NL-14-071, Indian Point, Unit 2 - Seismic Walkdown Report Update, Enclosure to NL-14-071 - Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev 1. Part 4 of 5

Indian Point, Unit 2 - Seismic Walkdown Report Update, Enclosure to NL-14-071 - Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev 1. Part 4 of 5

ML14168A062
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	06/05/2014
From:	Entergy Nuclear Operations
To:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
References
NL-14-071 IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev 1
Download: ML14168A062 (163)

Text

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-184 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet I of 7 IP2 Status: Y[ NEI UD-Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-034 Location:

Bldg. CWST Floor El. 80'-0" Room, Area 1 CST SWEL Components:

SWELl -095 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)?

Yes anchorage of equipment in the area appears to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

Y[ NE U-I N/AD 2. Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of.significant degraded conditions?

YE NEI UDi N/ADI Minimal surface corrosion acceptable.

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)?YZ ND_ UD- N/AD-]Yes based on a visual inspection from the floor, the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appears to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

'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.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-185 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 2 of 7 IP2 Status: YN NDI U[I Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-034 Location:

Bldg. CWST Floor El. 80'-0" Room, Area 1 CST SWEL Components:

SWELl -095 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic YZ NDE- UI' N/AD-spatial interactions with other equipment in the area (e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

Yes it appears that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the area.5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray in the area?Area is out doors so items gets rained on and snowed on regularly.

Component is on an elevated area and flooding would flow off area to lower ground.6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause a fire in the area?Yes it appears that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause a fire in the area.YN NEI u-l N/AFI YN NDI uD- N/AD-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)?

Yes it appears that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations.

YN NDI uDI N/AD-EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-186 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 3 of 7 1P2 Status: Y[ NEI U-i Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-034 Location:

Bldg. CWST Floor El. 80'-0" Room, Area 1 CST SWEL Components:

SWELl -095 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YN NEI ul-adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area?Yes we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area.Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Gravel & stones around tank free to roll during seismic event. Judged acceptable.

Chair inside fence gate is unsecured.

Judged acceptable given location of chair.Evaluated by: Nick Crispell " " -' Date: 10-25-2012 Kirit Parikh 10-25-2012 EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-187 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 4 of 7 IP2 Status: YI NEIl Ul Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-034 Location:

Bldg. CWST Floor El. 80'-0" Room, Area' CST SWEL Components:

SWELl-095 Photographs EN-DC-1 68 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-188 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 5 of 7 1P2 Status: YO NEi UEL Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-034 Location:

Bldg. CWST Floor EI..80'-O" Room, Area 1 CST SWEL Components:

SWELl-095 EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-189 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 6 of 7 1P2 Status: YO NEil uE-Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-034 Location:

Bldg. CWST Floor El. 80'-0" Room, Area 1 CST SWEL Components:

SWELl-095 EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. I P-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-190 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 7 of 7 IP2 Status: YZ NEI UEl Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-034 Location:

Bldg. QWST Floor EI.80'-0" Room, Area 1 CST SWEL Components:

SWELl-095 EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-1 2-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-1 91 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet I of 9 IP2 Status: YN NJ ULI Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-035 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 18'-6" Room, Area'SWEL Components:

SWELl -005. 021, 022 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)?

There is a 2Y" outside diameter pipe connecting to PCV-1284 which appears to have excessive unsupported length. See photos. From the first support, the pipe has a 2Y2 'horizontal run, a 3' vertical run and a 2Y2 'horizontal run at which point it connects to a heavy valve and two large diameter flanges. After that, there is a 6" vertical run of 7/8" OD tubing followed by a 2Y 2' run of 7/8" OD tubing to the next support. LB-12 issued to resolve.2. Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions?

5/8"+/- diameter anchor bolts of F 1-5004 support column are not fully engaged. (top of bolt is approximately 1/4" below the top of the nut). See picture. LB-IC issued to resolve.YD- NZ UE- N/AD YDI NZ U-- N/AD1 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)?YN NDI UD] N/AD1 Yes based on a visual inspection from the floor, the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appears to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

'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.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-192 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 2 of 9 1P2 Status: YO NE] UL-Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-035 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 18'-6" Room, Area 1 SWEL Components:

SWELl -005, 021. 022 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic YEI NZ U[E] N/AE]spatial interactions with other equipment in the area (e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

Fluorescent lights are too close to the cable tray and hanger. (total two locations for hanger proximity and one location for cable tray proximity.

The interference with the cable tray occurs below the top of the rail on the tray and would not result in impact of the light fixture on the cables.The interference with the hangers occurs at approximately midspan of the vertical hanger rod. (See pictures).

It is estimated that the seismic response of the light fixture impacting the hanger rod would have no affect on the integrity of the hanger rod.Long span 5/8" OD" tubing has little separation and typical span length of eight feet. The tubes will interact with each other during seismic event. (See photo) There are also 3/8" OD tubes also in close proximity to each other which have similar unsupported spans. LB-13 issued to resolve.At the entry to the room there is 5/8" OD tubing which has relatively long unsupported spans as noted in the isometrics below.support 2 3 8 5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray in the area?Yes it appears that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray in the area.YER NE] uE] N/AE]EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-193 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 3 of 9 1P2 Status: YE NO LI-Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-035 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 18'-6" Room, Area 1 SWEL Components:

SWELl-005, 021, 022 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic YE N[-] U[E- N/AE]interactions that could cause a fire in the area?Yes it appears 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)?

1. The fluorescent light tubes need to be restrained.

CR IP2-2012-06483 has been issued to track resolution.

2. Used glove is found in the area. Upon revisit to the area on 11/19/2012, the glove has been removed.3. Loose tool is found in the area. CR IP2-2012-06483 has been issued to track resolution.

4. Leftover scaffold part is found in the area. Upon revisit to the area on 11/19/2012, the scaffold part has been removed.5. Several florescent lights are out and need to be replaced.

CR IP2-2012-06483 has been issued to track resolution.

6. A scaffold is erected next to the AUX FEED PUMP NO. 22. The scaffold has lateral supports in all directions.

The lateral supports are at floor level and braced to the base plate of protected pump 22, the adjacent nitrogen bottle rack and Rack 5. The scaffold was under construction at the time of inspection and the scaffolding inspector had not done his inspection.

Upon follow up call later that day with the scaffolding inspector he informed us he had independently found and had construction fix the scaffold problems.

Follow up inspection later that day confirmed no seismic issues with the certified and construction completed scaffold.YE- NZ ULE] N/AE 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could Y[ NE:] UE]adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area?Yes we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-194 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 Sheet 4 of 9 Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-035 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 18'-6" SWEL Components:

SWELl -005, 021, 022 Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

References:

CR IP2-2012-06483 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST IP2 Status: YE NEI U-]Room, Area'-Evaluated by: Stephen Yuan Date: 10-25-2012 Paul Huebsch U Date: 10-25-2012 EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-1 2-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-195 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 5 of 9 IP2 Status: YO NO U'Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-035 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 18'-6" Room, Area'SWEL Components:

SWEL1-005.

021, 022 Photographs Note: 2"+/- diameter pipe connecting to has excessive unsupported length.4 Note: 518"+/- diameter anchor bolts of F1-5004 support column are not fully engaged. (Missing about Y 4").EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-196 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheot 6 of 9 IP2 Status: YZ NO' UrI Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-035 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 18'-6" Room, Area 1 SWEL Components:

SWELl -005. 021. 022 Note: Note: Fluorescent light is too close to the ca, tray (other end of the same light) and support hanger.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-197 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 7 of 9 1P2 Status: Y[ No-l U-IJ Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-036 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 18'-6" Room, Area'SWEL Components:

SWELl -005. 021. 022 NOW; Long span ruoing nas urrie separalion

(< 1/2') .They will be interactive each other during seismic event.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-1 2-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-1 98 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheot 8 of 9 1P2 Status: YO NEl uE-Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-036 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. M8'-6" Room, Area___ ___ ___SWEL Components:

SWELl -005, 021. 022 Note: Wrench hung by a wire in front of the instrument paneL Note: Leftover scaffold pail is found in tMle area.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-199 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 9 of 9 1P2 Status: YO NE] ULI Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-035 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 18'-6" Room, Area 1 SWEL Components:

SWEL1-005.

021. 022 Note: Tubing with excessive distance between supports at entry to room.Note: EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-200 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet I of 4 1P2 Status: YZ N-] U-III Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-036 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 77'-4" Room, Area 1 SWEL Components:

SWEL1 -043. 044, 045. 046 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)?

Yes anchorage of equipment in the area appears to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

YE NO] Ul WIAD 2. Does anchorage of equipment in the area appear to be free of significant degraded conditions?

Yes anchorage of equipment in the area appears to be free of significant degraded conditions.

Surface corrosion on components in area judged acceptable.

YZ NE] u-- NIAE1 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)?YN NEI UO~ N/AE]Yes based on a visual inspection from the floor, the cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ducting appears to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

'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.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-201 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 2 of 4 IP2 Status: YN NEI U-I Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-036 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 77'-4" Room, Area 1 SWEL Components:

SWELl -043. 044. 045, 046 4. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic YN NEI UE- N/A[: spatial interactions with other equipment in the area (e.g., ceiling tiles and lighting)?

Yes, it appears that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic spatial interactions with other equipment in the area.5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray in the area?Yes it appears that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding or spray in the area.Y[ NEI U[-] N/AL1 6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause a fire in the area?Yes it appears that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions that could cause a fire in the area.YZ NEI ur- N/ALI 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)?

1. Fluorescent light tubes need to be secured with wires. CR IP2-2012-06741 has been issued to track resolution.

2. One light bulb is out and needs to be replaced.

Called lights out hotline at ext 7600.3. Large piece of grating was noted to be stored on a concrete ledge.The grating was adequately secured by scaffold poles and is not a seismic risk. Loose grating clips are on the concrete ledge adjacent to the stored grating. Upon a second visit on 11/19/2012 it was noted that the grating clips had been removed.YEr NZ UE- N/AL EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-202 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 3 of 4 1P2 Status: YE NOI U[Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-036 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 77'-4" Room, Area 1 SWEL Components:

SWELl -043, 044, 045, 046 8. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could Y] NI-] U[]adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area?Yes we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment in the area.Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

A piece of grating was observed stored on a concrete ledge. The grating was adequately secured by scaffold poles and is not a seismic risk.

References:

CR IP2-2012-06741 Evaluated by: Stephen Yuan Date: 10-25-2012 Paul Huebsch 10-25-2012 EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page D-203 of 203 ATTACHMENT 9.7 AREA WALK-BY CHECKLIST Sheet 4 of 4 IP2 Status: YO NEI ULI Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC) AWC-036 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 77-4" Room, Area 1 SWEL Components:

SWEL1 -043. 044. 045, 046 Photographs Note: INUMU. kWLr(lfIg ,iUWUM UI urIUMNU dIIU adequately restrained using scaffold poles.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-1 of 10 ATTACHMENT E -POTENTIALLY ADVERSE SEISMIC CONDITIONS Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-2 of 10* 4 ~LICENSINGBASISr SLB# WC/AWC # IDENTIFIED CONDITION EVALUATION RESOLUTION STATUS CONCLUSI2N Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review: No degraded or nonconforming condition exists per EN-OP-104 Revision 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. The DC Panel doors ability to latch does not impact the" 23DC Power Panel door not closed. Latch is broken and latch breaker operation within the panel. No DC circuits are impacted by this condition.

There is no is missing parts. immediate reportability per EN-SMM-LI-108.

N/A AWC-004 CONDITION ENTERED Operability re-opened per CRG to add more information on the seismic impact CR-IP2-2012-06117 DIRECTLY INTO CAP Engineering was contacted and reported that -The cabinet contains molded circuit breakers CLOSED s 24DC Power PNL has latches in the open position.

Door is only, which are not sensitive to vibration and therefore this is not an seismic operability issue.shut and multiple other latches on door are in ctosed position.

Furthermore, if the door opened -nothing of consequence would be damaged. No degraded or nonconforming condition exists per EN-OP-104 Revision 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. There is no immediate reportability per EN-SMM-LI-108.

CR Action: WRN 286977 generated Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review: The Lighting Panel door unlatched does not impact the breaker NA AWC-0o Lighting panel 219 door slightly ajar (not closed/latched).

CONDITION ENTERED operation within the panel. The breakers inside lighting panel 219 are not vibration sensitive pl N/A AWCO4 Lighationg parnel2do slghuty pajr (notr csedtched).

CDIRCTI ENTE and therefore would not be affected during a seismic event. The issue addressed in this CR CR-IP2-2012-06119 describes a good practice and not a functionality issue. Lighting Panel 219 remains functional.

There is no immediate reportability per EN-SMM-LI-108.

CR Action: ctose to track and trending and coaching Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review: This CR describes unsecured fluorescent bulbs on the 15' and 33' of AWC-004 the control building.

This is not a seismic good practice and needs to be corrected.

However, Overhead fluorescent bulb doesn't have wire securing bulb to CONDITION ENTERED no equipment is currently being impacted.

In the event of a seismic event, if the bulbs fell out, CR-IP2-2012-06120 fixture. DIRECTLY INTO CAP they would break before damaging vital equipment such as static inverters and the 480V CLOSED SWELl-069 switchgear.

It would cause a housekeeping concern, but they would not render required safety related SSC's inoperable.

Not reportable per SMM-LI-108.

CR Action: use ty-wraps or wire to secure the bulbs to the fixture. WRN 286982.

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-3 of 10 LB# SWC/AWC# IDENTIFIED .I .EA LA.U IN RESOLUTION STATUS....

CN CWSIN 4 Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review: The described lifting hoist and anchoring chain was found to allow for The engine hoist tool located on the north wall needs to be tied approximately 12 inches of hoist movement.

This movement would not have allowed for any N/A AWC-003 more securely to the fixed post. Hoist can roll side to side along CONDITION ENTERED contact with any safety related SSC. No degraded or nonconforming condition exists per EN- CR-IP2-2012-06135 wallAand3m impscuyto the nxeay istrst rack. rDIRECTLY INTO CAP OP-104 Revision 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. This arrangement has since been securely CLOSED wall and impact the nearby instrument rack. tightened.

SMM-LI-1O8 reporting is not required.CR Action: needs to be chained around several perpendicular members to prevent movement or better yet remove from the room.Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN.Fluorescent bulbs need wire restraints securing bulb to fixture..8' ladder left unsecured behind west side of mcc 26BB. CR Operability Review: All housekeeping concerns identified in CR were corrected.

The AWC-024 .Tool box on wheels left on secured on east side of MCC26BB. condition described in this CR does not affect a required safety related system, structure or N/A AWC-023 .Pliers left on top of the 120 volt distribution panel #2. CONDITION ENTERED component as defined in EN-OP-104.

All seismic concerns raised in this CR have been CR-IP2-2012-06354

.A ladder not secured and batching tools left loose on boric DIRECTLY INTO CAP addressed and no longer pose any potential hazard. Therefore, no functionality or operability CLOSED SWEL1-008 acid batching tank platform.

A load (barrel lifting apparatus) is determination is required.

There is no IP-SMM-LI-108 immediate reportability associated with left hanging on hook of the overhead trolley. Items could fall this condition over or swing affecting components in the area.CR Action: Need to remove the items from the area Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN All cover screws (2 of 2) on south side of EPF9, EPG1, EPF7, & CR Operability Review: All housekeeping concerns identified in CR were corrected.

The EPFB are either not tightly secured or completely missing. One of CONDITION ENTERED condition described in this CR does not affect a required safety related system, structure or CR-IP2-2012-06355 AWC-024 these has the latch handle turned differently than the others DIRECTLY INTO CAP component as defined in EN-OP-104.

Therefore, no functionality or operability determination is CLOSED meaning one panel door is free to swing open. CR IP2-2012-required.

There is no IP-SMM-LI-108 immediate reportability associated with this condition 06355 issued to track resolution.

CR Action: Re-install the screws properly.

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-4 of 10 LICENSING BASIS i L3# SWC/AWc# IDEN TIFIED CONDITION EVALUATION RESOLUTI ON .' STATUS CONCLUSION

~'Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review:. No Degraded or Nonconforming Condition exists per EN-OP-104 rev 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. Per discussion with civil engineering, the described conditions do not pose a threat of damage to the aux feed water pumps or associated support equipment-Loose tool is found in the area and needs to be removed, even in a seismic event based on their location and mass and the energy they would be AWC-035 During a seismic event the tool will swing and strike nearby capable of imparting on the safety-related equipment.

The described conditions are N/A SWELl-005 Darieseismic CONDITION ENTERED housekeeping concerns; therefore, the Aux Feedwater system remains operable.

CR-IP2-2012-06483

/A SE-05 vavesequipment.

DIRECTLY INTO CAP CLOSED SWELl-079

-The fluorescent light bulbs need wires securing them to the No immediate reportability required per IP-SMM-LI-108.

fixture to prevent them from fatling in a seismic event.CR Action: WRN 290243 Secure loose tool, use wires to secure the fluorescent light to the fixtures (towards the two ends) and replace the lights that are out.Tool should not be removed since it is staged for ASSD, it should be secured or placed in a proper container.

Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review: No Degraded or Nonconforming Condition exists per EN-OP-104 rev 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. Per discussion with civil engineering, the described conditions do not pose a threat of damage to the steam supply line for 22 aux feed water pump or any associated support equipment even in a seismic event based on their location and mass and N/A AWC-009 Some florescent bulbs need wires securing the bulb to the fixture CONDITION ENTERED the energy they would be capable of imparting on the safety-related equipment.

The described CR-IP2-2012-06485 DIRECTLY INTO CAP conditions are housekeeping concems; therefore, the Aux Feedwater system remains CLOSED operable.No immediate reportability required per IP-SMM-LI-108.

CR Action: WRN 290243 Use wires to secure the fluorescent light to the fixtures (towards the two ends)Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN Scaffold tag 866B with a red "unsafe" sign spans over the 21 N/A AWC-019 containment spray pump. the scaffold is not braced well in the CONDITION ENTERED CR Operability Review:. 21 containment spray pump is operable.

CR-IP2-2012-06578 SWELl-027 east/west direction and would impact valve if it collapses or sways DIRECTLY INTO CAP during a seismic event.CR Action: The scaffold was removed.

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-5 of 10 ICIENSINGBASIS IDENTIFIED CONDITION EVALUATION RESOLUTION .S ...STATUS~~~ K ~~~CONCLUSION

.________Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review:. No degraded or nonconforming condition exists per EN-OP-104 Revision 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. This condition was discussed with the originator and there is no operability concern with the CCW pumps or any other safety related equipment in the Fluorescent bulbs need restraint wires to secure them to the light CONDITION ENTERED area. There is a safety concern in the event the bulbs were to fall and shatter during a seismic CR-IP2-2012-06614 fixture. DIRECTLY INTO CAP event. CCW pumps remain operable.

There is no IP-SMM-LI-108 immediate reportability associated with this condition.

CR Action: Restraint wires should be installed to secure the light bulbs to the fixture. The Work Order(s) written in conjunction with CR-IP2-2012-06354 for the same purpose should be revised to incorporate tasks covering this PAB location.Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review: Discussed condition with the author and the 23 sump pump float guide in the unsupported configuration does not cause any operability concerns with the CCW pumps or safety related equipment in the area. The CCW pumps and associated equipment 23 Sump pump missing all bolts on float rod guide. CONDITION ENTERED remains operable.

The sump pump is currently working in the degraded condition.

In the DIRECTLY INTO CAP event that the float were to not function properly an alarm would actuate on high level in the CR-IP2-2012-06616 sump notifying the operator that an abnormal condition exists and it would be addressed.

The level alarm switch is a separate device and remains functional.

There is no IP-SMM-LI-108 immediate reportability associated with this condition.

CR Action: Property secure the float rod guide Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review: No degraded or nonconforming condition exists per EN-OP-104 Revision 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. This condition was discussed with the originator and there is no operability concern with the safety related equipment in the area. There is a safety Fluorescent light tubes need oCONDITION ENTERED concern in the event the bulbs were to fall and shatter during a seismic event. Equipment in CR-IP2-2012-06663 DIRECTLY INTO CAP the PAB remains operable.

There is no IP-SMM-LI-108 immediate reportability associated with this condition.

CR Action: Restrain the fluorescent light bulbs to the fixture with wires and all safety related areas of the PAB Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-6 of 10:-LICENSING BASjS LB SWC/AWC# IDENTIFIED CONDITION" EVALUATION RESOLUTION STATU CONCWIO4CN A .-.Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN" Tool cart is tied off but all tools are loose on top of cart and CR Operability Review: No degraded or nonconforming condition exists per EN-OP-104 could be displaced in a seismic event. CONDITION ENTERED Revision 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. The housekeeping issues were resolved.

The walkdown N/A AWC-022

• There was an unsecured ladder DIRECTLY INTO CAP engineer states that there is no seismic issue with the stated condition and therefore there is CR-IP2-2012-06664

• Various equipment and miscellaneous items loose on a grating no operability impact to the safety related equipment in the area. There is no IP-SMM-LI-108 which was tagged "seismically sensitive area". immediate reportability associated with this condition.

CR Action: Assure all loose items are properly stored and the ladder is properly restrained.

Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review: No degraded or nonconforming condition exists per EN-OP-104 Revision 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. This condition was discussed with the originator and there CONDITION ENTERED is no operability concern with the AFW pumps, Pipe Pen or any other safety related equipment N/A AWC-036 Fluorescent light tubes need to be secured with wires. DIRECTLY INTO CAP in the area. There is a safety concern in the event the bulbs were to fall and shatter during a CR-IP2-2012-06741 seismic event. Affect area Safety related equipment remains operable.

There is no IP-SMM-LI-108 immediate reportability associated with this condition.

CR Action: Implement a plan to secure the fluorescent light bulbs to the fixtures in all areas where safety related systems or components are present.Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review. No Degraded or Nonconforming Condition exists per EN-OP-1 04 rev 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. Per discussion with Civil Engineering, the described condition does not seismically impact the operability of the CCW system or the spent fuel pool cooling system.The tubing in question is only for local indication of the CCW return flow and is located on the Tubing running to the SFP heat exchanger is vibrating CONDITION ENTERED top of the heat exchanger.

Even if the tubing were to break, it would not drain the CCW out of N/A AWC-008 significantly.

Long span of approximately 6' for a 1/4I" tubing DIRECTLY INTO CAP the heat exchanger and any leakage that could occur would be within the capacity of the sump CR-IP2-2012-06753 appears to be excessive.

pumps in the building.

Presently the flow indication is reading appropriately and no damage was evident to the tubing which continues capable of performing its function.

Therefore, the CCW system and the SFPC system remain operable.No immediate reportability required per IP-SMM-LI-108.

CR Action: Investigate reason for vibration and assess the tubing span.

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-7 of 10"LB#.t SWC/AWC #IDENTIrIED CONDITION LICENSING BASIS~EvAiuATiON CONCLUSION)

RESOLUTION STATUS_ __I_ _ _ __- -_ _-_I--_ _ _._ _-_... ----N/A AWC-008" Magnetic camera mounting appears to be inadequate for seismic loading." tool box not secured" miscellaneous tools not secured CONDITION ENTERED DIRECTLY INTO CAP Initial Action: CR GENERATED

-SEE STATUS COLUMN CR Operability Review. No Degraded or Nonconforming Condition exists per EN-OP-104 rev 6 Attachment 9.1 Table 1. The described condition of the camera does not impact the performance of safety related equipment The Gas bottle has been removed from this area and the identified equipment has either been removed or securely staged. No immediate reportability required per IP-SMM-LI-108.

CR Action: In addition to addressing the housekeeping type deficiencies, establish the need for the camera after a seismic event and evaluate its anchorage.

CR-IP2-2012-06774 I ______________________________________

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-8 of I0 L134 SWC/AWCU IDEE'JTIFIED CONDITION LICENIN~G RASIS EVALUATION COCUSION .i RESCILLTION STATUS~The evaluation concluded that: (1) the cable tray support was The seismic walkdown team observed that a conduit appeared to be too close to a cable tray support frame over the 22 MG Set analyzed for seismic loads and (2)the approximately 3/4' gap LB-O1 between the conduit and cable tray support frame is acceptable.

SWELl-062 (possible spatial interaction) and questioned if the cable tray thus, the ob d cnd are con t wit olcensing N/A N/A supprt ram is eisicaly dsiged.Thus, the observed conditions are consistent with our licensing support frame is seismically designed.

bss basis.The overhead pipe near the roof line of the EDG building eastern The unengaged threads, or recess, cover a distance of 1/4 inch or side is supported on three wide flange columns. These columns are less. Based on Calculation IP3-CALC-MULT-00734, a recess Of 0.27 LB-02 SWEL1-032 supported on baseplates bolted to a concrete pier. Some of the inches for a 1 inch diameter bolt does not reduce the bolt capacity.

N/A N/A nuts are not fully engaged (bolt does not project past dhe nut). Bolt Thus, a recess of 1/4" (0.25") or less is consistent with our licensing recess within the nut is 1/4 inch or less. basis.The seismic walkdown team observed small cracks near bolt nos.30, 24 & 25, which were not a seismic concern, and significant The spalled concrete and cracks are associated with a concrete mat concrete spalling and numerous cracks near bolt nos. 16,17,18,19.

protective layer. This spalling and cracking of this protective layer N/A N/A LB-03 SWELl-094 N' /The concrete spalling and cracks bring into question the RWST does not affect the anchorage of the RWST. and the observed anchorage adequacy.

In addition to this LBE, CR IP2-2012-06547 condition is consistent with our licensing basis.was issued to track resolution.

Work performed in conjunction with Work Order IP2-05-0522 and The seismic walkdown team observed that the anchor for the CCw ER No. 05-26433 indicates that at Support ACH-60, there is a vetical LB-04 AWC-018 pipe support is missing 2 of 4 anchor bolts. It was also noted that load of 1700 pounds and very small vertical seismic load. With no N/A N/A the missing anchor bolts are tagged with an old Work Order iP2 tension acting on the bolts, the existing configuration is consistent 0522 written in 2005. with our licensing basis.The seismic walkdown team observed that the support stanchion CR IP2-1998-04788 indicates that "This condition has been for the overhead crane in the Safety Injection Pump Room area in previously evaluated and found acceptable.

Calculation FFX-the PAB Elev. 59'-0" has a four hole base plate and only three bolts 00098-02 covers the design of the monorail with the missing N/A N/A LB-OS AWC-017NANA are installed.

It is noted that all other similar stanchions have four anchor bolt.. The CR also indicates that the Design Drawing bolts installed in the base plate and that per signage on the indicates this base plate as having only 3 bolts. Thus, the observed stanchion the anchor is abandoned per FEI-840679.

condition is consistent with our licensing basis, The existing configuration was conservatively modeled and LB-OS AWC-022 The seismic walkdown team question if the Unit heater 232 hot seismically analyzed.

The piping configuration was found to satisfy N/A N/A water piping is seismically designed/supported.

B31.1 requirements.

Thus, the condition is consistent with the licensing basis.

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-9 of 10 ikw/Awc#.

4 IDENTIFIED CONDITION LICENSING 8.BASIS EVALUATION CONCLUSION f..SO. .. ." The seismic walkdown team noted that: "Platform between Refueling Water Storage Tank and Primary Water Storage Tank has The evaluation concluded that: (1) the existing platform, including two cross braces (bracing platform in EW direction) at RWST bolt the missing brace, was seismically analyzed (Calculation FCX-0098-29 that are cut for a RWST pipe to pass through. Need to verify that AWC-32 a platform seismic analysis of the "as-is" platform was performed.-

01), (2) the sum of the maximum horizontal displacements of the The team also noted that: "Platform between 21RWST and Primary tanks and platform, i.e., 0.07315", is less than the 1/8" (0.125")LB-07 & Water Storage Tank is very close to touching both tanks. gap, and that (3) the sum of the vertical displacements of the N/A SWEL1-094 Approximately 1/8" gap between tanks and platform.

LBE needed tank(s) and platform is less than the horizontal displacement (and to determine if gap is acceptable for both tanks 21RWST and thus less than the gap between the valve mounted on the tank and Primary Water Storage Tank" and "Valve hand wheel at RWST the platform.

Thus, the observed conditions are consistent with the anchor bolt 29 is very close to touching the platform at frame with licensing basis.cut bracing. Gap is very narrow, almost 1/8". Platform could potentially hit valve handle." The evaluation concluded that the sum of the maximum The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the gap between Battery displacement of Battery Charger 21 and the adjacent Instrument LB-08 SWELI-072 Charger 21 and the adjacent instrument rack west of the cabinet is Rack is 0.14 inches. It is thus concluded that the 1/2" gap N/A 1/2" and questioned if this gap is sufficient to preclude seismic between the Battery Charger 21 and the adjacent Instrument interaction, Rack is sufficient to preclude spatial interactions and the condition satisfies the licensing basis.The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that one pipe is supported Technical Report No. 91177-TR-01, "Diesel Generator Fuel Oil from another pipe.. This is a non typical pipe support. Design System, Seismic Verification Summary Report," September 1991 LB-O9 AWC-12 drawings for this support were not available at time of walk down. analyzed the observed configuration and confirmed the pipes and N/A One pipe (insulated pipe) runs to the Emergency Domestic truck fill supports are adequate under all postulated loads and load stop valve and the other orange pipes from the EDG building to combinations, including OBE and DBE loads. Thus, the observed near 23FOTP condition is consistent with the licensing basis.The tension loading of the bolts anchoring the base plate for Instrument F1-5004 is very small, as discussed in the attached The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the 5/8"+/- diameter anchor evaluation.

As such, given that a recess of 0.172" for a 5/8" LB-10 AWC-035 bolts of the F1-5004 support column are not fully engaged. (top of diameter bolt does not reduce the bolt tension capacity, the N/A bolt is approximately

%4" below the top of the nut). 8/100" larger recess observed is acceptable and we conclude that the observed condition is consistent with the licensing basis.Based on calculation GCC-00025-OO, the load acting on the base The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the EDG exhaust pipe is plate and grout is minimal Furthermore, considering the 5000 psi LB-11 SWELl-77 supported on a post frame that also supports fuse panel for 22 Pry compressive strength of the grout, and the more that 75% of the N/A Lube Pump, 22 Lube oil HTR, and 22 Jacket Water HTR. This support base plate area supported on grout, the compression capacity of has damaged & missing grout under the eastern post base plate. the grout is more than sufficient to withstand the acting loads.Thus, the condition is in accordance with the IP2 licensing

basis, Engineering Report No. IP-RPT. 12-00037 Rev. 0 Page E-10 of 10 j~~i-~ F ~ ~cENS6~~IJATi0Nc0NCLUSION~

LB-12 AWC-35 The Seismic Walkdown Team noted at Elev. 18'-6" of the AFB that There is a 2%" outside diameter pipe connecting to PCV-1284 which appears to have excessive unsupported length..From the first support, the pipe has a 2% ' horizontal run, a 3'vertical run and a 2% ' horizontal run at which point it connects to a heavy valve and two large diameter flanges.After that, there is a 6" vertical run of 7/8" 0D tubing followed by a 2%' run of 7/8" 00 tubing to the next support.A subsequent walkdown of the pipe location by members of the IPEC Design Engineering Department certified for performance of the Seismic Walkdowns, assessed the configuration and found that: (1) spans are not excessive for the 2 3/4" diameter pipe, for which a span of 8'-0" would not be questionable, (2) the in-line loads are not excessive, and (3) the configuration is acceptable.

As the piping under consideration does not have excessive unsupported lengths, we find the configuration acceptable and within the IP2 licensing basis.N/A A subsequent walkdown of the tubing locations by members of the IPEC Design Engineering Department certified for performance of the Seismic Walkdowns, assessed the configurations and found The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that Long span 5/8' OD" tubing that: (1) The tubing spans are not excessive, (2) all tubes in close has little separation and typical span length of eight feet .The tubes proximity have common supports and spans, and (3) the N/A LB-13 AWC-35 will interact with each other during seismic event. There are also separation Is such that any impact of adjacent tubes under a 3/8" OD tubes also in close proximity to each other which have similar unsupported spans. seismic event will be associated with extremely small impact forces while eliminating any possible resonance and enhancing the system damping. As such, the configurations were found to be acceptable and within the IP2 licensing basis.While performing an area walkby of Elevation 59"-0" of the PAB, The evaluation established that the vertical span is not excessive the Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the HVAC ductwork and, under a postulated seismic occurrence, the stresses in the N/A LB-14 AWC-17 adjacent to the stairs does not have any lateral support from the duct are very low. As such, the configuration was found to be base to beyond the first elbow at the top. The span appears to be excessive, acceptable and within the IP2 licensing basis.Prepared by: Reviewed by: DragoskNuta Richard Drake , --" Date: J'/ 2o I ?I'sate: ý(/Z /Z" Peer Review Tyl&Member

/ /

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-2 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet 1 of 3 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-01 Originating SWC/AWC SWELl -062 Equipment ID No. 22MGS Equip. Class 13 Equipment Description 22 Machine Generator Set Location:

Bldg. CB Floor El. 33'-0 Room, Area Cable Spreading Room Condition"Cable tray support frame (over top of 22 MG SET) appears too close to the conduit west of the frame but is adequately separated from the 22 MG SET. The frame might interact with the conduit. Additionally the cable tray support frame does not appear to be seismically designed." Documents Reviewed Drawings 320933, 320997 Calculation No. GCC-00154-02, FCX-00336-00, FCX-00337-00 Licensing Basis (1) SSCs located nearby safety-related SSCs must be seismically designed to assure the safety related functions are not affected.(2) Spatial interactions shall not affect the functionality of safety related SSCs.Evaluation As indicated hereafter, the evaluation established that the cable tray support frame was seismically analyzed and the gap between the cable tray support frame and adjacent conduit is acceptable.

Conclusion Condition Meets the Licensing Basis: Z Yes Draqos Nuta a.Prepared by: Reviewed by: Licensing Basis Reviewer&kdf[i' No Date 10/25/12 Date Z_EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-3 of 54 SWELI-062

-Recorded Interaction Effects During the walkdown, we noted/questioned the following: "Cable tray support frame (over top of 22 MG SET) appears too close to the conduit west of the frame but is adequately separated from the 22 MG SET. The frame might interact with the conduit. Additionally the cable tray support frame does not appear to be seismically designed.*

Licensing Basis Assessment

-Seismic Design of Steel Frame (Support 320933)Drawing No. 320933, "Cable Spreading Room, Cable Tray Plans and Sections," deals with the precise support mentioned in our SWEL notes. The frame is located at Column Line K-8 of the Elev. 33'-0 Cable Spreading SUPPORT 2 W~SIOE OF 7OL.Rom(xertfo-Dg 293) -BOXR- fT l TRAYSE MG SET TS3. 3 ________SITC"GEAR

--A A¶COL. ~COL Room(Excrpt romDwg.32093):PARflAL PLMAT SLAT=OA2 Sections A -A and B -B shown on the plan above are as follows:*tJOIt 2 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-4 of 54 114___2i..~______

~o. I CC4 -~r fl (TM TM If'~ L~J -. .,. I I'I 4 Pictures taken during the Seismic Walkdown of Support 320933 framing that spans the 22 MG Set are as follows: 3 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-5 of 54 In the picture above, 22 MG Set is below the frame and the northern end of the MG Set Switchgear is shown on the right side.Two views of the conduit found to be approximately 3/4 inches away from the western end of the frame are shown below: 4 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-6 of 54 The Licensing Basis Evaluation concluded the following:

1. Regarding the seismic design of Support Frame 320933, Dwg. 320933 refers to "Seismic Calculations No. FCX-00336-00 and FCX-00337-00" and indicates the cable tray supports are seismically qualified.

Both calculations include seismic cable tray analyses performed by EQE. Thus, the support was seismically qualified.

5 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-7 of 54 2. Regarding the possible spatial interface between the support frame and the conduit located west of the frame, as shown in the pictures above, assuming the relative movements of the frame and conduit exceed the approximately 3/4 inch gap, it is our judgment that the conduit has sufficient flexibility to accommodate a displacement that includes a slight impingement and its structural integrity will not be challenged.

6 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-8 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet I of+Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-02 Originating SWC/AWC SWELl -032 Equipment ID No. 0032FOTP Equip. Class 6 Equipment Description Fuel Oil Trasnfer Pump D.G. 23 Location:

Bldg. FOST Floor El. 77'-6" Room, Area Condition The overhead pipe near the roof line of the EDG building is supported on three wide flange columns. These columns are supported on baseplates with some nuts not fully engaged.The bolt recess within the nut is 1/4 inch or less. Typical of all three baseplates.

Documents Reviewed" IP3-CALC-MULT-00734

• EPRI Document NP-5057, Volume I* AISC, "Manual of Steel Construction," 8th and 9th Editions.Licensing Basis Anchorages must have sufficient capacity so that all safety-related SSCs maintain structural integrity and perform their safety related function under all applicable loads and load combinations, including those associate with postulated seismic events.Evaluation The unengaged threads, or recess, cover a distance of 1/4 inch or less. Based on Calculation IP3-CALC-MULT-00734, a recess Of 0.27 inches for a 1 inch diameter bolt does not reduce the bolt capacity.

Refer to the attached evaluation.

Thus, a recess of 1/4" (0.25") or less is consistent with our licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Basis: Prepared by: Draqos A. Nut Licensing Basis Reviewer 0 Yes[-I No Date _/_/_____Date -Zý) Z-Reviewed by: Peer Reviewer Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-9 of 54 EVALUATION In SWEL1 -032, the walkdown team noted that the overhead pipe near the roof line of the EDG building (east side of the building, above the slab over the Fuel Oil Storage Tanks) is supported on three wide flange columns. These columns are supported on baseplates with some nuts not fully engaged. The bolt recess within the nut for the 1-inch diameter bolts is 1/4 inch or less. Typical of all three baseplates.

Based on Calculation IP3-CALC-MULT-00734, a bolt recess of 0.27 inches or less for a 1 -inch diameter bolt does not reduce the bolt capacity.

Given that the bolt recess on one of the four anchor bolts for each of the three column support base plates was 0.25" or less, the bolts have full capacity.Excerpts from Calculation IP3-CALC-MULT-00734 are provided hereafter.

EN-DC-168 REVO 2 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-10 of 54 NewYorlcPower Authority C~~~a~~ .............

& 73~~~~. .4AJ ........~~Al... .O V6 ......c ......As4~ 0 .....-d ..Dft jjjT 7A ..__ ......- ~-id IO n_7.______d 71t.:7L -- 7____L_ LLd __ _____ --. -( ~h~)i07V______~~l

-_ _ 1___I U t Si + 11 +/-1 F 17 j I I TO L+/-V_LL .. ...EN-DC-168 REVO 3 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-11 of 54 b;A )h... .....J K 47 I I tv YVJ 7ý V,ý 14900" A i [--- iI I I I ~ I t ~I Ii I I EN-DC-168 REVO 4 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-12 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet I of Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-03 Originating SWC/AWC SWELl-094 Equipment ID No. 0021RWST Equip. Class 21 Equipment Description 21 Refueling Water Storage Tank Location:

Bldg. NTF Floor El. 82'-0" Room, Area Condition The seismic walkdown team observed small cracks near bolt nos. 30, 24 & 25, which were not a seismic concern, and significant concrete spalling and numerous cracks near bolt nos.16,17,18,19.

The concrete spalling and cracks bring into question the RWST anchorage adequacy.

In addition to this LBE, CR IP2-2012-06547 was issued to track resolution.

Documents Reviewed* Dwg. 9321-F-2250" Structural Assessment of the RWST and PWST Foundations, Inspection Report dated April 10, 2001 Licensina Basis The RWST foundation and anchorage must be capable of maintaining structural integrity under all applicable loads and load combinations, including the postulated occurrence of seismic events.Evaluation The spalled concrete and cracks are associated with a concrete mat protective layer. This spalling and cracking of this protective layer does not affect the anchorage of the RWST. and the observed condition is consistent with our licensing basis.Conclusion Condition Meets the Licensing Basis: I Yes I No Prepared by: Draaos A. Nuta Date 11/06/2012 Licensing Basis Reviewer Reviewed by: LPt-2"o'v, e -. " .Date I Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-13 of 54 EVALUATION The CR noted that: "During the Fukushima Seismic Walkdowns of the 21 Refueling Water Storage Tank, is was noted that small cracks of the concrete exist near bolt nos. 30, 24 & 25. These are acceptable and not a seismic concern. The walkdown team also noted significant concrete spalling and numerous cracks near bolt nos.16,17,18,19.

A picture depicting these type of cracks is provided below.Significant Spalling and cracks near bolts 16 and 17" (Note the spall/cracks shape appears to be at the same location as the plastered area note in 2001 and shown below on Page 7)The attached documents developed in 2001 indicate that the concrete foundation was protected by a 1/2 inch thick plaster type layer that developed significant cracks (A picture of the delaminated protective layer is shown on Page 5, below). While the plaster was repaired in approximately 2002, the repair was not effective at all locations.

Nevertheless, the observed cracks in the protective layer does not have an adverse effect on the pullout capacity of the RWST anchor bolts.Due rather ineffective repair actions, new remediation actions need to be considered.

The 2001 assessment of the RWST AND pwst foundationS is attached below: EN-DC-168 REV 0 2 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-14 of 54 STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL STRUCTURES Foundations for RWST and PWST In support of a structural assessment of civil structures, a walkdown was performed on April 10, 2001 by Rebecca Hurt and Dan Nuta of the Design Engineering, Civil Projects and Programs.A key plan showing the two tanks with respect to the surrounding structures is presented on Drawing 9321-F-2250, and is duplicated below..- Nrarp + 24. 5 PIR IMA~R'WAýTE R&TO R^C%%REFUELING WTR.-STQRAGEV'ANK KEY PLAN 5CALE: I"= o--A summary of the findings is as follows: The Primary and Refueling Water Tank foundations, are structurally sound. The concrete foundation appears to be protected by a plaster like layer approximately one-half inch thick. It has spalled at a couple locations and is cracked at numerous locations.

A more detailed description and assessment of the structural elements, which correlates with information shown on pertinent drawings and photographs taken during the walkdown is presented below.Primary and Refueling Water Tank foundations The Primary and Refueling Water Tank foundations consist of 2-feet thick reinforced concrete circular slabs of 32' and 42' diameters, respectively, supported on 2-feet thick reinforced concrete ring walls founded on rock. At the center of each foundation, the center of the Primary and Refueling Water Tank slabs is supported by square concrete piers, supported on rock, with the sides of the pier being 5' and 7', respectively.

The space between the rock and underside of the slab is filled with "fill." Compacted fill is specified around the outside perimeter of the ring walls.EN-DC-168 REVO 3 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-15 of 54 A plan and cross section through the tank foundations is shown below.--

"!J PLAN I-SECTION 1-1.i.1. V...The inspection of the tank foundations found no problems in the immediate vicinity of the anchor bolt chairs and, from an "anchorage to concrete" perspective, the anchorage of the tanks is sound.As mentioned above, the outside surface of the concrete ring walls, including the horizontal portion extending beyond the edge of the tank appears to have an approximately A" plaster like protective layer.As shown in the following photographs, the layer has spalled at a couple locations, delaminations are present, and cracks and bulges are prevalent.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 4 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-16 of 54 Shown in the photograph to the left, the largest spall exists on the southern side of the Primary Water Storage Tank ring wall.A Tag indicating a deficiency is placed in the area indicating that pieces are broken off the foundation.

A close-up picture of the area shows the spalled concrete protective cover pieces that fell, and the "curling of the remaining pieces at the edges where the delamination of the protective cover is visible.Cracking and bulging of the protective cover on the Primary Water Storage Tank ring wall is apparent at numerous locations.

Some of the typical cases are pictured below.EN-DC-1 68 REV 0 s Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-17 of 54 Also for the Primary Water Storage Tank ring wall, the pictures below depict the horizontal crack that seems to have developed between the upper protection cover and the lower portion The pictures above cover the eastern portion of the Primary Water Storage Tank ring wall. In the adjacent picture we show a similar area in the northern portion of the ring wall where pipes penetrate the tank.The mid-height area along the horizontal crack appears to have been previously grouted immediately below the pipe.While the Refueling Water Storage Tank ring wall support has smaller spall areas, it displays the same horizontal crack between the two protective layer "courses," vertical cracks, and small EN-DC-1 68 REV 0 6 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-18 of 54 delaminated areas, as depicted in the pictures that follow.The adjacent picture of the Refueling Water Storage Tank ring wall shows a large spall area that was previously repaired.

The location is along the southern portion of the ring wall.The adjacent picture shows vertical cracks in the protective layer. At the bottom of the crack, along the separation between the upper and lower protective layer courses (which, at this western location is close to grade), a separation of the lower protective course is apparent, as well as delaminations of the protective layer away from the crack zone.While for both tanks the protective layer appears to be in rather poor condition, and would be expected to separate from the ring wall, the concrete behind the protective layer appears to be in excellent shape.There are no reinforcing bars exposed at any of the spall locations, confirming that the layer that is spalling is a protective layer.EN-DC-1 68 REV 0 7 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-19 of 54 The remediation of this condition will require removal of the loose protective layer followed by the application of an epoxy coating affording protection for the ring wall concrete.EN-DC-168 REV 0 8 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-20 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet I of 2 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-04 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-018 Equipment ID No. 0023CCP Equip. Class 5 Equipment Description CCW Pump 23 Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 68'-0" Room, Area CCW Pump Room Condition Anchor for CCW pipe support missing 2 of 4 anchor bolts. Missing anchor bolts are tagged with an old work order WRT IP2-05-0522 from 2005.Documents Reviewed" Work Order IP2-05-00522

• ER IP2-05-26433 Licensing Basis Systems and components must be adequately supported so that they maintain structural integrity under all applicable loads and load combinations and do not affect other safety related SSCs.Evaluation Work performed in conjunction with Work Order IP2-05-0522 and ER No. 05-26433 indicates that at Support ACH-60, there is a vetical load of 1700 pounds and very small vertical seismic load. With no tension acting on the bolts, the existing configuration is consistent with our licensing basis.Conclusion Prepared by: Reviewed by: Condition Meets the Licensing Basis: 0 Yes Eli No Drawos A. Nuta AQ I Licensing Basis Reviewer Peer R " r X " Date 11/06/2012 Date IA)tlj 'Z-EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-21 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet 2 of 2 EVALUATION DESCRIPTION Based on ER IP2-05-26433: "The location was walked down by engineering and found that the size of another two fastners on the base support of ACH-60 is 1/2" dia. The length of the anchor bolts are unknown. The other five base supports installed on suction and discharge elbows are also of the same 1/2" dia size. As there is a operating load of 1700 lbs acting downward per design drawing ACH-60, and there is no uplift due to the fact that the vertical seismic load is much less than the dead load acting downwards, the 1/2" dia, 3 3/4" long HILTI Kwik II expansion anchor bolts are sufficient to carry the loading." (Nevertheless, the ER response also recommended to install the missing fasteners with 1/2" dia, 3 3/4" long HILTI Kwik II expansion anchor bolts with minimum embedment of 2 1/4" and, if needed, to enlarge the bolt hole diameter to suit.)EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-22 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet I of 3 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-05 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-017 Equipment ID No. 0021 SIP Equip. Class 5 Equipment Description 21 Safety Iniection Pump Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 59'-0" Room, Area Safety Injection Pump Room Condition Support stanchion for the overhead trolley has a four hole base plate but only three bolts are installed.

All other similar stanchions have four bolts installed in the base plates. Per signage on stanchion the anchor is abandoned in accordance with FEI-840679.

Documents Reviewed" Condition Report CR-IP2-1998-04788" Work Order No. IP2-98-01397" Calculation FFX-00088-02 Licensing Basis Systems and components must be adequately supported so that they maintain structural integrity under all applicable loads and load combinations and do not affect other safety related SSCs.Evaluation The evaluation found that, based on statements in CR-IP2-1998-04788, that the design drawing shows only three bolts for the stanchion support. Calculation FFX-00088-02 establishes the seismic design adequacy of the support.Conclusion Condition Meets the Licensing 0Yes nI No Prepared by: Reviewed by: Date 11/06/2012 Licensing Basis Review./W Date (' r 0 -Peer Rev EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-23 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 Sheet 2 of 2 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS EVALUATION DETAILS Material extracted from CR-IP2-1998-04788 supporting the adequacy of the three bolt configuration is duplicated below: AWC-017 notes that: " Support stanchion for the overhead trolley has a four hole base plate but only three bolts are installed.

All other similar stanchions have four bolts installed in the base plates. Per signage on stanchion the anchor is abandoned in accordance with FEI-840679.

CR-IP2-1998-04788 indicates that: This is a repeat finding. This condition has been previously evaluated and found acceptable.

Calculation FFX-00088-02 covers the design of the monorail with the missing anchor bolt.and Forward to R. Altadonna, review of this missing bolt was analyzed prior to the 97 outage and as part of the extension of the SI trolley beams.and Field condition was NOT compared to the design document prior to the writing of the CITRS Event. Design drawing indicates that this base plate has only 3 anchor bolts.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-24 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet 1 of 3 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-06 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-022 Equipment ID No. SWELl-025 Equip. Class 6 Equipment Description Boric Acid Transfer Pump 21 Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 80'-0 Room, Area Condition A 1.5" (1.9" O.D.), threaded hot water pipe from area heater 232 has a long 15 feet span adjacent to the wall and its seismic design/support adequacy was questioned.

Documents Reviewed No previous seismic calculation for this condition was found.Licensing Basis Safety-related function of nearby equipment must not be impaired by non-safety related equipment such as the hot water heater piping.Evaluation The pipe stress is well below the B31.1 code limit. The piping will not have any adverse II over I interaction during a design basis seismic event.The new evaluation is performed on the next page.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Basis: Dracos Nuta Z Yes ED No Prepared by: Draqos Nuta Licensing Basis Reviewer Date 11-8-2012 Date 0)- -3 7z,01 Reviewed by: Peer Reviewer EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-25 of 54 AWC- 22 Hot water heater pipe (1.9" OD) with 15 feet pipe span along the wall D = pipe outside diameter = 1.9 inch t = wall thickness for sch 40 pipe = 0.145 inch S = section modulus of 4" Sch 40 pipe = 0.326 in 3 w = uniform weight of pipe and water = 3.60 plf P = design pressure = 150 psi, cons.i =SIF of threaded pipe = 2.3 L = span length of pipe = 15 ft For PAB EL. 72', 0.5% damping response spectra Gh = peak horizontal seismic acceleration

=MRM = multi-modal response multiplier

=Gv = (2/3)Gh =Base on fixed-fixed end condition:

0.75 2.0 0.5 Y x I For dead weight normal loading Treat the beam AB as fixed-fixed with length of L in the Y &L=At point A, Mmax = wL 2/12 =Ma = Mmax =PD/(4t) + 0.75i(Ma/S)

=Sh = allow pipe stress for A53 Gr B, CS material =For seismic loading Gr = SRSS of vertical and horizontal seismic acceleration

=MRM(Gr) =At point A, Mb = MRM(Gv)Mmax

=Combining DW + seismic DBE Ma + Mb =PD/(4t) + 0.75i(Ma+Mb)/S

=1.8Sh =Pipe is structurally adequate per B31.1 code requirement.

Z direction 15 ft 810 in-lb 810 in-lb 4777 psi, 0.75i = 1.725 15000 psi, o.k.0.9014 1.803 1460.2 2270.2 12504 27000 in-lb in-lb psi psi, o.k.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-26 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet 1 of 7 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-07 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-032 & SWELl -094 Equipment ID No. (3) Equip. Class Equipment Description Location:

Bldg. Floor El. Room, Area Condition The seismic walkdown team noted that: "Platform between Refueling Water Storage Tank and Primary Water Storage Tank has two cross braces (bracing platform in EW direction) at RWST bolt 29 that are cut for a RWST pipe to pass through. Need to verify that a platform seismic analysis of the "as-is" platform was performed." The team also noted that: "Platform between 21RWST and Primary Water Storage Tank is very close to touching both tanks. Approximately 1/8" gap between tanks and platform.

LBE needed to determine if gap is acceptable for both tanks 21RWST and Primary Water Storage Tank" and "Valve hand wheel at RWST anchor bolt 29 is very close to touching the platform at frame with cut bracing. Gap is very narrow, almost 1/8". Platform could potentially hit valve handle." Documents Reviewed* EQE Calculation 421 00-C-002* Calculation FCX-0098-01 Licensing Basis Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs) must be designed such that spatial interactions, including relative displacements, under all postulated loads and load combinations, including seismic loads, do not prevent safety related SSCs from performing their intended safety function.

Applied to this particular case, the licensing basis requires that the sum of the displacements of the tank and platform be less than the separation (gap)provided.Evaluation The evaluation concluded that: (1) the existing platform, including the missing brace, was seismically analyzed (Calculation FCX-0098-01), (2) the sum of the maximum horizontal displacements of the tanks and platform, i.e., 0.07315", is less than the 1/8" (0.125") gap, and that (3) the sum of the vertical displacements of the tank(s) and platform is less than the horizontal displacement (and thus less than the gap between the valve mounted on the tank and the platform.

Thus, the observed conditions are consistent with the licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensin BsIs: N Yes E- No Prepared by: Draqos A. Nuta Date 1 e5" ! 2_Licensing Basis Re iewer ,.F../Reviewed by: 21 C w bc Date t. e-I _Peer Reviewer"" Z.1 EN-DC-168 REV0 1 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-27 of 54 Evaluation The evaluation consisted of the following actions: 1. Locate seismic analysis of the RWST/PWST platform, confirm the cut bracing was correctly represented in the analysis, and extract maximum (seismic + dead load) displacements.

2. Locate the RWST SQUG assessment, establish the impulsive mode frequency and the associated spectral acceleration corresponding to the frequency developed as part of the SQUG assessment.

3. Calculate the maximum RWST displacement at the platform location.4. Calculate the sum of the RWST displacement and platfrm displacement and show it is less than 1/8 inches.5. Extrapolate the finding to the vertical direction and the 1/8" gap between the RWST valve and platform member.1. Locate seismic analysis of the RWST/PWST platform, confirm the cut bracing was correctly represented in the analysis, and extract maximum (seismic + dead load) displacements.

Calculation FCX-0098-01 performed a seismic analysis of the platform.

Platform member sizes were confirmed via a walkdown.

As shown in the attached excerpts from the calculation, the cut brace was so noted and the model did not include X bracing at RWST bolt No. 29.In the model, the X-axis is perpendicular to the platform long axis, the Y-axis is in the vertical direction, and the Z-axis is along the length of the platform.The maximum horizontal displacement is 0.06115" at Joint 15.The maximum vertical displacement is 0.03252" at Joint 15.Excerpts from the analysis, including the finite element model, joint numbering, and maximum displacements are provided on the following three pages:

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-28 of 54 iv3 0 w LU nn-., ruz Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-29 of 54 w cc cc 00 w Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-30 of 54 0)CALC.4* FCX-00098-GO-~

P.N.69982-CD4-XC

• WALKWAY PL~rFORM BETWEEN RWST AND PWST ,701Nrr DISPLACEMENF2T (INCH RADIANS) STRI+3-- PAGE J-., ID: CON EDI!'ON OCTURE TYPE w SPACE JOINT LOAD X-TRANS Y-TRANS Z-TRANS X-ROTAN Y-ROTAN 15 5 6 7 8 16 5 6 7 8 32 5 6 7 8 33 5 6 7 a 0.06115 0.06098 0.00122 0.06098 0.06111 0.06095 0.00122 0.06095 0.04568 0.04564 0.00034 0.04564 0.04566 0.04S563 0.00034 0.04563-0.01959-0 03252-0. 02072-0 03252-0.01616-0.02592-0.01562-0 .02592-0.00105-0.00230-0.00180-0.00230-0.00463-0.00694-0.00349-0.00694 0.00013 0.00011 0.00170 0.00011 0.0011.8 0.00116 0.00166 0.00116 0.00222 0.00220 0.00200 0.00220-0.00142-0.0014.3 0.00196-0.00143 0.00003 0.00006 0.00005 0.00006 0.00005 0.00008 0,00004 0.00008-0.00003-0.00005-0.00004-0.00005.-0.00004-0.00006-0.00003-0.00006-0.00011-0.00011 0.00000-0.00011-0.00015-0.00015 0.00001-0.00015 0.00027 0.00027 0.00000 0.00027 0.00029 0.00029.o00000 0.00029 Z-ROTAN 0.00019 0 .00037 0.00028 0.00037 0.00019 0.00037 0.00028 0,00037-0.00020-0.00026-0.00009-0.00026 ,-0.00020-0.00026-0.00009-0.00026 END OF LATEST ANALYSIS RESULT ********,***

98. PRINT SUPPORT REACTIONS EN-DC-168 REV0 5 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-31 of 54 2. The seismic analysis of the RWST, including the assessment of its anchorage is contained in Calculation 42100-C-002.

On Page 30-9 of the calculation, the impulsive mode frequency is shown to be 6.48 Hz: I STEP 3: Dete"nnthn e fluid-structure model frequency lot vertical carbon steel lanIs containing water.R -240 tfilt -, 0.0010 ,and H IR -1.3625 From Table 7-3. rind (IF 1 -&48 H2.NOTM If the tank materil Is not carbon steel ie not eal to 29,0O0 kell oa Iftlud is not water (GAMMA not quld to 62.4 Ibel*M3)the freaqumncy nvil be adjusted In accordance with the GIP STEP 3.3 OF 10 The spectral acceleration corresponding to this frequency is conservatively found to be S, = 0.21g (within 20%plus or minus of the natural frequency:

STEP 4: Detem~ine the spectral acceleration ISafl for the fluid-structure modal frequency.

Enter the 4% damnped hoadontlt ground or floor response spectrum for the surlace oan which the fa tle mounted, with the model frequonoy datenrned In STEP 3, and determine the nuomnurm spectra soceleratlon 4SVfI over the foewling frequency renr,.8 *FW<F<I.2*Ff

+ 5J Hz 4 F < Hi tc Appropriate Accelerefion ISMt) 0.21 a 3. The maximum displacement of the RWST at the platform location is calculated as follows:* Maximum horizontal displacement of a single degree of freedom having a frequency of 6.48 Hz is: o Max A = [S, x 386.4 in/sec 2]/( 2 x iT x f2 o Max A = [0.21g x 386.4 in/sec 2 ]/( 2 x iT x 6.48)2 = 0.04895 inches* Taking the location of the maximum displacement at 2/3 of the tank height, which is 495 inches, the displacement at the platform location (7' x 12" = 84 inches) is calculated conservatively assuming a straight line displaced shape: o 2/3 x 495 = 330" o 0.04895" x 84"/330" = 0.012 inches EN-DC-168 REV 0 6 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-32 of 54 4. Calculate the sum of the RWST displacement and platfrm displacement and show it is less than 1/8 inches.* Maximum displacement in the horizontal (X) direction of the platform was shown to be 0.061" under 1. above.* Maximum horizontal displacement of the tank at the 84" above the base platform elevation was calculated above as 0.012"* The sum of the two displacements, i.e., 0.06115" + 0.012" = 0.07315" < 0.12 inches.* Note: The total displacement above is conservatively calculated as the maximum platform displacement is at a point away from where the platform is close to the tank and the tank displacement was assumed to be linear rather than parabolic.

5. Extrapolate the finding to the vertical direction and the 1/8" gap between the RWST valve and platform member.* The RWST frequency in the vertical direction is > 6.48 Hz. Thus, the maximum displacement would be less that the 0.012" horizontal displacement.

• The maximum vertical displacement (Y-Axis) of the platform from 1. above 0.03252", much less than the 0.06115" horizontal displacement.

• Thus, the 1/8" (0.125") gap between the valve hand wheel (mounted on the tank) and platform is larger than the sum of the vertical displacements of the tank and valve and platform which we rationalized to be much less that the 0.07315" horizontal displacement.

Thus, there will be no spatial interactions between the RWST/PWST tanks and the platform located between the tanks during a postulated seismic event.EN-DC-168 REV0 7 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-33 of 54 ArrACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet 1 of 3 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-08 Originating SWC/AWC SWELl -072 Equipment ID No. (3) Equip. Class 16 Equipment Description Battery Charger 21 Location:

Bldg. CB Floor El. 33'-0" Room, Area Condition The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the gap between Battery Charger 21 and the adjacent instrument rack west of the cabinet is 1/2" and questioned if this gap is sufficient to preclude seismic interaction.

Documents Reviewed Calculation GCC-00095-00 Original and Revised SEWS for Battery Charger 21 Licensing Basis Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs) must be designed such that spatial interactions, including relative displacements, under all postulated loads and load combinations, including seismic loads, do not prevent safety related SSCs from performing their intended safety function.

Applied to this particular case, the licensing basis requires that the sum of the displacements of the Battery Charger 21 and the adjacent Instrument Rack be less than the separation (gap) provided.Evaluation The evaluation concluded that the sum of the maximum displacement of Battery Charger 21 and the adjacent Instrument Rack is 0.14 inches. It is thus concluded that the 1/2" gap between the Battery Charger 21 and the adjacent Instrument Rack is sufficient to preclude spatial interactions and the condition satisfies the licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Ba Yes No Prepared by: Draqos A. Nuta Date 11/15/2012 Licensing Basis Rev" er Reviewed by: C c.d z Date 6 Peer Revie er 7X EN-DC-168 REV0 1 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-34 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 Sheet 2 of 3 LICENSING BAsis EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS EVALUATION The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the gap between Battery Charger 21 and the adjacent Instrument rack west of the cabinet is 1/2" and questioned if this gap is sufficient to preclude seismic interaction.

Below, we calculate maximum displacements of the cabinet and rack and compare their sum to the existing gap.Battery Charger 21, shown below, was replaced in 1992 with a solid state model: I Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-35 of 54 In Calculation GCC-00095-00, the frequesncy of the previous Westinghouse Battery Charger 21 was calculated to be 9.7 Hz.In a letter dated April 15, 1992, attached, Nick Yarnell of SCI indicated that the new Battery Charger 21 has a frequency of 10 Hz and, based on the applicable floor response seismic spectrum, the applicable seismic acceleration is 0.71g.Based on this information, we can calculate the maximum horizontal seismic displacement as: o Max A = [Sa x 386.4 in/sec 2]/( 2 x n x f)2 o Max A = [0.71g x 386.4 in/sec 2]/( 2 x 11 x 10)2 = 0.0695 inches Per information obtained from Systems Electrical Engineering (Refer to the attached e-mail) the instrument rack adjacent to the Battery Charger 21 has Transfer Switches weighing 100 lbs or less, and mounted in the lower third of the Instrument Rack, and Junction Boxes mounted high on the Instrument Rack and weighing about 24 lbs or less. There are four (4) Transfer Switch enclosures and we consider six (6) Junction Boxes.Based on the 5441bs weight, the strong structural members, and diagonal (K) bracing on all four sides, the Instrument Panel is judged to be equal in frequency (or higher) to the Battery Charger 21 cabinet. Thus, doubling the displacement calculated above, the total displacement becomes 0.14 inches, indicating that the 1/2" (0.5") gap provided is sufficient to preclude any spatial interaction.

Concluding, the 1/2" gap between the Battery Charger 21 and the adjacent Instrument Rack is sufficient to preclude spatial interactions and the condition satisfies the licensing basis.Referenced documents are provided below.EN-DC-168 REV0 3 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-36 of 54-------- ---- ( Forwarded letter follows )---------------------

Dates Monday, 13 April 1992 2tOSpm ET To. NUZU.M Ccs SMZTH.L Froms GRJOSII.D Subjects Natural freq. of SCI Cabinets Per Niok Yarnell of SCI, the Natural (or Resonant)

Frequency of SCI Battery Charger or Inverter Cabinet is approximately 1011Z.Dates Wednesday, 15 April 1992 9i46am ET To% SHITl.LAW, *, GHOSIt.D Froms NUZZr.M Subjects Revised "g6 value for bat. chgr.Based on a frequenoy of 10 ha (as per D. Ghosh, Electrical Enginuerj, please use the following acceleration for the mounting of the battery g .-,73 tx I.S .71.u. tin " Analyosi, elevation 331-0, S98 condition, horizontal direction, 2i critical damping for bolted steel asaembliee.

1.3 represents a modal participation factor.I requested that D. Ghonh provide us with documentation from the manufacturer attesting to the charger natural frequency so that it can be Included in the calculation.

1, a. Part/subcomponent description Solid State Controls (SCI) 460 VAC @ 60HZ 250A transformer (Model 80-215758-90) for battery charger.b. Host equipment description:

Solid State Controls (SCI) battery charger 250A Tag number BATTCHG21.

EN-DC-168 REV0 4 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-37 of 54 E-Mail from Robin Daley to D. Nuta, dated November 14,2012 This took a little more digging than I expected.

I found an older Con Edison PO for those switches but the issue is that they were assembled for us from parts and there is no specific weight mentioned for the assembled components.

From what I can find the internal circuit breaker is -3Ibs, and it's likely the external switch handle assembly is around 3Abs but these items are obsolete and are not in Merlin nor has google returned any useful results. The external housing is a steel NEMA 12 rated box, but no weights are listed.What may help is that they were seismically tested to IEEE 344-1975, but the results are not included in the PO package I found (obviously it had to pass but I would think there would be more information).

There is no available information on the junction boxes above them either. The tag numbers on the boxes are not in Merlin and are likely just ECRIS nodes, which wouldn't necessarily tell you about the box, just the cables.There is no manufacturer or discernable information to say what they're made of either.My best guesses would be that the switch and its internals would weigh around -~100bs. This is based on the following:

1. The box is a steel NEMA 12 box sized at 36x 1lx10. I was unable to find a match online but a 36x24x10 enclosure is 791bs per my search. This leaves us with an overly conservative weight.2. The GE type TED136YT150 breaker has a listed package weight of 3lbs.3. The GE type TDA-2 handle/mechanism is obsolete but based on the size and material it would appear to be around 3lbs as well.4. The extra terminal blocks, fuses, cable and barrier boards likely add up to -10lbs.Assuming the upper junction boxes are also NEMA12, they're around 16x12x8 so around 241bs each. I based my weights of the enclosures on the following information:

http://www.deltafab.com/ProductsandServices/StandardEnclosures/NemaTvpel2SinqleDoorEnclosures/tabid/3 96/Default.aspx As always I would encourage you to second guess my estimate for thoroughness.

I have attached the original Con Edison PO to this email. The listed dimensions and materials are on page 15.Rob Daleyl Systems Engineering Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, Buchanan, NY 10511 Office: (914) 254-68171 Email: rdaleyl @enteray.com EN-DC-168 REV 0 5 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-38 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet 1 of 2 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-09 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-1 2 Equipment ID No. SWELl-032 Equip. Class 6 Equipment Description Fuel Oil Transfer Pump D.G. 23 Location:

Bldg. FOST Floor El. 77'-6" Room, Area Condition The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that One pipe is supported from another pipe. This is a non typical pipe support. Design drawings for this support were not available at time of walk down. One pipe (insulated pipe) runs to the Emergency Domestic truck fill stop valve and the other orange pipes from the EDG building to near 23FOTP.Documents Reviewed* Dwg. 9321 -F-2258" Dwg. 9321-F-2259

• Dwg. 9321-F-2260

• Technical Report No. 91177-TR-01, "Diesel Generator Fuel Oil System, Seismic Verification Summary Report," September 1991.Licensinq Basis All safety related systems and components, including piping systems, must be analyzed to show that the they will perform their safety related function under all applicable loads and load combinations, included the postulated occurrences of seismic events. In this particular case, a seismic analysis of the observed configuration would be required to document the pipe and support adequacy.Evaluation Technical Report No. 91177-TR-01, "Diesel Generator Fuel Oil System, Seismic Verification Summary Report," September 1991 analyzed the observed configuration and confirmed the pipes and supports are adequate under all postulated loads and load combinations, including OBE and DBE loads. Thus, the observed conditions are consistent with the licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Basis: [ Yes L No Prepared by: Draaqos A. NutaA"

• Date 11/19/2012 Licensing Basis Review r Reviewed by: C64f4 ( .,, Date e/(-Peer Reviewe68RV/

EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-39 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 Sheet 2 of 2 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS EVALUATION A picture of the observed pipe configuration is shown below: One pipe is supported from another pipe. This is a none typical pipe support.One pipe (insulated pipe) runs to the Emergency Domestic truck fill stop valve and the other orange pipe from the EDG building into ground near 23FOTP.As mentioned above, we established that Technical Report No. 91177-TR-01, "Diesel Generator Fuel Oil System, Seismic Verification Summary Report," September 1991 reports on analyses that reflected the field configuration.

A section of the report covers analyses of the 1 1/2" and 1" Diesel FO Normal and Emergency Fill Lines. The analyses confirmed that the pipes and their supports are adequate under all postulated loads and load combinations, including OBE and DBE loads.Thus, the observed condition is consistent with the licensing basis.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-40 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet i of 3 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-10 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-35 Equipment ID No. SWEL1-005,021,022 Equip. Class 0 and 5 Equipment Description N2 Backup Control Valves, Aux Feed Pumps 21 & 22 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 17'-6" Room, Area Condition The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the 5/8"+/- diameter anchor bolts of the F1-5004 support column are not fully engaged. (top of bolt is approximately 11/4," below the top of the nut).Documents Reviewed* Calculation IP3-CALC-MULT-00734

• EPRI Document NP-5057, Volume I" AISC, "Manual of Steel Construction," 8th and 9th Editions.Licensing Basis All safety related systems and components must be designed such that they will maintain structural integrity and perform their safety intended function under all applicable loads and load combinations, including postulated seismic event occurrences.

In this particular case, the bolt engagement should be sufficient to provide the tension capacity developed under a postulated seismic event.Evaluation The tension loading of the bolts anchoring the base plate for Instrument Fl-5004 is very small, as discussed in the attached evaluation.

As such, given that a recess of 0.172" for a 5/8" diameter bolt does not reduce the bolt tension capacity, the 8/100" larger recess observed is acceptable and we conclude that the observed condition is consistent with the licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Basis: X Yes LI No Prepared by: Dragos A. Nuta Date 11/19/2012 Licensing Basis Reviewer Reviewed by: _

• P .& , 6 Date P 1 z..-Peer ewer EN-DC-168 REV 0 1 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-41 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Shoot 2 of 3 EVALUATION The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the 5/8"+/- diameter anchor bolts of F1-5004 support column are not fully engaged. (top of bolt is approximately 1/4" below the top of the nut).5/8"+/- diameter anchor bolts of FI-5004 support column are not fully engaged. (Missing about X').In accordance with Calculation IP3-CALC-MULT-00734 Page 7 of 8, a recess of 0.172 inches does not affect the 5/8" diameter bolt tension capacity.Furthermore, as seen from the picture above, due to limited supported weights, the base plate loads and induced tension in the bolts during a postulated seismic event are minimal. Therefore, exceeding the maximum recess for which the bolt tension capacity is not reduced by approximately 8/100 of an inch (0.25" -0.172" = 0.08") is acceptable.

IP3-CALC-MULT-00734 Page 7 of 8 is attached hereafter.

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-42 of 54 NewYorkPower Authorft.. .... .... .. .F Mi, 7. .. .gw-im 0 ..........P.O.3-3-I-1 -, --l ." * , .I I ' ' .' ...- .I , ., .7--- , I I I k L r , s1 ILl+ -+ -...,,!d.~L fAJki~1 ~iidk1akL~

-i -I J I I I (' Al I. -I i -i ~ ~ L mu .L ~ I ~- .t ~ = El -~ ~ .~¶ ---:031 A.-I.J?I-J 4 j---*1 j I 41 I. q-L I iAL-S I I I-LA I"h-~1.13A4 t- I 6b1 P ! (W-4-4--ý4r-j* V 1.1-___ 1 1 A 11. it I Ad_____'s Iz z~ iI I-.-It's -___ -~D~J~ D ~2.EN-DC-168 REV0 3 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-43 of 54 ATrACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet I of 2 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-1 1 Originating SWC/AWC SWELl -077 Equipment ID No. 0022EDG Equip. Class 17 Equipment Description Diesel Generator No. 22 Location:

Bldg. EDG Floor El. 72'-0" Room, Area Condition The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the EDG exhaust pipe is supported on a post frame that also supports fuse panel for 22 Pre Lube Pump, 22 Lube oil HTR, and 22 Jacket Water HTR. This support has damaged & missing grout under the eastern post base plate.Documents Reviewed" Calculation GCC-00125-00" Calculation GCC-00176-00

• Calculation GCC-00025-00, "Support for Diesel Generator Main Exhaust Pipe."" Dwg. 3627-6A* Dwg. A250500-00 Licensing Basis All safety related systems and components must be designed such that they will maintain structural integrity and perform their safety intended function under all applicable loads and load combinations, including postulated seismic event occurrences.

In this particular case, the grout pad must have the required compression capacity and stability to withstand compression forces developed under a postulated seismic event.Evaluation Based on calculation GCC-00025-00, the load acting on the base plate and grout is minimal Furthermore, considering the 5000 psi compressive strength of the grout, and the more that 75% of the base plate area supported on grout, the compression capacity of the grout is more than sufficient to withstand the acting loads. Thus, the condition is in accordance with the IP2 licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Basis: I Yes r-] No Prepared by: Draqos A. Nuta Date 11/19/2012 Licensing Basis Reviewer Reviewed by: Dt;ate /// Date Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-44 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet 2 of 2 EVALUATION Based on calculation GCC-00025-00, the load acting upon the 6 x 6 x 1/4 TS that distributes the load to the two support columns is 1100 lbs vertical and 570 lbs horizontal with an interaction ratio of 0.07 vs the 1.0 allowable.

Distributed to the two support columns, the loading per column is 550 lbs vertical and 285 lbs horizontal.

In addition to the minimal loading on the grout, considering the 5000 psi compressive strength of the grout, the more that 75% of the base plate area supported on grout provides more than sufficient support for the acting loads, as only 3 inches squares of grout provide a compressive capacity of 15,000 pounds. Thus, the condition is in accordance with the IP2 licensing basis.EN-DC-168 REV 0 2 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-45 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet I of 3 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-12 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-35 Equipment ID No. SWEL1-005,021,022 Equip. Class 0 and 5 Equipment Description N2 Backup Control Valves, Aux Feed Pumps 21 & 22 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 17'-6" Room, Area Condition The Seismic Walkdown Team noted at Elev. 18'-6" of the AFB that There is a 24" outside diameter pipe connecting to PCV-1 284 which appears to have excessive unsupported length.. From the first support, the pipe has a 2Y ' horizontal run, a 3' vertical run and a 2/2'horizontal run at which point it connects to a heavy valve and two large diameter flanges.After that, there is a 6" vertical run of 7/8" OD tubing followed by a 21/2' run of 7/8" OD tubing to the next support.Documents Reviewed Since the observation related to non-threaded piping, which is not within the scope of the seismic walkdowns, a separate walkdown of the area was performed.

Licensina Basis All safety related systems and components must be designed such that they will maintain structural integrity and perform their safety intended function under all applicable loads and load combinations, including postulated seismic event occurrences.

In this particular case, the piping spans must be such that pipe stresses are within code allowables.

Evaluation A subsequent walkdown of the pipe location by members of the IPEC Design Engineering Department certified for performance of the Seismic Walkdowns, assessed the configuration and found that: (1) spans are not excessive for the 2 3/4" diameter pipe, for which a span of 8'-0" would not be questionable, (2) the in-line loads are not excessive, and (3) the configuration is acceptable.

As the piping under consideration does not have excessive unsupported lengths, we find the configuration acceptable and within the IP2 licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Basi : 0 Yes EI No Prepared by: Dragos A. Nuta Date 11/19/2012 Licensing Basis iew Reviewed by: c rd cPe Date e(e " )12 Peer Revi e4rl EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-46 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet 2 of 3 EVALUATION The Seismic Walkdown Team noted at Elev. 18'-6" of the AFB that There is a 2W" outside diameter pipe connecting to PCV-1284 which appears to have excessive unsupported length.. From the first support, the pipe has a 2Y2' horizontal run, a 3' vertical run and a 2Y 'horizontal run at which point it connects to a heavy valve and two large diameter flanges. After that, there is a 6" vertical run of 7/8" OD tubing followed by a 2Y'run of 7/8" OD tubing to the next support.A picture of the piping, located at the southern end of the AFB Elev. 18'-6", is provided below: Support]A subsequent walkdown of the pipe location by members of the IPEC Design Engineering Department certified for performance of the Seismic Walkdowns, assessed the configuration and found that: (1) spans are not excessive for the 2 314" diameter pipe, for which a span of 8'-0" would not be questionable, (2) the in-line loads are not excessive, and (3) the configuration is acceptable.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-47 of 54 As the piping under consideration does not have excessive unsupported lengths, we find the configuration acceptable and within the IP2 licensing basis.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-48 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet I of 3 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-13 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-35 Equipment ID No. SWELl-005,021,022 Equip. Class 0 and 5 Equipment Description N2 Backup Control Valves, Aux Feed Pumps 21 &22 Location:

Bldg. AFB Floor El. 17'-6" Room, Area Condition The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that Long span 5/8" 01" tubing has little separation and typical span length of eight feet .The tubes will interact with each other during seismic event. There are also 3/8" OD tubes also in close proximity to each other which have similar unsupported spans.Documents Reviewed A separate walkdown was performed by a team of engineers qualified to perform seismic walkdowns.

Licensing Basis All safety related systems and components must be designed such that they will maintain structural integrity and perform their safety intended function under all applicable loads and load combinations, including postulated seismic event occurrences.

In this particular case, the tubing spans between supports must be such that tubing maintains structural integrity.

Evaluation A subsequent walkdown of the tubing locations by members of the IPEC Design Engineering Department certified for performance of the Seismic Walkdowns, assessed the configurations and found that: (1) The tubing spans are not excessive, (2) all tubes in close proximity have common supports and spans, and (3) the separation is such that any impact of adjacent tubes under a seismic event will be associated with extremely small impact forces while eliminating any possible resonance and enhancing the system damping. As such, the configurations were found to be configuration acceptable and within the IP2 licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Basis:[A Yes[I No Prepared by: Reviewed by: Draqos A. Nuta Licensing Basis Reviewer Richard S-arak .Peer Reviewer Date 11/20/2012 Date 11/20/2012 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F49 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIS EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheot 2 of 3 EVALUATION The Seismic Walkdown Team noted that Long span 5/8" OD" tubing has little separation and typical span length of eight feet .The tubes will interact with each other during seismic event.There are also 3/8" OD tubes also in close proximity to each other which have similar unsupported spans. Photographs of the tubing configurations, contained in AWC-35 are provided below: Long span ruWing nas rite separation

(< 7/Z-) .I ney wiff be interacting with each other during a seismic event.Tubing with excessive distance between supports at entry to room.EN-DC-168REVO 2

Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-50 of 54 A subsequent walkdown of the tubing locations by members of the IPEC Design Engineering Department certified for performance of the Seismic Walkdowns, was performed.

Approximations of the tubing spans made by the original walkdown team that prepared AWC-35 were reviewed against the tubing layouts. The new inspections established that: " In general, the tubing is supported at 6 ft to 8 ft intervals or less* no excessive lengths were identified." spans satisfy guidance as to spans for seismic supports in CES-8 standard covering tubing design and installation, including the 10 ft or less horizontal and 13 ft or less vertically for 3/8" tubing, and 13 ft or less horizontally and 16 ft or less vertically for 5/8" tubing.: As mentioned above, the assessment of the configurations found that: 1) The tubing spans are not excessive, (2) all tubes in close proximity have common supports and spans, and 3) the separation is such that any impact of adjacent tubes against each other under a postulated seismic event will be associated with extremely small impact forces while eliminating any possible resonance and enhancing the system damping.As such, the configurations were found to be acceptable and within the IP2 licensing basis.EN-DC-168 REV0 3 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-51 of 54 ATTACHMENT 9.9 LICENSING BASIs EVALUATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS Sheet I of 3 Licensing Basis (LB) Evaluation Form LB Evaluation No. LB-14 Originating SWC/AWC AWC-017 Equipment ID No. SWELl -020, 090 Equip. Class 5. 20 Equipment Description 21 & 22 Safety Iniection Pumps Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 59'-0" Room, Area Safety Iniection Pump Room Condition While performing an area walkby of Elevation 59"-0" of the PAB, the Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the HVAC ductwork adjacent to the stairs does not have any lateral support from the base to beyond the first elbow at the top. The span appears to be excessive.

Documents Reviewed" Dwg. 9321 -F-4036* Dwg. 9321-F-4037" Dwg. 9321-F-4038" Dwg. 9321 -F-4039" AISC Steel Book" Technical Report No. 92128-TR-01, "Indian Point Unit 2, Licensing Basis In-Structure Response Spectra." Licensing Basis All safety related systems and components must be designed such that they will maintain structural integrity and perform their safety intended function under all applicable loads and load combinations, including postulated seismic event occurrences.

In this particular case, the duct span between supports must be such that duct maintains structural integrity.

Evaluation The evaluation established that the vertical span is not excessive and, under a postulated seismic occurrence, the stresses in the duct are very low. As such, the configuration was found to be acceptable and within the IP2 licensing basis.Conclusion (8) Condition Meets the Licensing Basis- 0 Yes EI No Prepared by: Draaos A. Nuta Date 11/20/2012 Licensing Basis iewr Reviewed by: Ric: .MDrake Date 11/20/2012 Peer Reviewer EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-52 of 54 EVALUATION While performing an area walkby of Elevation 59"-0" of the PAB, the Seismic Walkdown Team noted that the HVAC ductwork adjacent to the stairs does not have any lateral support from the base to beyond the first elbow at the top. The span appears to be excessive.

Picture taken by the walkdown team, as contained in AWC-17 are shown below: Based on Section D-D of Dwag. 9321-F-4039, the duct is anchored at the 59'-0" floor with the top of duct at Elev. 60'-4" and the bottom of the top duct extending from the support shown in the picture above is at Elevation 74'-1 1" -10" -74'.Thus, the vertical span extends from Elev 74' toElev. 60'-4" .The unsupported vertical span is approximately 13'-8". Based on Section C 7.5. 5 of ASCE 4 2012(Standard covering the Seismic Design and Analysis of Nuclear Facilities), SMACNA covers duct support spacing of 10 ft, 12 ft, 15 ft, 20 ft, and 25 ft. Thus, a span of 13 ft is within the range of duct spans covered by SMACNA: 2 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-53 of 54 7.5 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 7.5.1 Introduction The scope of this section considers portions of mechanical and electrical distribution systems requiring seismic analysis and design. and is limited to piping. tubing., ductwork, and raceways and their supports.

For seismic design and analysis purposes.these distribution systems shall be divided into five categories, SDC-5 through SDC-1. consistent with ASCFJSEI Standard 43-05. As described in this section- appropriate analytical procedures shall be used to determine the forces and moments at various limiting locations in distribution systems as well as at and on their supports.

Not included in this scope of the Section are mechanical.

electrical and imstrumentation and control components or devices not otherwise identified in the scope.C-7.5.5 Ductwork The design of nuclear safety-related duct is usually governed by one of two codes -SMACNA (C7.5-12) or ASME AG-i (C7.5-13).

A subsection of the 1980 SMACNA code for rectangular ducts (C7.5-14)provides guidance as to the resultant deadweight load as a function of rectangular duct dimension for support spacing of 10, 12, 15,20, 25, and 30 feet. A simiar standard is available for round duct (C7.5-15).

Transverse and longitudinal horizontal support spacing as a function of one of three seismic hazard levels is defined n the SMACNA code (C7.5-16).

As an alternative to this code for round duct design, the ASME B31.3 piping code is sometimes used. When using the piping code, care must be taken concerning the elastic stability of thin wall pipe when D/t ratios are greater than 50.The ASMd AG-1 standard provides (1) an alternative ASME-developed procedure for the construction of duct m the form of allovable stresses in the duct for design by analysis; (2) duct system finite-element modeling procedure recommendations:

and (3)testing procedures for design by testing. However, this standard does not provide specific guidance on seismic support spacing -either vertical, transverse, or 15 In order to ascertain that the duct will maintain structural integrity under a postulated seismic event, we obtained structural parameters from HVAC personnel as follows: The duct is 18 gage construction with 1 1/2" x 1/8" corner angles. The wide side has diagonal creases to enhance integrity.

3 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page F-54 of 54 Based on this information, we considered seismic loads consisting of a horizontal response spectrum peak for 1% damping of 1.Og (conservative for Elev. 59' of the PAB) and a verical seismic acceleration of 2/3 (1.0g) = 0.66g vertical acceleration.

Parameters for the duct are as follows: " 18gage steel o thickness

= 0.0478 inch o weight per square foot = 2 #/ft 2* The 1 1/2" x 1/8" corner angles: o weight per foot = 1.23 #/ft o Ix = ly = 0.078 in 4 o Area, A = 0.359 in 2* Perimeter of the duct is 64" = 5.33 ft" Height = 13'-8" = 13.667 ft" Weight of vertical duct = 13.667' x 5.33' x 2 #/ft 2 = 146 lbs.* Weight of the corner angles: o 4 x 13.67 ft x 1.23 #/ft = 67 1bs" Total weight of the duct = 146 lbs + 67 lbs = 213 lbs* Considering a horizontal earthquake with 1.Og horizontal acceleration and a vertical earthquake with a vertical acceleration of 2/3 (1.0g), we calculate the section properties for the duct, the maximum bending moment and axial compression and then assess the resulting stresses in the duct: o Considering only the corner angles, the moment of inertia about the weak axis (10" depth) is: o 4 (1,) + 4 ( A, x d 2)= 4(0.078) + 4( 0.359 x 5 2) = 0.312 + 35.9 = 36.2 in 4 o Section Modulus S = li/d = 36.2 / 5 = 7.24 in 3 o Cross-sectional area is A plate + Area angles N 64x0.0478+4x0.359=3+

1.47=4.5 in 2* We now establish the axial load under Dead Load + Vertical Seismic load and the bending moment under a horizontal 1.0g seismic acceleration:

o Under a horizontal uniform load of 213 lbs/13.67 ft = 16#/ft = 1.31 #/inch, the bending moment considering simply supported span (conservative assumption) is w 12/8 = 1.31 x 1642 /8 = 4404 # inch.o Thus, Mmax = 4404 # x inch o Compressive (axial) stresses under DL + vertical earthquake acceleration: " Axial load = 2/3(1.0g) x 213 # + 213# = 356 lbs" Compressive stress, a, ,given the 4.5 in 2 area is 356/4.5 = 79 psi o Compressive stress from bending is Ob = Mm,,JS = 4404/7.24

= 608 psi* Total compressive stress under axial load and bending is: 0 otota= a +ob=608 psi+79psi=687 psi A compressive stress of 687 psi on the corner angles is very low and acceptable.

Thus, we confirm the 13'-8" span is acceptable and the configuration satisfies the IP 2 licensing basis.4 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. 0 Page G- 1 of 5 ATTACHMENT G -PEER REVIEW CHECKLIST FOR SWEL Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page G-2 of 5 ATTACHMENT 9.10 PEER REVIEW CHECKLIST FOR SWEL FORM Sheet 1 of 4 Peer Review Checklist for SWEL Instructions for Completing Checklist This peer review checklist may be used to document the review of the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL) in accordance with EPRI 1025286, 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 comments.1. Were the five safety functions adequately represented in the SWEL 1 selection?

YZ NEI All five safety functions were adequately represented in SWEL-1 2. Does SWEL 1 include an appropriate representation of items having the following sample selection attributes:

a. Various types of systems?Various types of systems such as mechanical, electrical, control units etc. were considered Y[ NEI b. Major new and replacement equipment?

New/replacement equipment were represented (ex EDG thermostat, solenoid valve etc. see Base List 1)YN NO c. Various types of equipment?

Various types of equipment were represented on the SWEL- 1, such as fuel oil transfer pump, water pump, boric acid blender, solenoid valve, fan, circuit breaker, relay cabinet, MCC, switchgear, etc.YE NO EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page G-3 of 5 ATTACHMENT 9.10 PEER REVIEW CHECKLIST FOR SWEL FORM Sheet 2 of 4 Peer Review Checklist for SWEL d. Various environments?

YE NEI Various environments were considered.

e. Equipment enhanced based on the findings of the IPEEE (or equivalent) program? YI- NE There were no findings from IPEEE for Unit 2 f. Were risk insights considered in the development of SWEL 1? YO Nil Yes, risk insights were considered in the development of SWEL-1 3. For SWEL 2: a. Were spent fuel pool related items considered, and if applicable included in YE NEI SWEL 2?b. Was an appropriate justification documented for spent fuel pool related items not YE N[l included in SWEL 2?Yes, as shown in Table 4, Attachment B EN-DC-1 68 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037, Rev. 0, Page G-4 of 5 ATTACHMENT 9.10 Sheet 3 of 4 PEER REVIEW CHECKLIST FOR SWEL FORM Peer Review Checklist for SWEL 4. Provide any other comments (Attachment 9.11) related to the peer review of the SWELs.The development of SWEL- 1 and SWEL-2 was conducted in satisfaction of the EPRI guidance.Y0 NE]5. Have all peer review comments been adequately addressed in the final SWEL?Peer Reviewer #1: Tom PanaWhitm o Peer Reviewer #2: Kenneth Whitmore ga/&&Jrl ¢_Date: 11/07/2012 Date: 11/07/2012 EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-1 2-00037, Rev. 0, Page G-5 of 5 ATTACHMENT 9.10 Sheet 4 of 4 PEER REVIEW CHECKLIST FOR SWEL FORM Peer Review Checklist for SWEL Instructions The following instructions are meant to aid in completing the form and a guideline pertaining to the type and amount of information that is to be placed in each section of the checklist.

For all items in the checklist, identify whether the action has been completed and provide comments and/or discussions with the Seismic Walkdown Team that can be considered applicable to answer the item in the checklist.

NOTE Add additional SWEL Peer Reviewers to the Peer Review Checklist form as required Peer Reviewer #1: -The SWEL Peer Reviewer shall print and sign their name and include the date that the review was complete.Peer Reviewer #2: -The SWEL Peer Reviewer shall print and sign their name and include the date that the review was complete.EN-DC-1 68 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT H -REVIEW COMMENTS AND RESOLUTION FORM Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENT 9.11 PEER REVIEW COMMENT FORM Sheet I of I Seismic Walkdown Submittal Report-Enter Review Comments and Resolutions Form Engineering IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. Title: indian Point Energy Center., Unit 2 Seismic Walkdown Report for Report Number 0 Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2,3-Seismic Quality Related: :1 Yes No Special Notes or Instructions:

NIA Comment Section/Page No. Review Comment ResponseiResolution Reviewer's Number Accept Initials 1 SWELl -013 Q.3, Q.4: provide a statementon the condition of the Statement on the condition of the anchorage.

anchorage has been added. .Provide the name of the SWE's on pg. 3 SWEs-are noted on page 3.SWELI-014 Q. 3, Q.4 .provide a.statement on the condition of the Statement on the condition of the anchorage, anchorage has been added.Provide the name of the SWE's on pg. 3 SWEs are noted on page.3.._3 SWELl-015 0.4: provide a statement on the condition of the Statement on the condition of the anchorage, anchorage has been added. '.Provide the name of the SWE's on pg. 3 SWEs are noted on page 3.4 SWELl-016 Provide the name of the SWE's on pg. 3 SWEs are noted on page 3, -5 SWELl-017 0.2, 0.3: provide a statement on the condition of the Statement on the condition of the anchorage.

anchorage has been added.Provide the name of the SWE's on pg. 3 SWEs are noted on pae_3 .SWELI-018 Q.2, Q.3: provide a statement on the condition of the Statement on the condition of the anchorage.

anchorage has been added.7 SWEL1-019 Q.2, Q.4: provide a statement on the condition of the Statement on the condition of the anchorage, anchorage has been added.I Provide the name of the SWE's on pg. 3 SWEs are noted on page 3. " 8 SWELl-032 Q,2: provide a statement on the condition of the Statement on the condition of the anchorage.

anchorage has been added.I Provide the name of the SWE's on pg. 3 SWEs are noted on page 3.EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-1 2-00037 Rev. 0 Page 3 of 3 is ESeismic Walkdown Submittal Report___ t Review Comments and Resolutions Form Engineering IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. Title: Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 2 Seismic Walkdown Report for Report Number 0 Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic Quality Related;:1[

Yes [0 No Special Notes or Instructions:

NIA Comment Section/Page No. Review Comment Response'Resolution Reviewer's Number Accept Initials 9 SWEL 1-035, SWEL 0.2 0.3 and 04: provide a statement on the condition of Statement on the condition of the 1-036, SWEL 1-047, the anchorage-anchorage has been added.SWEL 1-051, SWEL Providethe name of the SWE's on pg. 3 SWEs are noted on page 3. .-%1-059, SWEL 1-060, SWEL 1-061, SWEL 1-065, SWEL 1-066, SWEL 1-068, SWEL 1-084, SWEL 1-089, SWEL 1-099, and SW EL 1-100. ________ adcted 10 AWC-06 Q.4 e indicate "not an adverse seismic condition" Statement added "This is not a seismic concern,..

._ _ .....Reviewed By: Pouria Pouriphobadi

/- I 1111412012 Resolved By: I'Paul Huebsch '- .,.L Site/Department:

IPECtENERCON Ph. Date: 11/14/2012 1 .EN-DC-168 REV 0 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 1 Page I-1 of 1I ATTACHMENT I -SEISMIC WALKDOWN ENGINEER TRAINING CERTIFICATES F.3 ENERCON Certificate of Completion is hereby grmated to Steve Yuan for suc:esfutl completion of TRAINING ON NEAR TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3 PLANT SEISMIC WALKDOWNS Awardedz 7/26/2012 in Mt Artinston, NJ Cartified Wsmnkr W kdown AIardrtia.

VA -6120/2012 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. 1 Page 1-2 of 11 ENERCON bE-le----

Eveqyp~rjecr.

E-eiy day Certificate of Completion is hereby granted to Tom Panayotidi for successful completion of TRAINING ON NEAR TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3 PLANT SEISMIC WALKDOWNS Awarded: 9/13/2012 In Mt, Arlingutom NJ Cetfe K&~~~ A~dw~Egne COW~, A81321 AkexSmetch Certiled S061mk Wildown lnoneer P010 ARMo CA -611 312012 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. 1 Page 1-3 of 11 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. I Page 1-4 of 11 FENERCON Ixtellenre-ve~yptoject.

EwvrydJy, Certificate of Completion i hereby granted to Paul Huebsch for successful completion of TRAINING ON NEAR TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3 PLANT SEISMIC WALKDOWNS Awarded; 9/13/2012 In MLArlingtOn, NJ Certified Seismic Walcdown tnginlw Palo Alto, CA -6/131201-2 Alex Smerch Certdled Seismic Wldown Entgineer Pato Alto, CA -6/13/2012 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. I Page 1-5 of 11 JENERCON Excltence-E--very project Every do Certificate of Completion is hereby granted to Pouria Pourghobadi for successwul completion of TRAINING ON NEAR TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3 PLANT SEISMIC WALKDOWNS Awarded: 9/13/2012 in Mt Arlington.

NJ Certified Seismik Wakdown Engineer Palo Alto. CA -6/13/2012 Alex Sasercl Certifie Seenis Walldco" Engknwe Palo Alto. CA -6/13/2012 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. I Page 1-6 of 11 Certifcate of Completion Kenneth Whitmore Training on Near Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3-Plant Seismic Walkdowns Jiuua~l,2O!2 V- bmt K.5,. -qn SMMMM --1% ai Ory Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. 1 Page 1-7 of 11 K2 ENERCON ExceIenIce-Every proect Every doy Certificate of Completion Is hereby granted to Kirit Parikh for successfud completion of TRAINING ON NEAR TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3 PLANT SEISMIC WALKDOWNS Awarded: 9/28/2012 in Naperville, IL Kevin BesseUl Cerfild Seismic Walludown Engineer Palo Alto, CA -6/13/2012 Alex Smerch Certifliad Selsokl Wallulown Engineff Palo Alto, CA -(41312012 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. I Page 1-8 of 11 Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. 1 Page 1-9 of 11 Certificate of Completion Richard Drake Training on Near Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3-Plant Seismic Walkdowns July 19,2012 046 RobedK KOmmin EPRVMM.U SmbwdAdg*W NIMN& b*AqiY Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. I Page 1-10 of 11 RI Engineering Report No. IP-RPT- 12-00037 Rev. I Page 1-11 of I1 UJ ENERCON Certificate of Completion is hereby granted to Maggie Farah for successful completion of TRAINING ON NEAR TERM TASK FORCE R1 RECOMMENDATION 2.3 PLANT SEISMIC WALKDOWNS Awarded: 7/26/2012 in Mt. Arlington, NJ Kenneth Whitmore Certified Seismic Walkdown Engineer Alexandria, VA- 6/20/2012 IP-RPT-12-00037 Rev. 1 ATTACHMENT J -DEFERRED SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLISTS (SWCs)

ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet I of 4 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM IP2 Status: YZ ND- U--Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-003 Equipment ID No. 22AT Equip. Class 1 21 Equipment Description 22 SIS ACCUMULATOR Location:

Bldg. VC Floor El. 46'-O" Room, Area 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 YE Nil of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

The anchorage configuration verification is required.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?The anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing and loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

The anchorage is 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 anchorage is free of visible cracks in the concrete.YE NDI UEr N/AO-YE ND U[-- N/A--YE NDI U- N/AOl' Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 2 of 4 IP2 Status: Y; NEI U-]Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-003 Equipment ID No. 22AT Equip. Class 1 21 Equipment Description 22 SIS ACCUMULATOR

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YZ NEI UEI N/All (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 drawing 9321-01-2921-1.

6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of Y[E NE] ur-potentially adverse seismic conditions?

The anchorage is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

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

Soft targets are free from impact by nearby equipment and structures.

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

Overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, and masonry block walls are not likely to collapse onto the equipment.

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

YE NEi UL] N/ALI YE NE-] uE! N/AL YN NE] U[I N/AL]10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YN NE] UEI of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?The equipment is free of potentially adverse siesmic interaction effects.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 4 IP2 Status: YZ NEI UD-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-003 Equipment ID No. 22AT Equip. Class 1 21 Equipment Description 22 SIS ACCUMULATOR Other Adverse Conditions

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

We have looked and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety fuctions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Reference Drawings:

MIC NO. 1999MC3434 Rev 17A, 41042 Rev 6 9321-01-2921-1.

AWC-039 Date: 3/3/14 Evaluated by: Maggie Staub......14 Kai Lo EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRM Sheot 4 of 4 IP2 Status: YO NiO UI-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-003 Equipment ID No. 22AT Equip. Class 1 21 Equipment Description 22 SIS ACCUMULATOR Photographs Note: 22AT Note: no photo.No deficiencies were noted and no pictures were required.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet I of 5 IP2 Status: YE NEI ULI Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-006 Equipment ID No. MCC-26A Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 98'-0" Room, Area 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 YE NEI-of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

The anchorage configuration verification is required.R1 2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?Compartment doors were opened on 3/4/14 and anchorage of transition box (above MCC) and internal components were inspected.

The anchorage of the MCC to the floor consists of welds to iron angles. The welds cannot be visually inspected since the welds are covered with foam insulation for fire protection.

Based on SQUG documentation, the welds were inspected and are acceptable.

Therefore, the anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing and loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

The anchorage is free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?YM NEJl ULI N/A[:]RI YZ NEil U[] N/A--YN NEI UiE N/Al]No significant cracks external to cabinet.Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 2 of 5 1P2 Status: YN NO] U[Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-006 Equipment ID No. MCC-26A Equip. Class' 1 Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YZ NO] U-I N/AOl (Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

The anchorage configuration is consistent with SQUG for MCC- 26A and drawing 9321-LL-11049 sht. 4 Rev 1. R1 6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of YE Nil ULO potentially adverse seismic conditions?

The anchorage is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

R1 Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Yes soft targets are 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?

Fluorescent bulbs need wire securing bulb to fixture. CR IP2-2012-06354 issued and has been resolved generically.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage?Yes 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?Yes based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, the equipment is free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects.YN NE] uOl N/A[l YZ NE] U[- N/AO R1 YN NE] U-I N/Al]YO NEI uE1 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 5 IP2 Status: Y] NEI- U-- R1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-006 Equipment ID No. MCC-26A Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Other Adverse Conditions

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

Observed a small painting brush inside the cabinet resting on the frame below spare compartment MCC26A-7M (see attached photo). This is a R1 housekeeping matter. The brush was removed from the cabinet on 3/5/14.Therefore, we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Cover screws on divider between MCC cubicals 3D & 4D not secured. Judged not to be seismic concern. CR /P2-2012-06605 issued to resolve.

References:

Drawings and AWC Drawings:

9321-LL-1 1049 sht.4 Rev 1 Auxiliary control panels for DG 31,32,33, Auxiliary control panels P7A.9321-F-11051 Rev 1 Auxiliary control panel P7A AWC-023 3/4/14 Date: Evaluated by: Magqgie Staub-.314114 Kai Lo EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATFACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm Sheet 4 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-006 Equipment ID No. MCC-26A Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC IP2 Status: YN NE] UL" RI Equip. Class 1 1 Photographs R1 Note: MCC-26A Note: painting brush inside the panel resting of frame at the floor EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 2 of 5 IP2 Photographs R1 Note: MCC-26A -floor compartments Note: foam insulation covering welds EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet I of 5 1P2 Status: YE NEI Ur- R1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-007 Equipment ID No. MCC-26AA Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 98-0" Room, Area MCC 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 YZ NEI of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

The anchorage configuration verification is required.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?Cabinet doors were opened and internals were inspected.

External anchroage at top to unistrut and exterior weld at bottom checked and found to be free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

Yes the anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware for exterior visible anchorage.

MCC opened.4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?Yes the anchorage is free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors when inspected externally.

MCC is opened and intemaly inspected.

'Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

Y[ NEI u-- N/AD]R1 Y[ NE! UEi N/AD1 YE NEI UE! N/A[-EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 2 of 5 IP2 Status: YE NEI U--Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-007 Equipment ID No. MCC-26AA Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YZ NEI U[-I N/AL (Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

External stitch weld at bottom and anchorage with unistruts at top matches SQUG (SEWS). Bottom panels opened and no anchorage is found. Weld is on the outside by base of angle. R Reference Dwg: 9321-F-20063-28 (A201805)

Rev-28.6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of YN NEI Ui potentially adverse seismic conditions?

Yes based on the above external and internal inspection anchorage evaluations, the anchorage is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions as inspected.

R1 I Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Yes soft targets are 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?

Florescent light with no safety wire is contrary to good seismic practice and must be secured to fixture. CR IP2-2012-06354 issued to track resolution.

This is acceptable per generic response.9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage?YE NEI u[-] N/AEL YN N[! U-- N/AL1 R1 YZ NEI UEi N/AII Yes attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet 3 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-007 Equipment ID No. MCC-26AA SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM IP2 Status: YE NEI U-- R1 Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC 10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?YN NEI UE R1 Florescent bulbs can fall and impact MCC. See item #8.Other Adverse Conditions

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

Yes we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

References:

Drawings and A WC Drawings: 9321-F-20063(A201805), Rev-28, Turbine building and heater bay general arrangement ground floor plan at elev 15'.9321-F-10323(A201331), Rev 5, Turbine building concrete plan at elev. 15' S.E portion.AWC-024 1. Some handles are broken or not functional and cubicle cannot be opened.2. Some latches are not functional and door cannot be opened.3. Tie wraps and red color covers for the openings in the wire trough is broken and sits at bottom of cabinet. One plastic cover is hanging outside its opening. Housekeeping issues addressed in CR-IP2-2014-01465.

R1__ __ __-_ __ _ Date: 3/1/14 Evaluated by: Kai Lo Dan Nuta A 3/1/14 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 4 of 5 IP2 Status: YN NEI Ur-] R1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-007 Equipment ID No. MCC-26AA Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Photographs R1 Note: Note: MCC-26AA Note: MCC-26AA-Bottom compartments Note: MCC-26AA -Bottom compartments 1 EN-DC-168 REV 0 I ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 5 of 5 IP2 R1 Note: MCC-26AA-intemals Note: MCC-26AA -red color covers for the openings in the wire trough EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 1 of 5 1P2 Status: YZ NEI- UL-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-008 Equipment ID No. MCC-26B Equip. Class 1 1 Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 98'-0" Room, Area 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.R1 Anchorage 1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

The anchorage configuration verification is required.Anchorage was not visible inside because there is so much dirt inside STRV foam used for fire protection.

Need to see embedded steel on drawing to confirm. Confirmed the embedded angles of the floor penetration that the MCC is welded to.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?YN NEl YN NE] uE-] N/AL]R1 MCC opened. See #1.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

MCC opened, see #1. The bolts we see on top of concrete do not show any corrosion.

Area is dry, indirectly implying free of corrosion at the weld.4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?No cracks of significance outside of MCC.Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

YN NEI U-- N/A'YZ NEI UlI N/A[-EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 2 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-008 Equipment ID No. MCC-26B Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC IP2 Status: YZ NIh UiL R1 Equip. Class 1 1 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.)

See #1, consistent with SQUG calculation.

Reference 42100-C-002.

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

Internal anchorage inspected Anchorage at bottom not visible, see item #1.YZ NE] ulI N/A[YN NEI U--R1 Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Yes soft targets are free from impact by nearby equipment or structures.

YE NEl UL-] N/AEJ 8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YZ NI U0II N/AZ and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Fluorescent bulbs need wire restraints securing bulb to fixture. CR IP2-2012-06354 issued to track resolution.

See genertic reponse.9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? YZ NEI U-I N/A[l Yes attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage.10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YN NZI U--of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?Unsecured fluorescent bulbs could fall on MCC. See #8.R1 R1 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKOOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 5 IP2 Status: YO NEI ULi RI Equip. Class 1 1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-008 Equipment ID No. MCC-26B Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Other Adverse Conditions

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

Yes we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Loose cover screw on MCC cubical 6D & 6H. Missing cover screw on Aux. Component Pump cubical 5KR, and on one bottom cover plate. MCC judged seismicly acceptable given location and quantity of remaining screws. CR IP2-2012-06605 issued to track repair of screws.Housekeeping:

screwdriver at the floor beneath MCC-26-5M.

Informed FSS and screwdriver was removed. Tie wraps were seen on the floor of the cabinet.

References:

Drawings and AWC Dwg DMD 311678-AA, 9321-F-2510(A200627), Rev 49 Primary Auxiliary building general arrangement plans.AWC-023 R1 Date: 3/1/14 Evaluated by: Kai Lo Dan Nuta A 3/1/14 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKUST FoRM Sheet 4 of 5 IP2 Status: YN NEI UW-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-008 Equipment ID No. MCC-26B Equip. Class 1 1 Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Photographs R1 Note: MCC-26B Note: tie wraps on the floor inside cabinet. No rust on bolts R1 Note: floor compartments EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKOOWN CHECKLIST FoRM Sheet 5 of 5 IP2 R1 Note: internals Note: No photo.No other deficiencies were noted and no pictures were required.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet I of 5 IP2 Status: YE NEI U[- R1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-009 Equipment ID No. MCC-26BB Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 98-0" Room, Area MCC 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 of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

YN NEI The anchorage configuration verification is required.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?External anchorage checked and found to be acceptable.

Cubicals are opened on 3/4/14 and anchorage of internal components were checked. The anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing and loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

External and internal anchorage are free of corrision.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?YE NEI U[- N/A--RI YN NEI IEU1 N/A--Y[ NEI ULI N/A-No significant cracks.I Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 SEISMIC WALK DOWN CHECKLIST FORM ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet 2 of 5 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM IP2 Status: YE NEI UI-I R1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-009 Equipment ID No. MCC-26BB Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YED NDI UI-- N/AE-(Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

Anchorage matches SQUG (SEWS) for external anchorage.

6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of YE NI--] Ui-potentially adverse seismic conditions?

The anchorage is free of potentially adverse siesmic conditions.

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

Yes soft targets are free from impact by nearby equipment or structures.

YO NEI Ul[- N/AED 8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YI NE] U-I N/AD and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Fluorescent light with no safety wire is contrary to good seismic practice and must be secured to fixture. Bulbs are not over top of MCC and therefore MCC is acceptable seismicly.

CR IP2-2012-06354 issued to track resolution.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage?Yes attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage.YZ NE] uI- N/A[]10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YE NE] U-I of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?Yes based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, the equipment is free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 5 1P2 Status: YE NEI U-I Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-009 Equipment ID No. MCC-26BB Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Other Adverse Conditions

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

Yes we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

References:

Drawings and AWC..Drawings:

9321-F-70693 Rev, 2 Primary Auxiliary building general arrangement plan at elev. 55'instrumentation.

9321-F-25153(A202087), Rev 22, Primary Auxiliary building general arrangement plan at elev. 55' & 73'SK-020 Rev 0 sht. I & 2, MCC-36B PAB elev. 55'.A208570, Rev 4, Equipment arrangement for post accident remote valve control sampling selection center.A200250 A WC-024 R1 3/4/14 Date: Evaluated by: Maggie Staub R1 W~i I tA 3/4/14 Kai Lo EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKIDOWN CHECKLIST FORM ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKOOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 4 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-009 Equipment ID No. MCC-26BB Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC IP2 Status: YN NMi UL-I R1 Equip. Class 1 1 Photographs Note: Noj RI Note: internal components EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm Sheet 5 of 5 IP2 Sheet 6 of 5 IP2 Rl Note: internal components Note: internal components EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet I of 4 IP2 Status: YN NEI U--Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-010 Equipment ID No. MCC-27A Equip. Class 1 1 Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Location:

Bldg. PAB Floor El. 98'-0" Room, Area 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)?

The anchorage configuration verification is required.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?Observed 11 out of 12 anchors since the middle lower compartment on the east side is jammed. Some of the compartment doors were opened and interals were inspected.

However, several of the compartment doors cam-locks were jammed and couldn't be inspected.

This is addressed in CR-IP2-2014-01835.

Based on bolts observed, the anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing and loose hardware.

It is assumed that the anchor bolt that couldn't be inspected is also free of bend, broken, missing and loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

Anchorage is free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?No cracks of significance to MCC.1 Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

YN Nr'Y[E NiD U[-- N/AD1 RI Y0 NEI U[- N/A--YE NDI U-- N/AF-EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet 2 of 4 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-010 Equipment ID No. MCC-27A Fmnrinm~nt fl~nrintinn 480 VAC MCC SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Status: YZ NEI U IP2 FD R1 Equip. Class 1 I 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YEK NEI ULi N/AD (Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

Reference SQUG (SEWS) for anchorage details.6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of YED ND UD potentially adverse seismic conditions?

Based on the above the anchorage is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

R1 Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Yes soft targets are 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?

Yes overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, and masonry block walls are not likely to collapse onto the equipment.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage?Yes 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?Yes based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, the equipment is free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects.Y[ ND UD N/AD YN NDI UD N/ADJ YN ND uD N/AD1 YE N- U-EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 4 IP2 Status: YN NEI UE-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-010 Equipment ID No. MCC-27A Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Other Adverse Conditions

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

Yes we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

I of 6 cover screws loose on north power panel. Judged not to be a seismic concern.CR IP2-2012-06605 issued to track resolution.

References:

Drawings and A WC.Drawings:

9321-F-2510(A200627), Primary Auxiliary building general arrangement plans.AWC-023 Date: 3/10/14 Evaluated by: MagQgie Staub_ _. -.3/10/14 Kai Lo EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 4 of 4 IP2 Status: YN NnI UL]Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-010 Equipment ID No. MCC-27A Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Photographs R1 Note: MCC 27A Note: intemals R1 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 1 of 5 1P2 Status: YZ NEI U-I Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-011 Equipment ID No. MCC-29 Equip. Class' 1 Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Location:

Bldg. CB Floor El. 33'-0" Room, Area 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 RI 1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

Yes the anchorage configuration verification is required.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?Panel doors were opened on 2/28/14 to inspect internal concrete anchorage and anchorage of internal components to the cabinet. All anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

Anchorage is free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?Floor coated. No noticable cracks of significance.

1 Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

Y[ NO YN NEI uEr] N/AEI Ri YE NEI U-- N/AD YN NOI tUil N/ADI EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 2 of 5 1P2 Status: YN ND ULI Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-011 Equipment ID No. MCC-29 Equip. Class 1 I Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YE N-] UI-- N/All (Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

Anchorage configuration is consistant with SQUG (SEWS) for MCC-29.6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of YE NE] U[: potentially adverse seismic conditions?

The anchorage is free of potentially adverse siemic conditions.

R1 R1 Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Yes soft targets are free from impact by nearby equipment or structures.

YE NE] UE- N/AD 8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YZ N[- UlI N/Al and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Block wall is seismiclly qualified by Computech report No. R547. 01.Floresent bulbs need to be secured to the fixture with wires. CR IP2-2012-06120 tracks installation of wires to tie florescent bulb to fixture. It is judged the hard target MCC will remain operable if the florescent bulbs were to fall on it.9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? YZ NE] uE- N/ADl Yes attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage.10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YZ NE] uE-of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?Yes based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, the equipment is free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet 3 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-011 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM I P2 Status: YN NEI Ull R1 Equip. Class' 1 Equipment ID No. MCC-29 Equip. Class' 1 Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Other Adverse Conditions

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

Observed a small face plate for spare MCC 29-IJ compartment that is taped to the panel door from both sides (see attached photos). This is judge to be adequate since the entire plate is secured on both sides.Observed a missing nut on a bolt for a small plate that is mounted to the roof of the MCC above compartment MCC 29-2BL. This plate is mounted to the panel roof with four bolts. The remaining 3 bolts (with nuts) are adequate to restrain the small plate from any movement during a seismic event. Therefore, the missing nut will not adversely affect the safety functions of panel.Observed an abandoned conduit bushing hanging from ground wire in compartment above MCC 29-2BL (see attached photos). During a seismic even the bushing may become loose and strike the panel's internal components.

CR-IP2-2014-01426 is generated to address this condition and tracks the removal of the bushing.Bottom panel below MCC 29-2M is missing one of 3 screws. The remaining 2 screws are adequate to hold the panel in place. Therefore, the missing screw will not adversely affect the safety functions of panel.YE NO-] U0-Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

References:

Drawings and AWC.Drawings: A206640, Rev. 10, Arrangement of equipment in Cable Spreading room elev. 33-0" west half plan &sects SQUG (SEWS)AWC-004 2/28/14 Date: Evaluated by: Maggie Staub 2/28/14 Kai Lo EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKOOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 4 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-011 Equipment ID No. MCC-29 Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC IP2 Status: Y[ NEI- U-1 R1 Equip. Class'1 Photographs Note: MC R1 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATAHMENT 59of6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 5 of 5 IP2 Note: small face plate taped to panel door Note: wfidII WdLu pdit*w Uptfiu IV fPirf UJUIf Note: loose abandoned conduit bushing above MCC 29-2BL EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet I of 6 SEISMIC WALKIDOWN CHECKLIST FORM IP2 Status: Y[ NO Ut] RI Equip. Class 1 I Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-012 Equipment ID No. MCC-26C Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Location:

Bldg. CB Floor El. 33'-O" Room, Area 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)?

YN NEl Yes the anchorage configuration verification is required.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?Most of the panel compartments were opened on 2/28/14 to examine the anchorage of the internal components.

For concrete anchorage, only able to open 4 bottom compartments since the two bottom middle compartment doors were jammed.Therefore, observed 8 out of 12 anchors. Based on the 8 anchors observed, the anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware.

This is addressed in CR-IP2-2014-01604.

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

The 8 anchors observed are free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?No cracks in the concrete were visible near the anchors.1 Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

YM NEI U-] N/A--R1 YZ NDJ U[-] N/AZ YE NEI UID N/A--EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet 2 of 6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM IP2 Status: YE NEI U[-I R1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-012 Equipment ID No. MCC-26C Equip. Class 1 1 Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YN NEI U-I N/A--(Note: This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

Based on 8 out of 12 anchors observed, the configuration is consistent with SQUG documenation for MCC-26C.6. Based on the above anchorage evaluations, is the anchorage free of YZ NEI u[-I potentially adverse seismic conditions?

The anchorage is free of potentially adverse seismic condition R1 Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Yes soft targets are free from impact by nearby equipment or structures.

YZ NEJ U[I N/AII 8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YZ NE] U0I N/ALl and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Masonry wall qualified by computech report no. R54 7.01.Fluorescent bulbs overhead are unsecured and could fall out of the light fixture. Hard target cabinets will protect internals from damage. Judged acceptable.

CR IP2-2012-06120 tracks installation of wires to tie florescent bulb to fixture for good seismic housekeeping.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage?Yes attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage.YN N[] U[] N/AL1 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet 3 of 6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM IP2 Status: YZ NOi U-I R1 Equip. Class 1 1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-012 Equipment ID No. MCC-26C Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC 10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YZ NEI UI]of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?Yes based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, the equipment is free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects.Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YZ NEI UD-I adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

One of the door locks for spare compartment MCC 26C-4H is missing (see coments and attached photo). The remaining lock is judged to be adequate to keep the door locked in place. This has no adverse affect on the safety fuctions of the equipment.

Yes we have looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Spare MCC26C-4H cubical missing 1 of 2 lock latches. MCC judged seismicly acceptable.

CR IP2-2012-06509 issued to track resolution.

References:

Drawings and AWC A206640, Rev. 10, Arrangement of equipment in Cable Spreading room elev. 33'-0" west half plan &sects SQUG (SEWS)AWC-004 R1 Ak 2/28/14 AAp Q#ý A Date: R1 r"V"IU-LeU by.UUM U 211- -14 Kai Lo EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 4 of 6 IP2 Status: Y[ NR UL-" R1 Equip. Class 1 1 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-012 Equipment ID No. MCC-26C Equipment Description 480 VAC MCC Photographs Note: MCC-26C Note: EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRM Sheet 5 of 6 IP2 Photographs Ri Note: MCC-26C Note: Internal Components Note: MCC-26C Bottom Compartments EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 6 of 6 IP2 Photographs RI Note: MCC-26C anchorage Note: No other photos.Note: missing lock EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet I of 5 IP2 Status: YE NO UDI Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-015 Equipment ID No. 52/RTA Equip. Class 1 2 Equipment Description REACTOR TRIP BREAKER A Location:

Bldg. CB Floor El. 33'-0" Room, Area 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.RI Anchorage 1. Is the anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

No, the anchorage configuration verification is not required.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?Cabinet anchorage inspected by opening the panel. All visible connections in good condition.

Anchorage of components internal to cabinet examined at time of inspection.

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

YE] NE YE NO UO N/AOl R1 YE NEI ulI N/A--Mild surface corrosion acceptable.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?YZ NEI u[-- N/AD-Yes, the anchorage is free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchor.'Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKIDOWN CHECKLIST FORM ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKOOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 2 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl -015 Equipment ID No. 52/RTA IP2 Status: YZ NEIl Ui RI Equip. Class 1 2 Equipment Description REACTOR TRIP BREAKER 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.)

Not applicable since component is not part of the anchorage configuration verification.

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

Yes based on the extemaly visible anchorage evaluations, the anchorage is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

Internals inspected when cabinet is opened. See questions 2.Y[-- N[-] UL- NlAN YM NDI UD-R1 Interaction Effects 7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

Yes soft targets are 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?

Fluorescent bulbs overhead are unsecured and could fall out of the light fixture. Hard target cabinet will protect intemals from damage. Judged acceptable.

CR IP2-2012-06120 tracks installation of wires to tie fluorescent bulb to fixture for added protection.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage?Yes 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?Yes based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, the equipment is free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects.YO NDI U0 N/AII YE NEI uDl N/ADl YN NDI UDl N/All YN NEI UD1 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTIAC HMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM AtTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-015 Equipment ID No. 52/RTA IP2 Status: YE NEI U-] R1 Equip. Class 1 2 Equipment Description REACTOR TRIP BREAKER A Other Adverse Conditions

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

Cover on west side of cabinet is missing 3 of 14 screws. Cabinet with missing screws judged acceptable during seismic event. CR IP2-2012-06155 issued to track resolution.

See AWC-003 for reference.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

References:

Drawings:9321-F-3052, Rev 38, Equipment arrangement control building.A WC-003 1. Slight oxidation dust found behind the middle black box at the rear (see photo).2. Back plate has 3 screws, lower left is not there. This is a spare hole to accommodate switchgear that requires the ground stab on the left side of the breaker. For our switchgear the ground stab is on the right side of the breaker hence no screw at the hole on the left side.3. Upper hinge pin is Y2" out, not fully inserted.

Sufficienly engaged to prevent panel from separation during seismic event. Informed FSS and the pin was pushed all the way into the hinge.R1 Kai Lo Date: 2/27/14 Evaluated bv: Dan Nuta A" * -2/27/14 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm ATrACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 4 of 5 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-015 Equipment ID No. 52/RTA Equipment Description REACTOR TRIP BREAKER A IP2 Status: Y[ N[J uril R1 Equip. Class 1 2 Photographs Note: RTA cabinet Note: : internals R1 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 5 of 5 IP2 Status: YO NiEo UL-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-015 Equipment ID No. 52IRTA Equip. Class 1 2 Equipment Description REACTOR TRIP BREAKER A Photographs R1 Note: hole on the left, but no bolt EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet I of 4 1P2 Status: YE NEI U-I Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-033 Equipment ID No. 22RP Equip. Class 1 6 Equipment Description 22 RECIRC PUMP Location:

Bldg. VC Floor El. 46'-0" Room, Area 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 YI-] N;of the 50% of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

The anchorage configuration verification is not required.2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?The anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing and loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

The anchorage is 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 anchorage is free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors.YZ NEI U[-I N/A--YE N[il U[- N/A--YE NEJ U[-] N/AE]'Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 2 of 4 IP2 Status: YE NEI Url Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-033 Equipment ID No. 22RP Equip. Class' 6 Equipment Description 22 RECIRC PUMP 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

Y[-7 N[I' U-- N/A[(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 YE NE] UI-potentially adverse seismic conditions?

The anchorage is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

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

Soft targets are free from impact by nearby equipment and structures.

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

Overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, and masonry block walls are not likely to collapse onto the equipment.

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

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?Observed scaffolding near the pump that appeared to be well anchored.

Scaffolding will be removed after outage. The equipment is free of potentially adverse sesismic interaction effects.YE NE] UE- N/AD YE NEI UE- N/A--YE NEI U-- N/AD]YE NEI UE-EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 4 IP2 Status: YZ N['- UI--Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-033 Equipment ID No. 22RP Equip. Class' 6 Equipment Description 22 RECIRC PUMP Other Adverse Conditions

11. Have you looked for and found no other seismic conditions that could YZ N[i] UI-adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment?

We have looked and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Reference Drawings:

267APKD-3 STAGE Rev 01, MIC NO. 1999MC3434 Rev 17A, 186C059 Rev 06, AWC-047 Date: 3/3/14 Evaluated by: Maggie Staub ,*313114 Kai Lo EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 4 of 4 IP2 Status: YE Nil UL]Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-033 Equipment ID No. 22RP Equip. Class 1 6 Equipment Description 22 RECIRC PUMP Photographs Note: 22RP Note: No other photos.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet I of 7 IP2 Status: YE NEI U-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-052 Equipment ID No. 21CRF Equip. Class 1 10 Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 21 Location:

Bldg. VC Floor El. 68-0" Room, Area 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)?

Y-I NZ 2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?The anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

Mild surface corrosion observed at the anchorages inside the steel enclosure, i.e at the isolator supports.

CR-IP2-2014-01405

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?The anchorage is free of visible cracks in the concrete.Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

YE ND- UD] N/A[D Y[ NDI UD1 N/AE--YN NEI UDI N/AD-EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEIS Sheet 2 of 7 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-052 Equipment ID No. 21CRF Ec IPU4 1 J111 ÷ I + JOO' l l. ; + I fl VA'I- VAl I I I/ I -I.AA I fTlJ IaAlII V:-I MIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM IP2 Status: Y; NEI U0 luip. Class' 10 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YEI NEI UlI N/AZ (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 YZ N[-E UE-potentially adverse seismic conditions?

The anhorage is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

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

Soft targets are free from impacts by nearby equipment and structures.

YN NEl uE- N/A[]8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, Y[ NE UE- N/AE-and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

FCU is enclosed in its entirety by a structurally very rugged steel enclosure.

9. Do attached lines have adequate flexibility to avoid damage? Y[ NEI U[E] N/A[-E Attached lines have adequate flexibility.

10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YZ NEl UE-of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?The equipment is free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 7 IP2 Status: Y[I NEI UD Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-052 Equipment ID No. 21CRF Equip. Class 1 10 Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 21 Other Adverse Conditions

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

We have looked and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functiosn of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Reference Drawings:

9321-F-2709-07 Rev 07, (A200745)AWC-42 The following conditiosn were observed, but presented no adverse effect seismically.

1. The floor coating is deteriorated at many places.2. A few small area on the floor have Boric acid residues.3. Mild surface corrosion at bolt connections, panels, attachment angles, door frame and the racks. CR-IP2-2014-01405

4. Hepa filter, charcoal filter and charcoal rack were removed. Hepa filter rack remained.Dan Nuta Evaluated by: Date: 2/27/2014 Kai Lo Date: 2/27/2014 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 4 of 7 IP2 Status: YZ NO ULI Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-052 Equipment ID No. 21CRF Equip. Class 1 10 Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 21 Photographs 1 Note: 21 CRF I Note: Minor surface corrosion at attachment EN-DC-1 68 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKOOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 6 of 7 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-052 Equipment ID No. 21CRF Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 21 1P2 Status: YZ Nr-] UM]Equip. Class' 10 Note: Fan motor isolator support has minor surface corrosion EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 6 of 7 IP2 Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-052 Equipment ID No. 21CRF Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 21 Status: YN NEI Ur-Z Equip. Class 1 10 Note: Hepa Outlet compartment note riepa uuuer comparrment:

paneis ano attachment angles have minor surface corrosion Note Hepa Outlet compartment:

panels and rack have minor surface corrosion gr Note Hepa Outlet compartment:

panels and attachment angles have minor surface corrosion EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKIDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm Sheet 7 of 7 IP2 Note: Hepa Outlet compartment:

panels and attachment angles have minor surface corrosion Note: Hepa Inlet compartment L-Note Hepa Inlet compartment:

Attachment angle has minor surface corrosion Note: Hepa Inlet compartment:

face has minor surface corrosion EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 1 of 5 IP2 Status: Y[ NEIl U0]Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-053 Equipment ID No. O022CRF Equip. Class 1 10 Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 22 Location:

Bldg. VC Floor El. 68-O" Room, Area 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)?

Y[-] NE 2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware?The anchorage is free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware.3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation?

Mild surface corrosion observed at the anchorages inside the steel enclosure, i e at the isolator supports.

Ceiling anchorages also have minor surface corrosion.

CR-IP2-2014-01405.

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors?The anchorage is free of visible cracks in the concrete.YE NE] UI N/AF-W YN NEI Ut] N/At-]YO NEI Ut] N/At]Enter the equipment class name from EPRI 1025286, Appendix B: Classes of Equipment.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 Sheet 2 of 5 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM IP2 Status: YZ NEI UDl Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-053 Equipment ID No. O022CRF E Eauipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 22 quip. Class 1 10 5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation?

YEI NEI U[I N/AZ (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 YZ N[l U[I potentially adverse seismic conditions?

The anchorage is free of potentially adverse seismic conditions.

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

Soft targets are free from impact by nearby equipment and structures.

YE NEI UL- N/AE]8. Are overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, YO NEJ UI-i N/AE]and masonry block walls not likely to collapse onto the equipment?

Overhead equipment, distribution systems, ceiling tiles and lighting, and masonry block walls are not likely to collapse onto the equipment.

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

YN NEI U0 N/AE]10. Based on the above seismic interaction evaluations, is equipment free YE NEI UE-of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects?The equipment is free of potentially adverse seismic interaction effects.EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 3 of 5 IP2 Status: YN NEI U[--Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-053 Equipment ID No. O022CRF Equip. Class 1 10 Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 22 Other Adverse Conditions

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

We have looked and found no other seismic conditions that could adversely affect the safety functions of the equipment.

Comments (Additional pages may be added as necessary)

Reference Drawings:

9321-F-2709-07 Rev 07, (A200745)The following conditiosn were observed, but presented no adverse effect seismically.

1. The floor coating is deteriorated at many places.2. A few small areas on the floor have Boric acid residues.3. Mild surface corrosion at bolt connections, panels, attachment angles, door frame and the racks. CR-IP2-2014-01405

4. HEPA filter, charcoal filter and charcoal rack were removed. HEPA filter rack remained.System engineer generated CR-IP2-2014-01153 for general signs of rust and corrosion.

System engineer generated CR-IP2-2014-01154 for the two tears on the FCU discharge air expansion joint.________.........._Date:

2-27-2014 Evaluated by: Kai Lo Dan Nuta 4 2-27-2014 EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheot 4 of 5 IP2 Status: YZ NRI U-I Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-053 Equipment ID No. O022CRF Equip. Class 1 10 Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 22 Photographs Note: 22CRF charcoal filter compartment Note: Fan motor isolator support and interi surface of steel enclosure Note: Fan motor vibration isolator support Note: Coating is peeling off and mild surface corrosion at the steel panels and connections in the Hepa outlet compartment.

EN-DC-168 REV 0 ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKDOWN CHECKLIST FoRm ATTACHMENT 9.6 SEISMIC WALKOOWN CHECKLIST FORM Sheet 5 of 5 IP2 Status: YO NEI ur-Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SWELl-053 Equipment ID No. O022CRF Equip. Class 1 10 Equipment Description CONTAINMENT RECIRC FAN 22 Note: Minor surface corrosion on roof connection angle in cooling coil discharge compartment.

Note: Poor coating and minor surface corrosion on framing steel in cooling coil discharge compartment EN-DC-168 REV 0