RPIS (16) Battery Chargers and NONE RPI Inverters PSY6 Y PAGE 6 VOLT POWER SUPPLY RPIS (16) Battery Chargers and NONE RPI Inverters PT-14-38B CS PUMP 12 DISCHARGE PRESSURE (18) Instruments on Racks 3

CSP PT-2994A DW PRESS NARROW RANGE (18) Instruments on Racks NONE PCT PT-2994B TORUS PRESSURE NARROW RANGE (18) Instruments on Racks NONE PCT PT-4022 EFT-ESW SYSTEM PRESSURE (18) Instruments on Racks NONE PCT PT-7251A DW WIDE RANGE PRES (18) Instruments on Racks NONE PCT PT-7251B DRYWELL WIDE RANGE PRESS (18) Instruments on Racks NONE PCT RV-1523 XFER PUMP DISCHARGE RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DOL VALVE RV-1524 XFER PUMP DISCHARGE RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4,5 DOL VALVE RV-1 745 11 CS PUMP DISCH RV TO ORW (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3

CSP RV-1746 12 CS PUMP DISCH RV TO ORW (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3

CSP Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-19

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety Tag Function2 System 3 RV-1 990 RHR 11 PUMP SUCTION RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-1 991 RHR/ RHR B PUMP SUCTION RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-1992 RHR 13 PUMP SUCTION RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-1993 RHR/ RHR D PUMP SUCTION RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-2004 RHR LOOP A DISCHARGE LINE RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-2005 RHR LOOP B DISCHARGE LINE RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-2025 RHR HEAD SPRAY LINE RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-2031 SD COOLING SUCTION SUPPLY (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4

RHR RV-2-71A A SRV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

APR RV-2-71 B B SRV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

APR RV-2-71C C SRV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

APR RV-2-71 D D SRV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

APR RV-2-71 E E SRV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

APR RV-2-71F F SRV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

APR RV-2-71G G SRV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

APR RV-2-71 H H SRV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

APR RV-3038 11 LOOP MOTOR COOLING HEADER (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4, 5 RSW RV-3039 12/14 LOOP MOTOR COOLING (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4, 5 RSW HEADER RV-3202 11 HX TUBE SIDE (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4, 5 RSW RV-3203 12 HX TUBE SIDE (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 4, 5 RSW RV-3216 11 DG AIR TK T-79A RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-20

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class 1 Safety 2 System3 Tag Function RV-3217 11 DG AIR TK T-79B RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3218 11 DG AIR TK T-79C RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3219 11 DG AIR TK T-79D RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3220 11 DG AIR TK T-79E RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3221 11 DG AIR TK T-79F RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3222 DIESEL AIR START COMPRESSOR (K-(07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN 8A)

RV-3223 DIESEL AIR START COMPRESSOR (K-(07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3,4,5 DGN 8B)

RV-3224 12 DG AIR TK T-80A RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3225 12 DG AIR TK T-80B RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3226 12 DG AIR TK T-80C RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3227 12 DG AIR TK T-80D RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3228 12 DG AIR TK T-80E RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3229 12 DG AIR TK T-80F RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN RV-3230 DIESEL AIR START COMPRESSOR (K-(07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN 9A)

RV-3231 DIESEL AIR START COMPRESSOR (K-(07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 DGN 9B)

RV-3242 A SRV DISCHARE 2 VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-3242A A SRV DISCHARGE 8 VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-3243 B SRV DISCHARGE 2" VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-3243A B SRV DISCHARGE 8" VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-3244 C SRV DISCHARGE 2 VAC (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-21

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Safety 2 System3 Tag Function RV-3244A C SRV DISCHARGE 8 VAC (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-3245 D SRV DISCHARGE 2 VAC (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-3245A D SRV DISCHARGE 8 VAC (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-4236 ALT N2 B RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2, 5 AN2 RV-4281 A RHR HX RV SHELL SIDE (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-4282 RHR/RHR B HXER RELIEF VALVE (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 3, 4, 5 RHR RV-4673 ALT N2 A RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2, 5 AN2 RV-4878 ALT N2 A RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2, 5 AN2 RV-4880 ALT N2 B RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2, 5 AN2 RV-7440 E SRV DISCHARGE 2 VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-7440A E SRV DISCHARGE 8" VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-7441 F SRV DISCHARGE 2" VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-7441A F SRV DISCHARGE 8" VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-7467 G SRV DISCHARGE 2 VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-7467A G SRV DISCHARGE 8" VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-7468 H SRV DISCHARGE 2" VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST RV-7468A H SRV DISCHARGE 8" VAC RV (07) Fluid-Operated Valves 2

MST SV-1728 CV-1 728 (11 RHR HX RHRSW (08) Motor-Operated and OUTLET)SV Solenoid-Operated Valves 4 5 RSW SV-1729 SV FOR CV-1 729 #12 RHR HX RHRSW (08) Motor-Operated and 4,5 RSW OUT Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-1994 SV FOR CV-1 994 #11 RHR MINIMUM (08) Motor-Operated and 3,4,5 RHR FLOW Solenoid-Operated Valves Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-22

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety System3 Tag Function2 SV-1 995 SV FOR cv-i 995 #12 RHR MIN FLOW (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 3 4, 5 RHR SV-1996 SV FOR CV-1996 #13 RHR MINIMUM (08) Motor-Operated and FLOW Solenoid-Operated Valves 3 4, 5 RHR SV-1997 SV FOR CV-1997 #14 RHR MIN FLOW (08) Motor-Operated and 3,4,5 RHR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-2-1 1A 11 RECIRC PUMP SEAL LEAKOFF (08) Motor-Operated and 3

REC Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-2-11B 12 RECIRC PUMP SEAL LEAKOFF (08) Motor-Operated and 3

REC Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-32A A SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-32B B SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-32C C SRV BELLOWS LEAK TEST SV (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-32D D SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-32E E SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-32F F SRV BELLOWS LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-32G G SRV BELLOWS LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR SV-2-32H H SRV BELLOWS LEAK TEST Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-33A A SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-33B B SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-33C C SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-23

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Safety System3 Tag Function2 SV-2-33D D SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-33E E SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-33F F SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-33G G SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-33H H SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-34A A SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-34B B SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-34C C SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves (08) Motor-Operated and APR SV-2-34D D SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-34E E SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-34F F SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-34G G SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-34H H SRV BELLOW LEAK TEST (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2369 FLANGE LEAK OFF CONTROL VALVE (08) Motor-Operated and 3

RPV Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2370 FLANGE LEAK OFF CONTROL VALVE (08) Motor-Operated and 3

RPV Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2371 REACTOR HEAD VENT TO CRW (08) Motor-Operated and 3

RPV Solenoid-Operated Valves Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-24

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety 2 System3 Tag Function (08) Motor-Operated and 5

PCT SV-2379 ALT N2 A SPLY TO AO-2379 Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2380 ALT N2 A SUPPLY TO AO-2380 (08) Motor-Operated and 5

PCT Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71A A SRV ALT N2 A A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 B B SRV PILOT (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 CC SRV ALT N2 B SUPPLY (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 D D SRV PILOT A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71E E SRV ALT N2 A A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 F F SRV PILOT A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71G G SRV PILOT A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 H H SRV PILOT A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 J E SRV ALT N2 A A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 K G SRV PILOT A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 L H SRV PILOT A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2-71 M F SRV ASDS PILOT A/S (08) Motor-Operated and 2

APR Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-3-29 EAST/NEST SDV VENT/DRN VLVS AIR (08) Motor-Operated and 1,3 CRH SUPPLY SOL VLV Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-3-31A INBOARD VENT/DR RPS CH A (08) Motor-Operated and 1,3 CRH Solenoid-Operated Valves Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-25

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class1 Function 2 System3 SV-3-31 B INBOARD VENT/DR RPS CH B (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 1, 3 CRH SV-3-31 C OUTBOARD VENT/AR RPS OH A (08) Motor-Operated and 1,3 Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-3-31 D OUTBOARD VENT/DR RPS CH B (08) Motor-Operated and 1,3 CRH Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4014A LIQ SX RETURN TO A RHR ISOL (08) Motor-Operated and NONE PAS Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4015A A LOOP RHR SAMPLE ISOL (08) Motor-Operated and NONE PAS Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4015B B LOOP RHR SAMPLE ISOL (08) Motor-Operated and NONE PAS Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4033A A CGCS RECMB CLG PMP INL (08) Motor-Operated and NONE PAS Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4033B B CGCS RECOMBINER COOLING (08) Motor-Operated and NONE CGC PUMP INLET Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4034A AGGCS RECMB CLG PMP BYPASS (08) Motor-Operated and NONE CGC Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4034B B CGCS RECOMBINER COOLING (08) Motor-Operated and NONE CGC PUMP BYPASS Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4234 ALT N2 A (08) Motor-Operated and 2,5 AN2 Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-4235 ALT N2 B MANIFOLD ISOL (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves 2, 5 AN2 SV-4541 INBOARD N2 SUPPLY TO HPV (08) Motor-Operated and PCT RUPTURE DISC Solenoid-Operated Valves T-200 Standby Liquid Control Tank (21) Tanks and Heat 1

SLC Exchangers T-44 DIESEL OIL STORAGE TANK (21) Tanks and Heat 3,4,5 DOL Exchangers T-45A STANDBY DIESEL GENERATOR DAY (21) Tanks and Heat TANK Exchangers 1,3,4,5 DOL Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-26

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description

Class, Safety System3 Tag Function S

T-45B STANDBY DIESEL GENERATOR DAY (21) Tanks and Heat 1,3,4,5 DOL TANK Exchangers T-48A Skimmer Surge Tank A (21) Tanks and Heat NONE FPC Exchangers T-48B Skimmer Surge Tank B (21) Tanks and Heat NONE FPC Exchangers T-49A A MSIV (AO-2-80A) ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 3,5 MST Exchangers T-49B B MSIV (AO-2-80B) ACCUMLATOR (21) Tanksannd Heat 35 MST Exchangers 3

S T-49C C MSIV (AO-2-80C) ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 3,5 MST Exchangers T-49D D MSIV (AO-2-80D) ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 3,5 MST Exchangers T-57A ALT N2 ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 2

APR Exchangers T-57B ALT N2 ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 2

APR Exchangers T-57C ALT N2 ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 2

APR Exchangers T-57D ALT N2 ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 2

APR Exchangers T-57E ALT N2 ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 2

APR Exchangers T-57F ALT N2 ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 2

APR Exchangers T-57G ALT N2 ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 2

APR Exchangers T-57H ALT N2 ACCUMULATOR (21) Tanks and Heat 2

APR Exchangers T-75A ACCUMULATOR FOR SV-1994 (21) Tanks and Heat 3,4,5 RHR Exchangers Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-27

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class 1 Function2 System 3 Tag Fnto T-75B RHRP RHR B PUMP MIN FLOW ACCUM (21) Tanks and Heat 3,4,5 RHR Exchangers T-75C ACCUMULATOR FOR SV-1996 (21) Tanks and Heat Exchangers 3, 4, 5 RHR T-75D RHRJ RHR D PUMP MIN FLOW ACCUM (21) Tanks and Heat 3,4,5 RHR Exchangers T-79A 11 DGAIRTKA (21) Tanks and Heat 3,4,5 DGN Exchangers T-79B 11 DGAIRTKB (21) Tanks and Heat 3,4,5 DGN Exchangers T-79C 11 DGAIRTKC (21) Tanks and Heat 345 DGN Exchangers T-79D 11 DG AIR TK D (21) Tanks and Heat 1,3,4,5 DGN Exchangers T-79E 11 DG AIR TK E (21) Tanks and Heat 1,2,3,4,5 DGN Exchangers T-79F 11 DG AIR TK F (21) Tanks and Heat 1,2,3,4,5 DGN Exchangers T-80A 12 DG AIR TK A (21) Tanks and Heat 1,3,4,5 DGN Exchangers T-80B 12 DG AIR TK B (21) Tanks and Heat Exchangers 1,2, 3, 4, 5 DGN T-80C 12 DG AIR TK C (21) Tanks and Heat 1,2,3,4,5 DGN Exchangers T-80D 12 DG AIR TK D (21) Tanks and Heat 345 DGN Exchangers T-80E 12 DG AIR TK E (21) Tanks and Heat 3,4,5 DGN Exchangers T-80F 12 DJG AIR TK F (21) Tanks and Heat 345 DGN Exchangers T-ALTN2B ALT N2 B BOTTLE RACK (21) Tanks and Heat 2,5 AN2 Exchangers Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-28

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-1: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety System3 Tag Function TS-1 3-79C RCIC STM LINE HI AREA TEMPERATURE ISOLATION (19) Temperature Sensors 2, 3, 5 RCI V-AC-4 RHR B AIR HANDLER (10) Air Handlers 3, 4, 5 HTV V-AC-5 RHR A AIR HANDLER (10) Air Handlers 3,4,5 HTV V-EAC-14A CRV DIV I HVAC UNIT (11) Chillers 1,2, 3,4, 5 EFT V-EAC-14B CRV DIV II HVAC UNIT (10) Air Handlers 1,2, 3,4, 5 EFT V-EF-40A DIV II 250VDC BATTERY ROOM VENTILATION (10) Air Handlers 1, 2, 3,4, 5 EFT V-EF-40B DIV II 25OVDC BATTERY ROOM (10) Air Handlers 1,2,3,4,5 EFT VENTILATION V-ERF-14A CRV DIV I EXHAUST RECIRC FAN (10) Air Handlers 1, 2, 3,4, 5 EFT V-FE-11 DIV 1 EFT CHARCOAL AIR FILTER UNIT (10) Air Handlers 1,2, 3, 4, 5 EFT V-SF-1 0 11 DIESEL ROOM VENT FAN (09) Fans 1, 3, 4, 5 HTV V-SF-9 12 DIESEL ROOM VENT FAN (09) Fans 1,3, 4, 5 HTV X30 TRANSFORMER (04) Transformers 1, 3, 4, 5 480 X40 TRANSFORMER (04) Transformers 1,2, 3, 4, 5 480 Y01 STANDBY INTRUMENT AC (04) Transformers NONE UAC Y10 DIV 1 CLASS NON-1E UNINT INST (14) Distribution Panels NONE UAC 120VAC DIST PANEL Y20 NON-1E INST 120VDC DIST PANEL (14) Distribution Panels NONE UAC Y21 INSTRUMENT AC TRANSFER SWITCH (14) Distribution Panels NONE UAC Y22 12 INSTRUMENT AC TRANSFORMER (04) Transformers NONE UAC Y30 DIV 2 CLASS NON-1E UNINT 120VAC (14) Distribution Panels NONE UAC INST AC DIST PANEL Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-29

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-I: Monticello Base List I Equipment Description Class' Safety 2 System3 Tag Function Y70 DIV 1 UNINTERRUPTIBLE 120VAC (14) Distribution Panels 1,2,3,4,5 UAC CLASS 1 E DIST PANEL Y71 DIV 1 120VAC CLASS 1E INVERTER (16) Battery Chargers and 1,2,3,4,5 UAC Inverters Y72 120 VDC TRANSFORMER FEEDING Y73 (04) Transformers 1, 2, 3,4, 5 UAC Y73 ALTERNATE 120VAC TO UPS (Y71)

(14) Distribution Panels 1, 2, 3,4, 5 UAC Y74 FUSED DISCONNECT SWITCH TO (14) Distribution Panels NONE UAC PANEL Y10 Y75 FUSED DISCONNECT SWITCH TO (14) Distribution Panels 1,2,3,4,5 UAC PANEL Y70 Y77 120-120/240VAC TRANSFORMER TO (04) Transformers NONE UAC PANEL Y10 Y80 DIV 2 UNINTERRUPTIBLE 120VAC (14) Distribution Panels 1,2,3,4,5 UAC CLASS 1 E DIST PANEL Y81 DIV 2 120VAC CLASS 1E INVERTER (16) Battery Chargers and 1,2,3,4,5 UAC Inverters Y82 DIV 2 120 VDC TRANSFORMER Y83 (04) Transformers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 UAC Y83 ALTERNATE 120VAC TO UPS (Y81)

(14) Distribution Panels 1,2,3,4,5 UAC Y84 FUSED DISCONNECT SWITCH TO (14) Distribution Panels NONE UAC PANEL Y30 Y85 FUSED DISCONNECT SWITCH TO (14) Distribution Panels 1,2,3,4,5 UAC PANEL Y80 Y87 120-120/240VAC TRANSFORMER TO (04) Transformers NONE UAC PANEL Y30 Notes:

1) Class - Class as defined in Appendix B of Reference 1.

Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-30

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report

2) Safety function - Defined as follows:

1 = Reactor Reactivity Control 2 = Reactor Coolant Pressure Control 3 = Reactor Coolant inventory Control 4 = Decay Heat Removal 5 = Containment Function

3) System - Identifies the system associated with the equipment. The abbreviations for these systems are listed below.

System Description System Description System Description 125 125 Volt DC DGN Emergency Diesel Generators PPS Plant Protection System 250 250 Volt DC DOL Diesel Oil System RCI RX Core Isolation Cooling Sys 480 480 V Station Auxiliary EFT Emergency Filtration Train REC RX Recirculation System 4.16 KV Station Residual Heat Removal 4KV Auxiliary ESW Emergency Service Water RHR System AN2 Alternate N2 FPC Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup RLC RX Level Control APR Automatic Press Relief FSW Emergency Filtration Train - Emergency RPI Rod Position Information Service Water System ASD Alternate Shutdown HPC High Press Coolant Injection RPV RX Pressure Vessel System CFW Condensate &

HTV Heating & Ventilation RSW RHR Service Water Feedwater CGC Combustible Gas LRW Liquid Radwaste RWC RX Water Cleanup Control CMP Computer MSC Miscellaneous SIN Security Instrumentation CRD Control Rod Drive MST Main Steam SLC Standby Liquid Control System CRH Control Rod Drive PAS Post Accident Sampling System UAC Uninterruptible AC Hydraulic CSP Core Spray System PCT Primary Containment Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-31

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report A.2 Final SWEL 1 This section provides a list of the final equipment selected for MNGP's SWEL 1 in Table A-2 below. This table identifies which items were selected for anchorage configuration verification, as well as which items are being deferred due to inaccessibility. The comments column of this table identifies the following selection criteria which were utilized in Screen #4:

"IPEEE Enhanced" identifies that this equipment was enhanced due to outliers identified during the IPEEE program.

"New or Replaced" identifies this equipment as major new or replacement equipment.

"Risk Significant" identifies this equipment as risk significant.

The comments column also identifies those electrical components that required an internal cabinet inspection. The equipment class, safety function, and system designations used in Table A-2 are the same as Table A-1.

Table A-2: Monticello SWEL I Equipment Description Class Safety System Comments Verify Deferred Tag Function Anchorage 152-505 4KV TO P-208A 11 (03) Medium Voltage 3

4KV Internal Yes Core Spray Pump Switchgear cabinet inspection AO-2379 VACUUM RELIEF (07) Fluid-Operated 5

PCT DAMPER Valves AO-2-80A INBOARD MSIV (07) Fluid-Operated 2, 3, 5 MST Yes Valves AO-4539 HARD PIPE VENT (07) Fluid-Operated 5

PCT Risk INBOARD ISOLATION Valves Significant VALVE AV-3147 11 RHR SW PUMP P-(07) Fluid-Operated 4, 5 RSW New or 109A AUTO AIR Valves Replaced VENT AV-4024 13 ESW PUMP P-(07) Fluid-Operated 3, 4, 5 FSW 111C DISCHARGE Valves AIR VENT BPM-1, DC-BOOSTER PUMP (05) Horizontal 1, 3, 4, 5 DGN Location 11 MOTOR Pumps DG Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-32

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-2: Monticello SWEL I Equipment Description Class Safety System Comments Verify Deferred Tag Function Anchorage BUS 15 4160 SWITCHGEAR (03) Medium Voltage 1, 2, 3,4, 5 4KV Internal Yes Switchgear cabinet inspection C-17 CHANNEL B ISOL (20) Instrumentation 1, 3, 5 PPS Yes AND RPS VERTICAL and Control Panels (substitution BOARD and Cabinets for C-03)

C-122 JET PUMP (18) Instruments on 3

REC Yes INSTRUMENT RACK Racks C-1 29A RHR INSTRUMENT (18) Instruments on 3, 4, 5 RHR Yes RACK Racks C-129B RHR INSTRUMENT (18) Instruments on 3,4, 5 RHR Yes RACK Racks C-253A SRV Panel (20) Instrumentation 2

APR Yes and Control Panels and Cabinets C-253D DIV II LOLO SET (20) Instrumentation 2

APR Internal Yes BYPASS PANEL and Control Panels cabinet and Cabinets inspection C-290A SRV BLOWDOWN (18) Instruments on 2, 3 APR INST PANEL Racks C-292 ASDS BENCHBOARD (20) Instrumentation 1, 2, 3,4, 5 ASD Yes and Control Panels and Cabinets C-30 RCIC CABLE SPR RM (20) Instrumentation 3

RCI Yes CONTROL PANEL and Control Panels and Cabinets C-303A ECCS DIV I ANALOG (20) Instrumentation 3

PPS Yes TRIP SYSTEM and Control Panels and Cabinets C-39 HPCI RELAY PANEL (20) Instrumentation 3

HPC Yes and Control Panels and Cabinets C-41 INBOARD ISOLATION (20) Instrumentation 3, 5 PPS Yes RELAY PANEL and Control Panels and Cabinets C-55 RX LEVEL &

(18) Instruments on 1,2,3,5 RPV Yes PRESSURE RACK Racks Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-33

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-2: Monticello SWEL I Equipment Description Class Safety System Comments Verify Deferred Tag Function Anchorage C-91 11 DIESEL GEN (20) Instrumentation 1,3, 4, 5 DGN Internal Yes ELECTRICAL and Control Panels cabinet and Cabinets inspection CRD HCU CRD HYDRALIC (18) Instruments on 1

CRD New or Yes W

CONTROL UNITS Racks Replaced WEST SIDE CRD16A SCRAM DISCHARGE (21) Tanks and Heat 1, 3 CRD VOLUME Exchangers CV-1 728 11 RHR HX RHRSW (07) Fluid-Operated 4, 5 RSW OUTLET Valves CV-2043 HPCI STEAM LINE (07) Fluid-Operated 3

HPC DRAIN TRAP Valves BYPASS CV-3-32A WEST SDV VENT (07) Fluid-Operated 1,3 CRH Valves D1

1. 11 BATTERY (15) Batteries on 1, 2,3,4, 5 125 Risk Yes 125VDC Racks Significant D100 DIV 2 125/250 VDC (14) Distribution 1,2,3,4,5 250 Risk DISTRIBUTION Panels Significant PANEL D11 DIV I 125VDC (14) Distribution 1, 2, 3,4, 5 125 Risk Yes DISTRIBUTION Panels Significant, CENTER Internal cabinet inspection D31 DIV I 125/250 VDC (14) Distribution 1,2,3,4,5 250 Risk Yes DISTRIBUTION Panels Significant PANEL D3A

1. 13 (DIV 1)

(15) Batteries on 1,2,3,4, 5 250 Risk Yes 125/25OVDC Racks Significant BATTERY "A" D3B

1. 13 (DIV 1)

(15) Batteries on 1,2,3,4, 5 250 Risk Yes 125/25OVDC Racks Significant BATTERY "B" Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-34

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-2: Monticello SWEL I Equipment Description Class Safety System Comments Verify Deferred Tag Function Anchorage D40 125VDC SWING (16) Battery 1, 2, 3,4, 5 125 Risk Yes Yes CHARGER FOR #11 Chargers and Significant, AND #12 BATTERIES Inverters New or

Replaced, Internal cabinet inspection D54 SWING CHARGER (16) Battery 1,2,3,4, 5 250 Risk Yes Yes D3A,D3B 13 Chargers and Significant, BATTERY Inverters Internal cabinet inspection D90 CHARGER, SWING (16) Battery 1, 2, 3,4, 5 250 Risk Yes Yes D6A,D6B (16)

Chargers and Significant, BATTERY Inverters Internal cabinet inspection DM-8089A1 V-SF-9 SUPPLY (10) Air Handlers 1, 3, 4, 5 HTV DAMPER DM-8089J1 V-SF-10 SUPPLY (10) Air Handlers 1, 3, 4, 5 HTV DAMPER FT-23-82 HPCI PUMP FLOW (18) Instruments on 3

HPC TRANSMITTER Racks G-3A 11 EMERGENCY (17) Engine-1,3,4,5 DGN Yes DIESEL GENERATOR Generators G-3B 12 EMERGENCY (17) Engine-1,3,4,5 DGN Yes DIESEL GENERATOR Generators K-10A RHRSW AUX AIR (12) Air Compressors 4,5 RSW Yes COMP K-8A 11 EDG (12) Air Compressors 1, 3, 4, 5 DGN Yes ELECTRIC/DIESEL AIR STARTER COMPRESSOR #1 K-8B 11 ELECTRIC AIR (12) Air Compressors 1,3,4,5 DGN Yes STARTER COMPRESSOR #2 LT-2-3-72A LO LO REACTOR LVL (18) Instruments on 2, 3 RPV Risk ECCS INITIATION Racks Significant Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-35

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-2: Monticello SWEL I Equipment Description Class Safety System Comments Verify Deferred Tag Function Anchorage LT-2-3-72C LO LO REACTOR LVL (18) Instruments on 2, 3 RPV Risk ECCS INITIATION Racks Significant LT-2996 TORUS WATER (18) Instruments on 5

PCT LEVEL Racks MCC-133B 480V AC MOTOR (01) Motor Control 1,3, 4, 5 480 Risk Yes CONTROL CENTER Centers Significant, 133B Internal cabinet inspection MCC-1 34 480 V MCC (B34)

(01) Motor Control 1, 3,4, 5 480 Internal Yes Centers cabinet inspection MCC-312 DIV 2 (HPCI) 250V DC (01) Motor Control 3

250 Risk Yes Yes MOTOR CONTROL Centers Significant, CENTER 312 Internal cabinet inspection MCC-313 DIV 1 250V DC (01) Motor Control 2, 3, 5 250 Risk Yes Yes MOTOR CONTROL Centers Significant, CENTER 313 Internal cabinet inspection MO-1741 11 CS PUMP TORUS (08) Motor-Operated 3

CSP SUCTION and Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2010 TORUS SPRAY VLV (08) Motor-Operated 4, 5 RHR and Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2012 11 RHR LPCI (08) Motor-Operated 3,4 RHR OUTBOARD and Solenoid-INJECTION Operated Valves MO-2013 RHR/RHR B LPCI INJ (08) Motor-Operated 3, 4 RHR OUTBD and Solenoid-Operated Valves MO-2030 RHR SHUTDOWN (08) Motor-Operated 3, 4 RHR COOLING SUPPLY and Solenoid-OUTBOARD Operated Valves ISOLATION MO-2063 HPCI CST SUCT (08) Motor-Operated 3

HPC and Solenoid-Operated Valves Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-36

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-2: Monticello SWEL I Equipment Description Class Safety System Comments Verify Deferred Tag Function Anchorage MO-2078 RCIC TURBINE (08) Motor-Operated 3

RCI Risk STEAM SUPPLY and Solenoid-Significant Operated Valves MO-2106 RCIC PUMP (08) Motor-Operated 3

RCI Risk DISCHARGE and Solenoid-Significant OUTBOARD Operated Valves MO-2374 MAIN STEAM LINE (08) Motor-Operated 2, 3, 5 MST New or Yes DRAIN - OUTBOARD and Solenoid-Replaced Operated Valves N3346A 11 EDG AIR CMPSR 1 (20) Instrumentation 1,3, 4, 5 DGN Internal Yes (K-8A) LOCAL and Control Panels cabinet DISCONNECT and Cabinets inspection SWITCH N3347 MOTOR STARTER (20) Instrumentation 4, 5 RSW Internal Yes FOR K-10A and Control Panels cabinet and Cabinets inspection N4301A 11 EDG AIR CMPSR 2 (20) Instrumentation 1, 3, 4, 5 DGN Internal Yes (K-8B) LOCAL and Control Panels cabinet DISCONNECT and Cabinets inspection SWITCH P-1 09A 11 RHR SW PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 4, 5 RSW New or Yes Replaced P-11 DIESEL OIL XFER (05) Horizontal 1,3, 4, 5 DOL Yes PUMP Pumps P-111A 11 ESW (EDG-ESW)

(06) Vertical Pumps 1, 3, 4, 5 ESW Yes PUMP P-1i1 C 13 ESW PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 FSW New or Yes Replaced P-202C 13 RHR PUMP (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 RHR New or Yes Replaced P-203A 11 SBLC Pump (05) Horizontal 1

SLC Yes Pumps P-208A 11 CORE SPRAY (06) Vertical Pumps 3

CSP PUMP P-209 HPCI PUMP (05) Horizontal 3

HPC Risk Yes Pumps Significant Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-37

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-2: Monticello SWEL I Equipment Description Class Safety System Comments Verify Deferred Tag Function Anchorage P-222A 11 DG FUEL (05) Horizontal 1, 3,4, 5 DGN TRANSFER PUMP #1 Pumps P-73A 480V POWER PANEL (14) Distribution 4, 5 480 Internal Yes Yes Panels cabinet inspection P-88A ECCS AREA DRAIN (06) Vertical Pumps 3, 4, 5 LRW PUMP PS-23-97A HPCI HI TURB EXH (18) Instruments on 3

HPC Risk PRESS TURB TRIP Racks Significant RV-1990 RHR 11 PUMP (07) Fluid-Operated 3,4,5 RHR SUCTION RV Valves RV-2-71A A SRV (07) Fluid-Operated 2

APR Risk Yes Valves Significant SV-1728 CV-1 728 (11 RHR HX (08) Motor-Operated 4, 5 RSW Yes RHRSW OUTLET)SV and Solenoid-Operated Valves SV-2379 ALT N2 A SPLY TO (08) Motor-Operated 5

PCT AO-2379 and Solenoid-Operated Valves T-200 Standby Liquid Control (21) Tanks and Heat 1

SLC Yes Tank Exchangers T-45A STANDBY DIESEL (21) Tanks and Heat 1, 3, 4, 5 DOL Yes GENERATOR DAY Exchangers TANK T-45B STANDBY DIESEL (21) Tanks and Heat 1, 3,4, 5 DOL Yes GENERATOR DAY Exchangers TANK T-75A ACCUMULATOR FOR (21) Tanks and Heat 3, 4, 5 RHR SV-1994 Exchangers T-79D 11 DG AIR TK D (21) Tanks and Heat 1,3,4,5 DGN IPEEE Yes Exchangers Enhanced T-80A 12 DG AIR TK A (21) Tanks and Heat 1,3,4,5 DGN IPEEE Yes Exchangers Enhanced T-ALTN2B ALT N2 B BOTTLE (21) Tanks and Heat 2, 5 AN2 RACK Exchangers Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-38

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table A-2: Monticello SWEL 1 Equipment Description Class Safety System Comments Verify Deferred Tag Function Anchorage TS-13-79C RCIC STM LINE HI (19) Temperature 2, 3, 5 RCI AREA Sensors TEMPERATURE ISOLATION V-AC-5 RHR A AIR HANDLER (10) Air Handlers 3, 4, 5 HTV Yes V-EAC-14A CRV DIV I HVAC (11) Chillers 1,2,3,4, 5 EFT UNIT V-EF-40A DIV II 250VDC (10) Air Handlers 1,2,3,4,5 EFT New or BATTERY ROOM Replaced VENTILATION V-EF-40B DIV II 250VDC (10) Air Handlers 1,2,3,4,5 EFT New or BATTERY ROOM Replaced VENTILATION V-ERF-14A CRV DIV I EXHAUST (10) Air Handlers 1, 2, 3,4, 5 EFT RECIRC FAN V-FE-11 DIV 1 EFT (10) Air Handlers 1,2,3,4,5 EFT CHARCOAL AIR FILTER UNIT V-SF-1 0 11 DIESEL ROOM (09) Fans 1, 3, 4, 5 HTV Yes VENT FAN V-SF-9 12 DIESEL ROOM (09) Fans 1, 3,4, 5 HTV Yes VENT FAN X30 TRANSFORMER (04) Transformers 1, 3, 4, 5 480 Y72 120 VDC (04) Transformers 1, 2, 3,4, 5 UAC Yes TRANSFORMER FEEDING Y73 Y81 DIV 2 120VAC CLASS (16) Battery 1,2,3,4,5 UAC Internal Yes Yes 1E INVERTER Chargers and cabinet Inverters inspection Appendix A - Equipment Lists A-39

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report B

Deferred Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWCs)

This appendix provides the Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWC) completed after Reference 13 was submitted. The SWCs completed prior to November 27, 2012 were provided in Table B-1 of the Reference 13 report, and are not provided in this supplement.

In the Reference 13 report, NSPM identified 22 deferred seismic walkdowns that needed to be completed at a later date. As described in Section 4 of this report, item C-03 was deleted from the SWEL 1 list, because not all of the anchors were visible to perform a complete inspection. A similar panel located in the Control Room, C-17, was substituted for C-03 and completed as part of the deferred walkdowns. In addition to this substitution, two deferred items (C-93 and G31) were not inspected because anchorages for these items were not visible. As a result of the substitution and deletion of these items, NSPM completed 21 deferred seismic walkdowns.

Table B-1 of this appendix includes a description of each deferred walkdown item, anchorage configuration verification, and the checklist status for each SWC. If a checklist status is marked "Y," then the SWEs concluded in the field that the equipment was seismically acceptable. If a checklist status is marked as "N," then the SWEs judged there was a potential adverse condition that required additional information to determine if the equipment was seismically adequate, complied with current site procedures and met the current licensing basis requirements. None of the observations noted in the SWCs for the deferred walkdowns were found to be adverse seismic conditions that significantly affected or degraded safety related functions of equipment.

NSPM completed its seismic walkdowns over the month of August 2012, and submitted the results of these seismic walkdowns on November 27, 2012 (Reference 13). The revised NRC position on internal electrical cabinet inspections was issued in September 2012. NSPM had already completed external visual inspections of several electrical cabinets and panels in August 2012. Instead of re-performing the external visual inspection completed in August 2012, NSPM included the SWCs from these inspections in the deferred walkdowns and completed a separate SWC to document the results of the internal cabinet inspections. Both SWCs are included in this appendix.

The SWCs are provided after Table B-i, and are in the same chronological order as listed in the table.

The SWCs in this appendix include information on the location of SWEL components, which is considered Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI), of which the loss, issue, modification, or unauthorized access can reasonably be foreseen to harm the safe operation of the nuclear plant. Pages which contain SUNSI information Appendix B - Deferred Seismic Walkdown Checklists B-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report have been marked with a header, and the sensitive information, such as the locations and photos of safety-related components, has been redacted. A copy of this report with the SUNSI information redacted has been provided as Enclosure 2 of this letter package.

Table,Bi-I:%:

"M!onticello SWCs Completed After November 27, 201.2 Equicpment Ahorage Checklist-Status TEag Description Configuration (Y/N)

Verified 152-505 4KV TO P-208A 11 Core Spray Pump Y

AO-2-80A INBOARD MSIV Y

BUS 15 4160 SWITCHGEAR Y

C-1 7 CHANNEL B ISOL AND RPS VERTICAL Y

BOARD C-253D DIV II LOLO SET BYPASS PANEL Y

C-91 11 DIESEL GEN ELECTRICAL Y

Dll DIV I 125VDC DISTRIBUTION CENTER Y

D40 125VDC SWING CHARGER FOR #11 Y

Y AND #12 BATTERIES D54 SWING CHARGER D3A, D3B 13 Y

Y BATTERY D90 CHARGER, SWING D6A,D6B (16)

Y Y

BATTERY MCC-133B 480V AC MOTOR CONTROL CENTER Y

133B MCC-1 34 480 V MCC (B34)

N MCC-312 DIV 2 (HPCI) 250V DC MOTOR CONTROL Y

Y CENTER 312 MCC-313 DIV 1 250V DC MOTOR CONTROL Y

Y CENTER 313 MO-2374 MAIN STEAM LINE DRAIN - OUTBOARD Y

Appendix B - Deferred Seismic Walkdown Checklists B3-2

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report Table B-I: Monticello SWCs Completed After November 27, 2012, Equipment

.Anhorage Checklist Status

.Tag Description Cornfiguration (YIN)

Verified N3346A 11 EDG AIR CMPSR 1 (K-8A) LOCAL Y

DISCONNECT SWITCH N3347 MOTOR STARTER FOR K-10A Y

N4301A 11 EDG AIR CMPSR 2 (K-8B) LOCAL y

DISCONNECT SWITCH P-73A 480V POWER PANEL Y

Y RV-2-71A A SRV Y

Y81 DIV 2 120VAC CLASS 1E INVERTER Y

Y Appendix B - Deferred Seismic Walkdown Checklists B-3

SlUtl - WIT; 11 LD FROM PUBLI, DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.390 Sheet 1 of 8 Status: Y0 N[-] U-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. 152-505 Equip. Classi (03) Medium Voltage Switch clear Equipment Description 4KV Supply to P-208A Location: Bldg. TO Floor El.

Room, Area Lower 4KV Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

Y' NI

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?

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-?-

YED NE UD N/AC YO NE UD N/AC-YED NE UE N/AC YE NE UD NWAS YOi NE.-UD I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix 13: Classes of Equipment.

GUNGI

'ITHHOLDl FROM PUBIC DI CL*GSGU*

r UNDER 2.300 Sheet 2 of 8 Status: YIZ NEI UI-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. 152-505 Equip. Class' (03) Medium Voltage Switchgear Equipment Description 4KV Supply to P-208A Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YZ NEI UE] N/ADl

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YZ NI] UI N/AEl and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

Y0D NI] UI] N/ADl Y

NI-] UI Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YIO NEI UD]

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Internal inspection performed lower compartment and upper relay compartment. No looser or missing hardware found.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

Pruce Lory

/;0qam

SUNS. - W. I 11 I.l.

FREWM.U.Li...

i.sO..RE UNDER i.39.

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SIJPl8_

- WITI IEII D-FROM PuDLeI DLsIsCJLOSRE UNDER 2.890 Sheet 1 of 4 Status: YO NEI U[-D Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. AO-2-80A Equip. Class, (07) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment Description INBOARD MSIV Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area DWNORTH Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 judgments 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)?

YO' NO

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?

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?

YE] NEI UD N/AID Y] NEI UO N/A0 YE! NE] UO N/AI YE NO UE N/AO YO NEI UE

'Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUNSi - WITHHOLD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.396 Sheet 2 of 4 Status: Y0 N[] UI-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. AO-2-80A Equip. Class' (07) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment Description INBOARD MSIV Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YZ NE UZ N/ADl

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YZ NEI Ur1 N/AED and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Overhead HVAC duct judged to be adequately anchored.

9, Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage?

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YN NEI Ur N/AU YIZ NEI U Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YO NEI UDI adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

- /? 9/"-

F)nnni.k Z7rcher

,-" g 9 o'

C~I IkIC'I

~AIITLILJf~g r~ I~Df\\I~A I~i DI If' r~IL'r'I C~C~I ID~ I iMr~I~D ~

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

8&48I - WVITHHO 1ELD FREW PUBIC' D)9ISCLOSURE UNDER 2.393 Sheet I of 47 Status: YIZ NFI Ut]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. Bus 15 Equip. Class' (03) Medium Voltage Switchqear Equipment Description 4160 Switchgear Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area Lower 4kV Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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'judgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchorae

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

YO NO

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

The slot weld anchorage at the front of the breaker compartment was viewed. Lateral bracing at the top of the cabinet was not inspected (Refer to Bus 15 SEWS for information).

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.)

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

YO NO UD N/Al YO NO UD N/AD YZ NE UE N/AE YE NE UD N/AO YO NEI UD

' Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment

SUIPSI 4

WTI II IOl FREW rUBLIt DISC I=1lRE UNDER 2.898 Sheet 2 of 47 Status: Y[I NEI U[

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. Bus 15 Equip. Class' (03) Medium Voltage Switchgear Equipment Description 4160 Switchgear Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YZ NEI U0 N/All YN NO UD] N/AU3 Y0 NO U0 N/AU YE NEI Ut Other Adverse Conditions 1 1. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YED NEI Ut]

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Bus 15 internal compartments were visually inspected by opening the upper and lower front doors and removing the rear panel. No loose internal components were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

Internal inspection note:

1. Upper compartment of cubicle 502, fuse holder NM is missing the bottom mounting screw. Top screw is present and visually appears to be tightened. CAP AIR 01377713 was writtent to document issue.

The back panel of cubicles 511 and 507 were not removed. Per drawing NX-27319-1 Rev A, there are no anchorage welds to view in these locations, nor are there internal components to inspect.

Ivlatdy Bre Date:

9 0 v // Sý/z

ell IHPIl rA'IHCfl fl lp, IIIi li~'ifPIIF ~lf f

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUNS' W-ITHHOlD-FROM PUBIC DIGCLrOlURE UNPjDEl-R 2.300 Sheet 1 of 7 Status: Y0 Ni] U]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. C-17 Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Channel B Primary Isol and RPS Verticle Board Location: Bldg. Admin Floor El.1 Ro Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended) om, Area Control Room 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 ofjudgments 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)?

YO NO

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?

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.)

YO NO UD N/AD YO ND UE NWAD YO ND UD N/AD YO NEI UD N/AO IEnter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

Sheet 2 of 7 Status: YN NEI U[--

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment lD No. C-17 Equip. ClassI (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Channel B Primary Isol and RPS Verticle Board

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

Cabinets are laterally braced by overhead bracing back to the concrete walls.

Intemal cabinet lights are screwed to panel and judged adequate by SWE's.

Cabinets are well fastened to each other.

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YO NEI UD N/AO

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YI NO UO NIAO and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Overhead lights, conduits, and ductwork well supported.

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

YO NO UD N/AD

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YED NO UO of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could Y[0 NO UD adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Q1I~I~ ITHlf

~l 1IIIC l~J(~

FFIIfF ff Sheet 3 of 7 Status: YZ NEI U[-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. C-17 Equip. Class1 (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Channel B Primary Isol and RPS Verticle Board Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Dennis Zercher,/Z"*.j l/

Date:

-6L// -

BUNS,*-

VVIT,,, ',IlD FROM %rUiLIC e.

.i..sURE UND'-ER 2.396 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUP4II -- VII I I IOLD) FREW PUDLIC DISCLO-URE UJl DER 2.39.

Sheet i of 5 Status: YZ NEI U[-I Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. C-253D Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Div II LOLO Set Bypass Panel Location: Bldg. Admin Floor El.

Room, Area CR Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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 YO NO 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?

YO NO UU N/AU YO NE UD N/AU

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

Y0 NO UU N/AU

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?

YU NU1 UO N/AID YED NE UUi I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

CII IHPI1 -AIHH~

fl PabPaP CfIRICR R

I~lR' Sheet 2 of 5 Status: Y* Nn' U[]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. C-253D Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Div II LOLO Set Bypass Panel Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Y[Z NEI UD N/AU

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YI NEI UD N/AU and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YO NEI UD N/AU YZ NO UD Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YIZ NE] UE adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

SWEs judged cork board next to panel is adequately anchored to wall with four screws such that it is not a seismic interaction hazard.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Anchored with four 3/8" bolt, which is approx. 36" high and 18" wide.

Evaluated by: Bruce M. Lory

-I Date:

Steve Kaas

r.! !H5!

- %.A!I9TI I m f F f P 1

if piC fI5.! flP IFIIJlP 9 ff Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

GYNG' WITHý 191=9 FReM.,,,,.*!

ISU I-lT'HHOLD/FROM rCDISCLOSURE UNDER 2.390 Sheet 1 of 3 Status: Y0 NO] Uf-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. C-253D Equip. ClassI (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Div II LOLO Set Bypass Panel (Internal Inspection)

Location: Bldg. Admin Floor El. Int Room, Area CR Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchorafe

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

YE NEI

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?

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?

YO NEI UD N/AD YEI NEI UD N/AD YO NO UD N/AD YE] NO UD N/AD YO NE UD 1Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUNSI - WITI II ILD, FROM

.ULIC, I-SCELGSURE UND1ER 2.398 Sheet 2 of 3 Status: Y0 NEI U-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. C-253D Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Div II LOLO Set Bypass Panel (Internal Inspection)

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YE NEI UD N/AC

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YE NC UC N/AC and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YE NC UC N/AC YO NEI U0 Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YE] NO U-adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

• C-253D internals were visually inspected by opening the front door. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Dennis Zercher I 1 1 1

Date:

V-9 -Zo13 Steve Kaas

/I-

GUNS, WITH II..... FROM.

D'ISCLO.SURE UNDER 2.390 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUP46I WITFHHOLD FROM PUBLIC DISOLOCUYRF UND9ER 2.399 Sheet 1 of 18 Status: YN NIO-U-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. C-91 Equip. Class, (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 Diesel Gen. Electrical Location: Bldg. TB Floor El.

Room, Area 11 DG RM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

YEI NO

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

There is one anchor in each comer of the cabinet. The anchorage is a clip bolted to the floor and welded to the cabinet framing.

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.)

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

Note that cabinet is braced to the concrete wall at the top with structural steel braces on both sides.

Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

YZ NE UE N/AD YO NE UE N/AE YiR ND UO N/AE YE NE U0 N/AO YO NEI UE-

1I AI-I WrITHHOLMD FROM PUBICIG DISCLOSURE UrNDER 2.39r Sheet 2 of 18 Status: Y1Z NEI U0 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. C-91 Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 Diesel Gen. Electrical Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Overhead room heaters deemed acceptable in Area Walk-B Checklist (AWC) performed last year by SWE's.

YU NE UEI N/AE

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, Y0 NEI ULI N/All and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Roof drain pipe nearby with Victaulic couplings. Pipe was deemed acceptable in Area Walk-B Checklist (A WC) performed last year.

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

Y0 NE UE N/AO YO NEI UE Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YN NEI UE adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

C-91 internals were visually inspected by opening doors in front and removing lower panels in the back. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

?

Dennis Zercher 671

,4*

-4

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

lCUNCl WIT 1 ITHIHrL FROM PUI"I*

DIt G6-ICO SU*' E U-DER 2.399 Sheet 1 of 19 Status: YV NO-U[-l Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. D11 Equip. ClassW (14) Distribution Panels Equipment Description Dlv I 1 25VDC Distribution Center Location: Bldg. ADMIN Floor El.

Room, Area #11 125 BA Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

Instructions for Completing Checldist This checklist may be used to document the results of the Seismic Walkdown of ani item of equipment on the SWEL. The space below each of the following questions may be used to record the results ofjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

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

YO NO

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

Visually located eight bolts anchoring panel to unistrut installed into masonry wall. Front screwed on panels were removed to view anchors.

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?

The wall supporting DII is a masonry wall. Not able to view the wall surface directly behind Dll, but no cracks were seen in wall around the panel.

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?

YO NO UO NIAEJ YO NEI UO N/AO YO NO UO N/AOl YOI NO UO N/Ai YO NO UE I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

.U...

v.....

iOLD FROM PU..i..

DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.398 Sheet 2 of 19 Status: YZ NO-] UL-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. 011 Equip. Class, (14) Distribution Panels Equipment Description Div I 125VDC Distribution Center Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Reader is referred to IE Bulletin 80-11 for the battery room masonry wall evaluation

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YI NE] UlI N/Ar" YNJ NEI U[I N/Ar1 Y0 NEI U[" N/AU YE NEI UE Other Adverse Conditions I1. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety finetions of the equipment?

D11 internal components were visually inspected by opening breaker compartments in front. Circuits 03 and 13 could not be opened due to "Hold Tags" on these. On the viewed components, no loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than I-0" to the plane of the cabinet door.

Y0 NEI UE Sixteen screws were noted to be missing from the front panels.

Electrical Maintenance Supervision notified. CAP AIR 1367974 and WO 447529 were found to already address this issue. All panels have at least three screws which was judged adequate to temporarily support the panels until all screws will be placed.

COmments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated by: Dennis Zercher Steve Kves Date:

/'-Z /-,

3 r.4sA,

Q!WQ IN5

'~I.ATI 11 'A'i AlF fM if _I. fliflCi CYImrII-lP Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SU.S. - WITI......

FROM P...........I..sL RE UN.ER.2.39-Sheet 1 of 4 Status: Y[

NEI U0-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment [D No. DQ1 Equip. Class1 (14) Distribution Panels Equipment Description Div I 125VDC Distribution Center Circuits 03.and 13 Internal Inspection Location: Bldg. ADMIN

- Floor El.

Room, Area #11 125 BA Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

Instructions for Completing Checidist 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 ofjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchora*e

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

Y NEI

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?

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?

YO NO UC N/AO YO NO UI N/A" YO NO U-N/AC YO NO UC N/Al YO NO U-I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

Ai WA!.

r'ITPaU fa, 1R'M P, fII ICOSR NE IG BIGG6E)SURF: YP4E)F=R 2.890 Sheet 2 of 4 Status: YN NEI U-I Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. DlI Equip. Class, (14) Distribution Panels Equipment Description Div I 125VDC Distribution Center Circuits 03 and 13 Internal Inspection Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YD ND UD N/AD YD ND UD N/AD YD ND UD N/AD YD ND UD Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YO ND U-adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

DI1 circuit 03 and 13 internal components were visually inspected by opening breaker compartments in front. On the viewed components, no loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1V-0" to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Bruce Lorv dA -4 Date:

05' t2--

Steve Kaas

.0,/ -"

Z.1,/az/y

SUNS' WITHHOLD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOlUREl UNDER 2.300 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

lUilCI WlITHHO1-lDr-=

FROW PUBICI itiCCliURE UNDER 2.399 Sheet i of 6 Status: Yo NE] U[]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist-(SWC)

Equipment ID No. D40 Equip. Class' (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters Equipment Description 125 VDC Swing Charger for 11 and 12 Batteries Location: Bldg. ADMIN Floor El.

Room, Area DIV I 250V Battery Room (Door 109)

Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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 Y0 NEI 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?

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

Small shrinkage cracks in concrete, judged to be satisfactory by SWE's.

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 SEWS

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

Y0 NEI UE3 N/A-!

YI NEI UE-N/AE" YZ NOJ UE! N/AE-Y10 NEI U" N/AE-YED NEI UE!

'Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

YUN, WIT-I u LD IG,9 FRW PU,*LIG DIC*,oLOU, U,,DER 2.390 Sheet 2 of 6 Status: Y Ni] Ul]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. D40 Equip. Class' (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters Equipment Description 125 VDC Swing Charg.er for 11 and 12 Batteries Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YO NEI UEI N/AD

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YN NEI ULI N/AD and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

HVAC Duct has strap bolt not fully screwed in. Judged ok in Area Walk By Inpection done previously.

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YO1 NOJ U-N/AD YO NE UO Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YOI NO:] UD adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

D40 internals were visually inspected by opening doors in front. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas X,

A

-'l--

Dennis Zercher Date:

V/ 11-',

9-i/-7G /3

SUNSI WITHHOLD FROMVt PUBLI I-11CLOSURE UNIDER 2.3"0 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

UP4 WITI 11 LD. FRWOM.U.LIC I...L."URE UP"DER 2.390 Sheet 1 of 5 Status: YN NEI UI-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. D54 Equip. Class, (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters Equipment Description Swing Charger, D3A, D3B (13) Battery Location: Bldg. ADMIN Floor El.

Room, Area DIV I 250V Battery Room (Door 109)

Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 8fjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchoraae

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one YiO NO 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?

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

Small shrinkage cracks in grout and concrete, judged to be satisfactory by SWE's.

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.)

3" minimum length of weld at each corner to floor plate, which is consistent with the anchorage configuration in the SEWS.

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

Y1Z NEI Ur-NIA-YS NEI UI N/AL YI NEI UEI N/AD Y0 NEI U-N/AD YID NO U-

' Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

86UNC8 WITHHL FROM PUBLIC DIOCLOCSURE UNDE)R 2.898 Sheet 2 of 5 Status: YN NE] U[-'

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. D54 Equip. Class' (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters Equipment Description Swing Charger, D3A, D3B (13) Battery Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

8. Are'overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

Minimum gap of 2" between panels YN NEI UD N/AD YO NEI U-- N/AO Y0 NO UE NWAD Y0 NEI UO Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could Y0 NEil U[J adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

D54 internals were visually inspected by opening doors in front. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1" to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Steve Keas

/-L-Dennis Zercher Date:

5/- //- ?"13

Q! i1Hzi -.AA!T-11 IPI Plf R'M P PI PIC Z fI' i fl5I IFIlfQf

~

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

813H81 - VVIT-I 11 ILD[:

FR81 rUDalIC DIseLo3HRE H JDTr~ 2....

Sheet i of 8 Status: YM NE] UE]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. D90 Equip. Class, (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters Equipment Description Swing Char.er, D6A. D6B (16) Battery Location: Bldg. EFT Floor El.

Room, Area DIV 2 (Door 171)

Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

3" of weld in each corner to wide flange beam. Frame welded to embeds in concrete floor.

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?

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.)

Anchorage configuration consistent with SEWS

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

YIR NEI YO NEI UiJ N/AU YO ND Ul N/AD YED ND U' N/AD Y10 ND UO N/AD YZ ND UU I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUNSI ITHHl1Ul FROM PUBLI DISL*I SU*)RE UNDlrER 2.390 Sheet 2 of 8 Status: YE N[-] U-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. D90 Equip. Class' (16) Battery Chargers and lnverters Equipment Description Swing Charger. D6A, D6B (16) Battery Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YO NE UD N/AD

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YI0 N[D ULI N/AU and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Copper water line overhead. See Area Walk By for resolution of this item.

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

Adequate gap between panels Y0 NO UD N/AU YO NEI UEO Other Adverse Conditions S11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could Y0 NO UD adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

D90 internals were visually inspected by opening doors in front. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Dennis Zercher

• 4 tZ

,,A" Date: *,//'

UN V

WITH HOLJ G

FROIV ICBI=II DlIS*L RFi UNIDER 2.39E0 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUNS' w1T-1 11 IlDl FREW PUDLIC DIGGCLOSURE UND9ER 2.390 Sheet 1 of 15 Status: Y0 NEI UL-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-133B Equip. Class' (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description 480VAC MOTOR CONTROL CENTER 133B Location: Bldg.. TB Floor El. 1 Room, Area South Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

YED NZ

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

The MCC is anchored to support frame with two bolts. MCC is attached to adjacent MCC with two bolts front and back.

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.)

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

YO NEI U0 N/AC YED NE] U0 N/AC YE] NEI U1 N/A0D YE] NEI UD N/A0 Y0 NEI U0 Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

~'.I IH5~.I

'.A'ITI II Ifli fl FflflM P1 IflI IC'. flIe~.r1 (Y'.I IPF I IHflFP 9 ~fl Sheet 2 of 15 Status: YZ NEi UE-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-133B Equip. Class' (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description 480VAC MOTOR CONTROL CENTER 133B Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Y0 N["] UOI N/A[]

Security barrier well supported, grating tied to support structure Lights are rod hung and able to swing into conduit above MCC in a seismic event (as noted in Area Walk By for TB) Lights are above MCC 133B and conduit deemed robust enough to be unaffected by impact from the comparatively fragile lighting system.

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YIO NOl UO N/AOl and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Lights are rod hung, not likely to collapse Overhead cable tray well supported Overhead copper air line well supported

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YZ NOI U0 N/AEl YIDNEIUEO Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YIN NOI UO adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Area is being modified for new Feedwater Pumps / Motors. Multiple scaffold, platforms, and construction equipment in area making seismic interaction evaluation very difficult.

Evaluated by: Dennis Ze her Steve Kaas Date:

-5"j--2.-o,(3

C~I II~IC~U

~AIIrLILif~I r'~ I~I~II'.r.A Ii I~I If' r~IO,'I f~C'I ir~r~ I IM~~I~D ~

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUNSI - WITI II I-LD-FRM UiLi D COi.,SURE UNDER 2.39E, Sheet i of 14 Status: YE] NN UL]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-1.4 Equip. Clas (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description 480V MCC -(34)

Location: Bldg. EFT Floor El.

Room, Area ALL Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided. at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchorage

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (ie.,, is the item one YD NO 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?

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

Typical shrinkage cracks only. No adverse affect on seismic capacity of anchorage..

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

(Note: This question only applies. if the item is one ofthe 50% for which. an, anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

MCC welded to 6Wbaseplates using two Xx 114" Milef welds on 60 centers. Baseplates anchored to 1oor using (12) - 5/8'.diameter anchors 6n :2' centers, Details are per SQUG SEWS anchorage calculaion 91.C2687.

'Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment YO NEI UQ N/AD YO. NO] UO N/AIJ YO NO UD WAD YE) NEl UO N/AN YO NEI UD

GUNSI ll IT-HHOI FROM PUWBLI DIGCLOSlURE UNDER 2.390 Sheet 2 of 14 Status: Y"1 NO UFA Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment 1D No. MCC-134 Equip. Class1 (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description 480V MCC (B34)

I-nteraction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YE NO UO NIAQ

1) 3" diameter line entering room from south wall has just a dead weight support near south wall and then runs horizontally. over to MCC. This line appears to contain cast iron threaded fittings. Concern Is If this small line structurally fails in seismic event, it could impact MCC.

2) 4diameter line from south wall Is connected at wall with structural steel anchored to CAP concrete. It has victaulic coupling midspan and is anchored above MCC with U-bolt/I-beam support Concern is diffdrential displacement of south steel beam versus north. CIP wall.

3) 4-diameter piping containing victaulic couplings have good structural support to CIP. SWE sjudge them adequate.

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YlR NEI UE] N/AOI and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Drywall noted and determined to meet seismic I/ over I criteria based on documentation in modificaton 79N745 (Doc D400)

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

Yi NE] UE] N/AD

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YO N] UEI]

of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and fbund no other seismic. conditions that could YN NE]

NI'-

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Housekeeping: Sheet metal screw missing on cover to west end cubicle at-top. Same issue found on east end cubicle.

Evahunfed hv~ RnII'!a M I nrv Date:.

t21 Steve Kaas

CUSIJP

- WIT-I 11 IE)LD FREW PUBLIC) DiseLeSURE UNDER 2.390 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report

SUNSI -

ITI i1i lD FROM uDLIe iDsLEOlURE UP4DER 2.390 Sheet i of 33 Status: YZ N-] U[]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment D No. MCC-134 Equip. Class' (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description 480V MCC (B34) (Internal Inspection)

Location: Bldg. EFT Floor EIMER _ Room, Area ALL Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 judgments 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)?

YO NO

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?

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?

YE NE UE N/AE YE NE UE N/AE YE NEI U-N/A-YE NEI UE N/AE YO NEI UE I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

L,

l. L U- -. -J U Sheet 2 of 33 Status: Y[

NEI U[--

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-134 Equip. Class, (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description 480V MCC (B34) (Internal Inspection)

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YE] NO] Ur] N/AD

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YE] NE] UE] N/AE and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YE] N] UE] N/AE YE] NEI U Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YE] NE] UE]

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

MCC-134 internals were visually inspected on 4/11/13. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 26" to the plane of the bucket doors.

Evaluated by: Dennis Zercher_,

2 Steve Keas Date:

41- /16 2-, /.3

%.UI*I VVI I 1 11 II JL-LJ I rl

-. IVI F U

)LI'J LI..J

• .-UIIN.JLIx 4.00OU Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUNSI - WIT-i-HOLD. FREM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.396 Sheet 1 of 14 Status: YZ NOi UMI Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-312 Equip. Class' (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description DIV 2 (HPCI) 250V DC MOTOR CONTROL CENTER 312 Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area HPCI ROOM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

YZ NEI

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?

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.)

Anchorage is consistent with plant documentation (SEWS). There are also angle iron brackets each end of the MCC adding redundant anchorage.

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

YO ND UD N/Al Y0 ND UD N/AD YO NEI UD N/AD Y0 ND UD N/AD Y0 ND UD I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

91119 IKlH flflFCMP R'I l9IfllIFIinfF ff Sheet 2 of 14 Status: Y[0 NE] UM Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-312 Equip. ClassI (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description DIV 2 (HPCI) 250V DC MOTOR CONTROL CENTER 312 Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

OVHD trolley has a stop YE NEI U0 N/AD]

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YN NEI ULI N/Ar]

and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

Wheels locked on cart next to MCC YE NEI UtD N/A[I Y0 NE UI Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YO NEI UD]

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

MCC opened and interior visually inspected. No loose hardware visible.

Per direction from site Operations, cubicles with Hold Tags were not allowed to be opened during this walkdown.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas

,,,[,/6

//

Date:

-erl

2

'-1 fl*.nni5g 7Rrechor

.Dennis IZ----.e

SUNSI - WITHHOLD FROM PUBLIC DIOSLO3SURE UNDER 2.390 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SP,8 - WIT-,,,,EOLDB FROM PUDLC D',CLOSURE UNDER 2.390 Sheet 1 of 7 Status: Y NOl UE]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-312 Equip. ClassI (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description DIV 2 (HPCI) 250V DC MOTOR CONTROL CENTER 312 Walk-down of cubicles D312-01. D312-02. D312-03. D312-06. D312-10. D312-12 Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area HPCI ROOM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 judgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchoraze

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

YI-NEI

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?

YOJ NO UO N/AF YI-NEI UO N/AD

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

YO NO UQ-N/AF

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?

YD NO UO N/AU YU NE UOI I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

7 Hr]:

H U U ii I I I I :1 ii~ I I: I: ~:::..:.I I 1~ ;1 ii I u~: II I I V HI Sheet 2 of 7 Status: YZ N[] U[]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ED No. MCC-312 Equip. Class' (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description DIV 2 (HPCI) 250V DC MOTOR CONTROL CENTER 312 Walk-down of cubicles D212.01Q D.12-02 QD712-03. Q312-06. Q312-10. D312-12 Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YD NEI U[0 N/A]

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YE] ND U[-] N/AD and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YE] NEI U0- N/AE YE] NEI U0-Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YE] NEI U0 adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Walk-down of the cubicles D312-01, D312-02, D312-03, D312-06, D312-10, D312-12.. Internal components were visually inspected. No loose components were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

s/-/

.A Bruce Lorv

~~5;41i3~~

,Jl..JI.,1d1,J.

-- VVI I I II I%..lL_,

I I%'.JiVI I-L..L..LIVJ LJI*...LA%.L JI.P.JIXL.

LJl'4LJ~l.

L...*.P;1JO Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

Sheet I of 4 Status: Y0 NEI UE-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-313 Equip. Class, (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description DIV I 250V DC Motor Control Center 313 Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area MG Set Room Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

YN NEI

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?

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.)

Only shrinkage cracks are evident. There are no structural cracks.

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

YN ND UD N/AD YI NEI U-- N/AUl YN NEI UEI N/AUl YE ND Ur-N/AUl YO NI UUU

' Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

sU.ClI -II II IOLD:9 FROM 1

UDI1.I-DICLOGSIURE= UNDE-.R 2.390 Sheet 2 of 4 Status: Y0 NEI U[]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-313 Equip. Class" (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description DIV 1 250V DC Motor Control Center 313 Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Cable tray above supported on brackets and deemed adequate.

Y0 NEI U[I N/A--

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YZ NEI UE-N/AEl and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Fire protection piping is welded steel and seismically supported. HVAC duct is trapeze rod-hung to 112" shell expansion anchors.

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YO NEI UE] N/A[I YN NEI UE]

Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YN NE] UE]

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated by: Walter Diordievic Al Date:

I1,,,

Scott Luckiesh

GUP461 WITI 11 OELD FROM PUDBlC DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.890 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

.UN.I WITHHOLD FROMP.

ILI.

DISC-. OSURE UD*ER 2.390 Sheet i of ii Status: YZ N[l U[:]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-313 Equip. Class, (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description DIV I 250V DC Motor Control Center 313 (Internal Inspection)

Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area MG Set Room Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 judgments 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 YO NO 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?

YO-NO UD N/AD YO NEI UD N/AD

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

Y] NEI Ui N/A]

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?

YO NEI UD N/Al YO NEI UO I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

sup.s. - wI. 11 LD. FROM.u.i.

DIsL. sURE... UNDER 2.39E Sheet 2 of 11 Status: YN N[:] UE Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MCC-313 Equip. Class, (01) Motor Control Centers Equipment Description DIV I 250V DC Motor Control Center 313 (Internal Inspection)

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YO NO UD N/AO

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YO No UO N/AD and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YO NO UO N/AO YO NEI UO Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YO NO UO adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

MCC-313 internals were visually inspected on 5/07/13. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Dennis Zercher Date:

5- --- 2013 Steve Kaas

ý'- 7-6/ 7

SUNS' - WIT.

I.LD FROM.u..L. DISCLOsURE UNDER 2.390

.Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUNSI WI 8I:I IiO FREW PUDiL:_

DI.C.LOUJF1 UNDER 2.390 Sheet I of 4 Status: Yt N[-] UE-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MO-2374 Equip. Class' (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment Description Main Steam Line Drain - Outboard Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area Steam Chase Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchorag~e

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

YEI NO

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?

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?

YEI NO] UI] N/AO YEI NEI U-- N/AIO YEI NEI UE-N/AO YEI NE] UF-N/AO YEI NEI UE-I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SU..S. -

IT.. ', OLD FROM F2UDLC DI..LO SURE UNDER 2.396 Sheet 2 of 4 Status: Y[

N[il U-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. MO-2374 Equip. Class' (08) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment Description Main Steam Line Drain - Outboard Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YIR NEI U[] N/AU

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YO NEI ULi N/AUl and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YIR NE] UE] N/AU YED NEI UO Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YED NE] UE3 adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated bv: Steve Kaas Date:

Dennis Zercher

UNS'I WITII II ILI FREW PULICID*llO--LURE UNDER 2.398 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

.UP... - WIT. 1.. I.

FROM.. BLi... Dis.

.SURE UNDER 2.396 Sheet 1 of 6 Status: YO NEI UL]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N3346A Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 EDG Air CMPSR 1 (K-8A) Local Disconnect Switch Location: Bldg. TB Floor El.

Room, Area 11 DG RM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

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

Two unistruts support N4301A and N3346A. Equipment is bolted to unistrut. Unistrut is anchored to concrete wall. Condition deemed acceptable.

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?

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?

YD NEI YO NDI UD N/AD YZ ND UD N/AD YED ND UD N/AD YD NDI UD N/AN YO NND UD I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUSIJP8 WITI 11 IGLD) FREW PUD~LI DieiSCLOSURE UNDER 2.390 Sheet 2 of 6 Status: Y0 NEI U[]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N3346A Equip. Class, (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 EDG Air CMPSR I (K-8A) Local Disconnect Switch Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YM NE Ui N/AU

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YO NEI UU N/AU and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Fire protection piping well supported from above.

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

No potential for differential movement of attached lines.

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YO NU UU N/AU YO NE UD Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YED NEI UD adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

SUNSI - VITHHOLD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.390 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUPN61 WIT! 1 IEI IOL FREW PUDICB=

DI1SCLOSU1RE UNDER 2.390 Sheet i of 6 Status: YN NEI U-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N3346A Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 EDG Air CMPSR I (K-BA) Local Disconnect Switch (Internal Inspection)

Location: Bldg. TB Floor El.

Room, Area 11 DG RM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 judgments 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 YO NEil 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?

YEI NEI U0 N/AO YO NE UE N/AL

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

YE NE UE N/AE

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?

YE NEI UE N/AL YO NEI UE

' Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUPN61 WITHHO1IELD FROM PUBLIC DIGCLOSGURE UNDEER 2.390 Sheet 2 of 6 Status: Yo NE[] UI-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)'

Equipment H) No. N3346A Equip. Class, (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 EDG Air CMPSR 1 (K-8A) Local Disconnect Switch (Internal Insnection)

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YE] NE UE N/AU

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YE NEI U-N/AU and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YE NEI UE N/AU YO NO U-Other Adverse Conditions II. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YE NE UE adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

N3346A internals were visually inspected on 4/2/13. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1'to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas x&

7-6~4~

Date:

--zi *.s

..<- 7.

D*.nni.g 7*.rchor Dennis Zercher

NSI WIT.....

I.I..D FROM.ULe.ICDI LO.URE UNDER 2.398 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

Ai1 !HPAI WIHfIf

-MP R C lIf1fflm

~lP92 Sheet 1 of 4 Status: YV N["] UE-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N3347 Equip. Class, (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Motor Starter for K-10A Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area East Wall Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

YI-N

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?

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?

YO NEI U] N/AD YO NEI U] N/AD YO NEI UD N/AEl YEI NEI UU N/AN YO NEI UL t Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUN..il

- VVITI 11 I,.DI,- FREW PUDLIl DISCLOSURE UND.,,

ER 2.390 Sheet 2 of 4 Status: Y[

N[] U[i]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N3347 Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Motor Starter for K-10A Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YN NEI UO N/Al

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YIo NO UDI N/AD and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YZ NOI UO] N/AD3 YO NE UD Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YE NO UO adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated by: Bruce Lor1

ý&A.

Date: 04Ae22 Steve Kaas

I.)tLJlld,.Jl -

VVl I I II I*JL.LJ FI I.IVI F LPJL.LIJ ~I.Jl*P.JL~.%JJ*IL[*.. *.JlII4JL-IX L..,..01J Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SU,,,

- WITI II IOLD FROM 'U.LIC DISCLOSURE_ UNDER 2.393 Sheet 1 of 4 Status: Y[* N[-] UE-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N3347 Equip. Class, (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Motor Starter for K-IOA (Internal Inspection)

Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area East Wall Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

Instructions for Completing Checldist 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 ofjudgments 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)?

YE NEI

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

3. Is the anchorage free of conosion 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?

YE NO UD N/AD YE NE UD N/AD YE NEI U0 N/AD YE NE UD N/AD YE NE UO IEnter the equipment class name from Appendix 13: Classes of Equipment.

5'iIP W A!I Hd fl FPAN PI IlI IC flIRrI flRHRFP INIPFR P2 QAn Sheet 2 of 4 Status: Y[

NI] U-l Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N3347 Equip. Class, (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description Motor Starter for K-10A (Internal Inspection)

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free friom impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YE NE UE N/AEI

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YE3 NE UDI N/AEI and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YE NO UE N/AL]

YE NE UD Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YLI NE UD]

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

N33,67 internals were visually inspected on 4/11/13. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

rn Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

///'!" 1/7 Date:

V-/6. z1/.3 Dennis Zercher-

k*.J,.JI'4,.JI --

VVi I I II IX.JL,-I.,

I I%%.,,iVl I

IL LI.Jl,-Il,, ~I,,l,.'J

,,,.*,'.J.jS

.JlI

'L,.

%JI,4lJL..Il% £,,*q./1,,,.J Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUP1I8 - WIT'.1...

D FREW Puale DIe'CL..URE UNDER 2.39.

Sheet 1 of 6 Status: YN NF-ULI]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N4301A Equip. ClassI (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 EDG Air CMPSR 2(K-BB) Local Disconnect Switch Location: Bldg. TB Floor El.

Room, Area 11 DG RM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

Instructions for Completing Checldist 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 ofjudgments 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 YED NO of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

Two unistruts support N4301A and N3346A. Equipment is bolted to unistrut. Unistrut is anchored to concrete wall. Condition deemed acceptable.

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?

YID NEI UE N/AU YO NEI UE] N/AD

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

YOl NEI UE] N/AU

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?

YE] NEI UE] N/A0 YO NEI UE I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUMS. - WITI "1 IOLD FROM PU..i..

.IS.L.SURE UNDEFR 2.359.

Sheet 2 of 6 Status: YO NEI UE-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N4301A Equip. Class, (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 EDG Air CMPSR 2(K-8B) Local Disconnect Switch Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YO NEl UEI N/AD

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YE NEil ULI N/AU and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Fire protection piping well supported above.

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

No potential for differential movement of attached lines.

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YE NEI UU N/AU-YE NEi UE Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YO NEI UL adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated by: Walter Diordievic

~,'t' Date:

k/l

ý&/

Scott Luckiesh

SUP48I - WITI 11 IOlDB FROM PuOilIC DIel:SCLO RE UNDER 2.396 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

Sheet 1 of 7 Status: YN NR U[]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment HD No. N4301A Equip. Class' (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 EDG Air CMPSR 2(K-8B) Local Disconnect Switch (Internal Inspection)

Location: Bldg. TB Floor El.

Room, Area 11 DG RM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchorale

1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one YE NOi 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?

YE[

NEI U[] N/AE YEr NO UE-N/AE

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?

YE-NE UE N/AE

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?

YE NE UE N/AE-YEI NE UE I Enter the equipment class name from Appendix 13: Classes of Equipment.

SU...

- WIT.I........ FROM.U.i.

DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.390 Sheet 2 of 7 Status: Y0 NO U-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. N4301A Equip. Class, (20) Instrumentation and Control Panels and Cabinets Equipment Description 11 EDG Air CMPSR 2(K-8B) Local Disconnect Switch (Internal Inspection)

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YEI NEI UI-N/AD

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YE-] NEI UE-N/All and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YEI] NEI U[0 N/AU YEI] NE UE Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YEI NEI UE-adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

N4301A internals were visually inspected on 4/3/13. No loose intemals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door.

/

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

.~

Dennis Zercher

-2Z/)

'5-0.9 -odli

SUNSi - VVITHHOUL FROM ruDLi'C DISCLOSURE UNjDEIRm 2.390 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SUP4,

- WIT_ 1, I8[, FROM PuaLe DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.398 Sheet 1 of 4 Status: Y[

No U[-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. P-73A Equip. Class' (14) Distribution Panels Equipment Description 480V Power Panel Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area MG SET ROOM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

YN NEI

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?

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.)

Anchorage configuration is consistent with plant drawing # NX-20614 which shows six 1/2" diameter anchors.

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

Y9 NO UD N/AD YN NO UDI N/ADl YZ NO UO N/AU]

YN NOI UD N/AD YED NO UD i Enter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUNS'I WITI II I81-- FROM I

UBLI BDIseL*OsIRE H)UI ER 2.390 Sheet 2 of 4 Status: Y[

NEI' Ur Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. P-73A Equip. Class, (14) Distribution Panels Equipment Description 480V Power Panel Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YN NO] U-- N/AOl

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YE NEI Ur-N/Ar and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

Rigid conduit runs are adequate for seismic loads.

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YED NEI UE] N/AU YZ NEI U'

Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YZ NEI UE]

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated by: Bruce M. Lorv 4e I

Steve Keas 5

ýe'

'Z-Date: O0/? 2-1

8UN11i - WITHHOLD FRQM FUBLiG DiSCLOXUR E UNDER, 2.39t Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

GYU46I WITHHOLDG6 FROM PUlBLIC DISOLOCUYRE UN4DER 2.899 Sheet I of 3 Status: YN NE] U-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. P-73A Equip. Class' (14) Distribution Panels Equipment Description 480V Power Panel (Internal Inspection)

Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area MG SET ROOM Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

YW NO

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?

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 theitem 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?

YO NO UFI NIAO-YO NEI UE] N/AU YO NO UD N/AD YD NEIl U-N/A0 YO ND UU IEnter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

GUNSI wITHH 11OLD-u-,

FROm.uU..DI. BLOs-..URE UNDER 2.393 Sheet 2 of 3 Status: YE NEI UE-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment MD No. P-73A Equip. Class, (14) Distribution Panels Equipment Description 480V Power Panel (Internal Inspection)

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YO NEI UO N/AE

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceilingtiles and lighting, Y] NEI UE-N/A[]

and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YE] NE UE-N/AE YO NO UE Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YE] NEI UE]

adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

P-73A internals were visually inspected on 5/07/13. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place. No internal components were visible with the door open since the view is blocked by internal panels screwed into place. SWE's not allowed closer than 1 to the plane of the cabinet door.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas I'll Date:

/ Z,?

Dennis Zercher 5-,-

?...

_s-7 0IJ

.lJlP4,.I VVl I I II I'./I--U I

I\\AJlVl I '*J.JL.LI*.d UI

• I

'*L' JI.JI\\L.

• .JINIL.L-I\\ I..J.t Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

Sheet I of 4 Status: YN N[] U-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. RV-2-71A Equip. Class, (07) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment Description A SRV Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area DW West Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments and findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchoraae

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

YEI NIZ

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?

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.)

YE-NEI U0 N/AR YE] NEI U[] N/AH YEi NEI U] N/AN YEI NEI U-' N/A[D

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

IEnter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUP...

WITI 1. I"LDB FROM.U...l DIOCLO' URE U...ER 2..90 Sheet 2 of 4 Status: YIZ NEI U-]

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. RV-2-71A Equip. Class' (07) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment Description A SRV Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

YN NF'I UU N/AU

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, Y[ NEI UFIJ N/A[I and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

No overhead equipment

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damnage?

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

YEJ NEl U-- N/AN Y0 NEI UE Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YO NEI UL-adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas 7

Date:

s-?Y//S Dennis Zercher

SUP...

- W..I.

IOLD FREWM.I.....

DISCLO.URE UNDER 2.39E Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

SU...

- WI...

1 18OLD FROM....

i. DI..L.sURE UNDER 2..9 Sheet 1 of ii Status: YO NE] U['

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. Y81 Equip. Class' (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters Equipment Description Div 2 120VAC Class 1E Inverter Location: Bldg. EFT Floor EI.

Room, Area North Manufacturer, Model, Etc. (optional but recommended)

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 ofjudgments 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)?

Y0 NEI

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?

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.)

Anchorage in accordance with Y81 SEWS.

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

YZ NO UO N/AO YO NEI U-N/AO Y0 NO UO N/AO YO NO UO N/AO YO NEI UO IEnter the equipment class name from Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

SUlIP4 WITI

.IeLD FREW PUDLIG I..tlOiURE U...DER 2.89E Sheet 2 of 11 Status: YN NE] U[-

Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No. Y81 Equip. Class' (16) Battery Charqers and Inverters Equipment Description Div 2 120VAC Class IE Inverter Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Overhead light and tray well supported. No other concerns YM NEI UD N/AD

8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YN NO U-N/Al and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Roof drain at East wall with Victaulic coupling well supported Roof drain at North wall supported at floor and ceiling. Previously evaluated by CAP AIR 1346922 as being adequate in seismic event.

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?

314" gap to adjacent panel Y-83 judged ok Y0 NEI UL] N/AC YE NEI UO Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YE NEI UD adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Y-81 internals were visually inspected by opening the two front doors. No loose internals were noted, fasteners appeared to be in place, and components appeared adequately supported based on the viewing angle and distance available. SWE's not allowed closer than 1' to the plane of the cabinet door..

Evaluated by: Dennis Zercher C,

Date:

Steve Kaaq 7,

7

'~I IH5~.I - ~.AJITI II Ifli fl rRflM P1 In, IC. flI~Yi flf~L IflF I IHflFP 9 VŽ.fl Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report SUNS!

WITTHOLD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.390 C

Deferred Area Walk-By Checklists (AWCs)

This appendix provides the Area Walk-By Checklists (AWC) completed after Reference 13 was submitted. The AWCs completed prior to November 27, 2012 were provided in Table C-1 of the Reference 13 report, and are not provided in this supplement.

NSPM completed three deferred Area Walk-Bys. Table C-1 below provides the list of the deferred Area Walk-By checklists that were completed, as well a list of SWEL items associated with each area, and whether or not the checklist was marked as "Y" or "N" (the checklist status). If a checklist status is marked "Y," then the SWEs concluded in the field that the equipment was seismically acceptable. If a checklist status is marked as "N," then the SWEs judged there was a potential adverse condition which required additional information to determine if the equipment was seismically adequate, complied with current site procedures and met current licensing basis requirements. None of the observations noted in the SWCs were found to be adverse seismic conditions that significantly affected or degraded safety related functions of equipment.

The AWCs are provided after this table, and are in the same chronological order as listed in the table below.

This table and the following AWCs include information on the location of SWEL components, which is considered SUNSI, of which the loss, issue, modification, or unauthorized access can reasonably be foreseen to harm the safe operation of the nuclear plant. Pages which contain SUNSI information have been marked with a header, and the sensitive information, such as locations and pictures of safety-related components, has been redacted. A copy of this report with the SUNSI information redacted has been provided as Enclosure 2 of this letter package.

Table C-1: Monticello Completed AWCs After November 27, 2012 Area Walk-By Area Walk-by Checklist Equipment Tag Checklist Designation Status (Y/N) 37 R-DRYWELL AO-2-80A Y

38 RX-STEAMCHASE MO-2374 Y

Appendix C - Deferred Area Walk-By Checklists C-1

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report SUNSI WITTHOLD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER 2.390 NOTE: The Area Walk-By PAB-CR, associated with deferred SWEL 1 items C-1 7 and C-253D, was completed prior to November 27, 2012. The results of this Area Walk-By were provided in Appendix C of the Reference 13 report.

Appendix C - Deferred Area Walk-By Checklists C-2

SUGY1 WI:TTHOLD FROM PYUBLc DISCLOSU6R UNDER 2.390 Sheet 1 of 5 Status: Y] N-- U[-1 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area, Drywell 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 judgments and findings.

Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

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

YN NE] UE] N/AL]

2. Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant YN NE] UE] N/Ai degraded conditions?

3. Based on a visual inspection 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 cable trays appear to be inside acceptable limits)?

HVAC ductingjudged to be adequately supported where possible to view.

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)?

YE NEI UE1 N/AE1 YM NEI UD-N/AF1 I If the room in which the SWEL item is located is veiy large (e.g., Turbine Hall), the area selected should be described.

This selected area should be based on judgment, e.g., on the order of about 35 feet from the SWEL item.

StUfft - VVI:f 1 11LDE FROM PUBLICl EDI3CLOSURE UNDER 21398 Sheet 2 of 5 Status: Y[9 NEI U[]

'. &hs Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area' Drywell

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 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)?

Significant amounts of temporary scaffold in area due to refueling outage activities.

YE NEI UEi N/AZ YlN NEI UE-N/AZ YN NEI UE[

N/AZ-

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YN NEI UE1 adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Limited visibility of equipment and seismic interactions due to congestion, shielding and scaffolding in drywall.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

____/,

Dennis Zercher A

3

6UNPI WrrTI IOLD FREOM.U.LIG L..U.RE UPDER 2.890 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report The remaining pages are withheld from public disclosure

.UP...

WITT I...

FROM.U..I..

URE UP.ER 2.39.

Sheet 1 of 7 Status: Y9 NO u[--

Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

/h. Q Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area' Steam Chase 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 ofjudgments and findings.

Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

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

Y[

NEI U-N/AZ

2. Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant YZ NEI UI N/AEZ degraded conditions?

3. Based on a visual inspection 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 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 area (e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

YE NE UE N/AZ YE NE U-N/AZ I 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 of about 35 feet from the SWEL item.

Sheet 2 of 7 Status: Y[-] NEI U[]

-V' 4/s'/.ý Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area' Steam Chase

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 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)?

There was temporary scaffolding, tools, etc in the steam chase, but the plant is shutdown with the core unloaded.

YO NE] U-] N/AF-YZ NEI UI-N/A[

YO NEI U-1 N/AD

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YE NM UMi adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Three of the anchor nuts are not run all the way down on a permanent platform. The platform is fastened to the East wall near the South end. This represents a potential safety issue and not a seismic concern to equipment.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

Dennis Zercher

_-_______3

- 17

(/

GUYI..

WF... T9' D FROM PUB.IC.

"IG..LOSURE.

UNDER 2....

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report

SUNCfi WITTEI ICLFRO)M rUDiLIC DI3CLCSIRE UNDBER 2.393 Sheet I of 7 Status: AM N-] u-]

/'Q "h/,;/

Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location: Bldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area, Drywell 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 judgments and findings.

Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

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

Y[

NEI U-1 N/A-]

2. Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant YM NEI UF N/AL degraded conditions?

3. Based on a visual inspection 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 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 area (e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

YN NE(( UrU N/AZ YM NEI UE N/AL 1 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 of about 35 feet from the SWEL item.

CUC, WITT' I..L. FROM.I......

DIC'LE)URE U....ER 2.898 Sheet 2 of 7 Status: YN-NEI UM Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

"4ýl/rl1g Location: B3ldg. RX Floor El.

Room, Area' Drywell

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 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)?

YO NO) UL-N/AL YZ NEI U-1 N/AE)

YO NEI ULI N/AEl

8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YZ NEI UF-adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area?

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Limited visibility of equipment and seismic interactions due to congestion, shielding and scaffolding in drywall.

Evaluated by: Steve Kaas Date:

/'

i..

Dennis Zercher

SUP46I WFFITTI91O9 FROW PUBLIC BIGCLOCGURE UNDER 2.390 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Seismic Walkdown Report D

Peer Review Report This appendix includes the Peer Review Team's report on the results of the deferred seismic walkdowns. This appendix includes a revision to the signed Peer Review Checklist for the SWEL from Appendix E, Checklist for Peer Review of SSC Selection, of Reference 1.

Table D-1 of this appendix includes information on the location of SWEL components, which is considered SUNSI, of which the loss, issue, modification, or unauthorized access can reasonably be foreseen to harm the safe operation of the nuclear plant.

Pages which contain SUNSI information have been marked, and the sensitive information has been redacted.

Appendix D - Peer Review Report D-1

Peer Review Report for Near Term Task Force (NTTF) Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Walkdown Inspection of Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant September 12,2013 Prepared b Peer Reviewers as6n kindred (Team Leader)

Date S ottindred VD Scc-ot"ifu kieAd. P*E Date 1

1. Introduction Overview This updated report documents the independent peer review for the Near Term Task Force (NTTF) Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns performed at MNGP after November 27, 2012. The peer review addresses only the changes made to the SWEL list after November 27, 2012 and includes the following activities:

Review of the selection of the structures, systems, and components (SSCs) that are included in the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL).

Review of a sample of the checklists prepared for the Seismic Walkdowns &

Area Walk-bys.

Review of any licensing basis evaluations.

Review of the decisions for entering the potentially adverse conditions into the plant's Corrective Action Plan (CAP).

Review of the final submittal report.

The peer reviewers for MNGP are Messrs. Jason Kindred and Scott Luckiesh of NSPM.

Mr. Kindred is designated the Peer Review Team Leader. Neither of these engineers were involved in the seismic walkdown inspections performed after November 27, 2012 so that they can maintain their independence from the project. Mr. Kindred is a degreed mechanical engineer with over twenty years of nuclear engineering experience and is a licensed Senior Reactor Operator. Mr. Luckiesh is a structural engineer with a graduate structural engineering degree and over sixteen years of structural experience and over three years of nuclear power plant experience. Mr. Luckiesh has also been trained as a Seismic Capability Engineer (5-day, EPRI-SQUG Training).

The SWEL development was performed by Robert Walstrom. The Peer Review team was involved in the review of SWEL 1 and SWEL 2. The Peer Review ensured the lists covered various systems in the plant and all five safety functions listed in Section 3 of EPRI Technical Report 1025286(1). All issues identified by the Peer Review team were corrected prior to completion of the Seismic Walkdown Report. None of the issues identified by the peer review team were significant enough to warrant entry into the corrective action process. The completed SWEL Peer Review Checklist is found in. The discussion for the SWEL development peer review is found in Section 2.

The peer review of the seismic walkdown inspection started on September 4, 2013 with a peer check of the Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWCs) and Area Walkdown Checklists (AWCs). The discussion of the sample SWCs and AWCs is provided in Section 3.

No issues were identified which challenged the current licensing basis.

1 EPRI Technical Report 1025286, Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, dated June 2012.

2

2. Peer Review - Selection of SSCs Purpose The purpose of this section is to describe the process to perform the peer review of the selected structures, systems, and components, (SSCs) that were included in the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL).

This section documents the Peer Review - Selection of SSCs performed for MNGP.

Peer Review Activity - Selection of SSCs The guidance in EPRI Technical Report 1025286, Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, dated June 2012, Section 3: Selection of SSCs was used as the basis for this review.

This peer review Was based on interviews with the following individuals who were directly responsible for development of the SWEL:

o Mr. Robert Walstrom, Retired SRO/Shift Manager This peer review utilized the checklist shown in the SWG, Appendix F: Checklist for Peer Review of SSC Selection.

For SWEL 1 development, the following actions were completed in the peer review process:

Verification that the SSCs selected represented a diverse sample of the equipment required to perform the following five safety functions:

o Reactor Reactivity Control (RRC) o Reactor Coolant Pressure Control (RCPC) o Reactor Coolant Inventory Control (RCIC) o Decay Heat Removal (DHR) o Containment Function (CF)

This peer review determined that the SSCs selected for the seismic walkdowns represent a diverse sample of equipment required to perform the five safety functions.

Verification that the SSCs selected include an appropriate representation of items having the following sample selection attributes:

o Various types of systems 3

o Major new and replacement equipment o

Various types of equipment o Various environments o

Equipment enhanced based on the findings of the IPEEE o

Risk insight consideration For SWEL 2 development, the Peer Review process verified that appropriate justification was documented for spent fuel pool related items that were not added to the SWEL 2.

This final peer review determined that the SSCs selected for the seismic walkdowns include a sample of items that represent each attribute/consideration identified above.

Peer Review Findings - Selection of SSCs This peer review found that the process for selecting SSCs that were added to the SWEL was consistent with the process outlined in the SWG Section 3: Selection of SSCs.

o The SSCs selected represented a diverse sample of equipment required to perform the five safety functions o The SSCs selected included a sample of items that represents each of the desired attributes/considerations.

The peer review checklist is attached to this document with additional comments that the Peer Review team provided back to the SWEL developer. All of these comments were verified by the Peer Review team to have been incorporated into the SWEL prior to the commencement of in-plant walkdowns. None of the issues identified were significant enough to warrant entry into the Corrective Action Process.

Resolution of Peer Review Comments - Selection of SSCs All comments requiring resolution were incorporated prior to completion of this inplant walkdowns. None of the issues identified were significant enough to warrant entry into the Corrective Action Process.

Conclusion of Peer Review - Selection of SSCs This peer review concludes that the process for selecting SSCs to be included on the seismic walkdown equipment list appropriately followed the process outlined in the SWG, Section 3: Selection of SSCs. It is further concluded that the SWEL sufficiently represents a broad population of plant Seismic Category 1 equipment and systems to meet the objectives of the NRC 50.54(f) Letter.

4

3. Review of Sample Seismic Walkdown & Area Walk-I1 Bys Checklists Overview A peer review of the sample SWCs and AWCs was performed on September10, 2013 in accordance with the SWG requirements.

Sample Checklists Table D-1 lists the SWC and AWC samples which represent approximately 29% of the SWCs and 100% of the AWCs. The sample includes the equipment inspected during the peer review and other equipment items from other classes to introduce diversity to the sampling procedure.

a

<Tbe

. S ad, AwC S rp I'esf ro § eis M'i c Walk d _wn ihpcin 6ý'

.n.jt2 nchr-.

P.C

.*Walkdow4 Obtem

.-. '.' ]Oservations.

AO-2-80A 07-Fluid-Operated Inboard MSIV N

No Comments Valves 20 - Instrumentation Channel B ISOL C-17 and Control Panels and RPS N

No Comments and Cabinets Vertical Board 16 - B125 VDC Swing D40 6

nBattery Chargers Charger for #11 Y

No Comments

& #12 Batteries 16 - Battery Chargers Swing Charger D54 16 Inverters D3A, D3B 13 Y

No Comments and InvertersBatr Battery 01 - Motor Control Div 2 (HPCI)

MCC-312 250VDC Motor Y

No Comments Control Center 16 - Battery Chargers Div 2 120VAC Y81 t6 Intery rers Class 1E Y

No Comments rand Inverters 5

NI-314121 I.llO-rD' F PROM PUBICI I*S-C LOSUIIR*E IUNl-DER 29.3 Area~~ Wvkow at~ions., 2, Reactor Bldg I

Drywell No comments Reactor Bldg

- Drywell No Comments Reactor Bldg

- Steam No Comments Chase Evaluation of Findinas There were no findings that challenged the licensing basis. Tables 5-2 and 5-3 of the Seismic Walkdown Report (final submittal report) provide the lists of the issues encountered for the equipment seismic walkdowns and area walk-bys.

The scaffolding and seismic housekeeping procedures were reviewed by the"SWEs in order to gain a full understanding of the plant practices in regard to those procedures.

There were no seismic concerns noted with regard to scaffold erection. The scaffolds were properly tied off and braced, and properly tagged with respect to the procedure.

There were no seismic housekeeping issues identified during the walkdowns and it can be concluded that MNGP implements their seismic housekeeping program consistently.

The peer reviewers consider the judgments made by the SWEs to be appropriate and in concurrence with the SWG.

Conclusion of Peer Review - Seismic and Area Walkdown Checklists This peer review concluded that Seismic and Area Walkdown checklists properly documented and dispositioned the issues identified by the engineers performing the walkdowns.

6

4. Review of Licensing Basis Assessments Section 6 of the final submittal report was reviewed to assess Seismic Licensing Basis Evaluations. The report documents that all potentially adverse seismic conditions that were identified during plant walkdowns were entered into the corrective action process.

Therefore, no Licensing Basis Evaluations were needed.

The Peer Review Team determined that while this was a conservative method to complete this portion of the evaluation, it did not violate the EPRI guidance document.

Tables 5-2 and 5-3 of the Seismic Walkdown Report were reviewed by the Peer Team, and it was concluded that the completed and planned corrective actions for the issues identified were appropriate to address the conditions identified.

7

5. Review Final Submittal Report & Sign-off The entire final submittal report has been reviewed by Messrs. J. Kindred and S. Luckiesh and found to meet the requirements of the EPRI 1025286 - Seismic Walkdown Guidance.

The Peer Review determined that the objectives and requirements of the 50.54(f) letter(2 ) are met. Further, the efforts completed and documented within the final submittal report are in accordance with the EPRI guidance document.

2 NRC Letter to All Power Reactor Licensees et al., "Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendation 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Daiichi Accident," Enclosure 3, "Recommendation 2.3: Seismic," dated March 12, 2012.

8

Peer Review Checklist for SWEL PeerReviewChecklistforSWEL If\\

30A Z'1Z

-to r',e,-. Ci 4.,.es Instructions for Completing Checklist This peer review checklist may be used to document the review o cj inaikdo~iVZ'n

?

(SWEI,) in accordance with Section 6: Peer Review. The space below each question in this checklist should be used to describe any findings identified during the peer review process and how the SWEL may have changed to address those findings. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comrments.

1. Were the five safety functions adequately represented in the SIAL I selection?

YA' NOJ

,i ic.Re, iq clS 4

e ct.

e 1b0) 60C

2. Does SWEL 1 include an appropriate representation of items having the following sample selection attributes:

a. Various types of systems?

Yk NF1 4-&.'

91-I2,VDC )L-Jq.2svo" I,-*O',

-o

-N

b. Major new and replacement equipment?

Y% NO

)lor It/

O s-c, Various types of equipment?

YQ N[3

~ A ~

i+yeO3 A oJ 4t,00sý J Yk~w LO c

be, 40o ik ibsit F,-re a,),ty 2,0z are-P(kdAIA/.*

d. Various environments?

YX NF1 e -,. tocj LOA ý,..t o d'.

V\\CrvbU evv-n eJ.

ro-61i~~'e

~o-2.373

",s ;-"

5-

,, Chets$

-A-s-&W Ts,",

PCT-7 9

Peer Review Checklist for SWEL

e. Equipment enhanced based on the *4ings of the IPEEE (or equivalent) program?

Y1 NED

f. Were risk insights considered in the development of SWIEL I ?

Y)4 NO I'% i "1-.

e.ey.s-co p

ZO 1 Z

3. For SWEL 2:

a-Were spent fuel pool related items considered, and if applicable included in YO] NO]

SWEL 2?

b. Was an appropriate justification documented for spent fuel pool related items not YE NE]

included in SWEL 2?

4. Provide any other comroeots related to the peer review of the SWArELs.

,~

~

~

~

e mp

/* J

5.

I-ave all peer review comments been adequately addressed in the final SWEL?

Y NO]

Peer Reviewer #1:

\\

a t e:

Peer Reviewer #2:

~

P A

ei 10