Text

Supplemental Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident
	ML13182A610
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	06/27/2013
From:	Kaegi G; Exelon Generation Co
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	RS-13-136
	Download: ML13182A610 (170)
	v • d • e

MN Exelon Generation, 10 CFR 50.54(f)

RS-13-136 June 27, 2013 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-29 NRC Docket No. 50-254

Subject:

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

References:

1. Exelon Generation Company, LLC 180-day Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident, dated November 27, 2012 (RS-12-169)

2. NRC Letter, Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident, dated March 12, 2012 In Reference 1, Exelon Generation Company, LLC (EGC) provided the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 seismic walkdown reports in accordance with the NRC Request for Information (Reference 2). The Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 seismic walkdown reports verify current plant configuration with current licensing basis, and verify the adequacies of monitoring and maintenance procedures. In Table E-1 of Enclosure 1 of Reference 1, EGC provided the list of the ten (10) Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 items that were deferred due to inaccessibility. EGC committed to complete the walkdown inspection of these ten (10) items during the Q1 R22 Refueling Outage (Spring 2013). In Table E-2 of Enclosure 1 of Reference 1, EGC provided the list of the eighteen (18) Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 electrical cabinets that required supplemental inspections for which twelve (12) have been completed. EGC committed to complete the remaining six (6) supplemental inspections of these electrical cabinets by Q1 R28 Refueling Outage (Spring 2025). EGC continues to evaluate additional opportunities to complete these future inspections on an earlier schedule.

A oc

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Supplemental Response to 50.54(f) Letter NTTF Recommendation 2.3: Seismic June 27, 2013 Page 2 This letter provides the results of the completed walkdown inspections performed for the ten (10) Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 items identified in Table E-1 of Enclosure 1 of Reference 1. These inspections were completed during the Q1 R22 Refueling Outage (Spring 2013). Additionally, this letter provides the supplemental internal electrical cabinet inspection updates on the eighteen (18) remaining Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 electrical cabinets identified in Table E-2 of Enclosure 1 of Reference 1. Twelve (12) of the eighteen (18) remaining inspections have been completed. Six (6) supplemental internal electrical cabinet inspections remain for Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 1.

Conditions identified during the walkdowns were documented and entered into the corrective action program. All corrective actions have been completed for the initial and follow-on inspections.

No degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions that required either immediate or follow up actions were identified. to this letter provides the updated Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Seismic Walkdown Report. This report includes the results of the completed walkdowns of the ten (10) Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 items identified in Table E-1 of Enclosure 1 of Reference 1. This report also includes the results of the twelve (12) completed supplemental internal electrical cabinet inspections identified in Table E-2 of Enclosure 1 of Reference 1. The results of these walkdown inspections are addressed in Annex A of Enclosure 1. This report completes Regulatory Commitment No. 1 contained in Reference 1.

This letter contains no new regulatory commitments.

Should you have any questions concerning the content of this letter, please contact Ron Gaston at (630) 657-3359.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the 27th day of June 2013.

Respectfully, Glen T. Kaegi Director - Licensing & Regulatory Affairs Exelon Generation Company, LLC

Enclosures:

1. Updated Transmittal # 1 (Annex A) Seismic Walkdown Report In Response To The 50.54(f) Information Request Regarding Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic for the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, Report No. RS-13-136

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Supplemental Response to 50.54(f) Letter NTTF Recommendation 2.3: Seismic June 27, 2013 Page 3 cc: Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Regional Administrator - NRC Region III NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 NRC Project Manager, NRR - Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Illinois Emergency Management Agency - Division of Nuclear Safety

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Supplemental Response to 50.54(f) Letter NTTF Recommendation 2.3: Seismic June 27, 2013 ENCLOSURE 1 Updated Transmittal # 1 (Annex A) Seismic Walkdown Report In Response To The 50.54(f) Information Request Regarding Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic for the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, Report No. RS-13-136 (166 Pages)

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 SEISMIC WALKOOWN REPORT IN RESPONSE TO THE 50.54(f) INFORMATION REQUEST REGARDING FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC UPDATED TRANSMITTAL # 1 (ANNEX A) for the QUAD CITIES POWER STATION UNIT 1 22710 206TH AVENUE NORTH, CORDOVA, ILLINOIS 61242 Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-29 NRC Docket No. 50-254 Correspondence No.: RS-13-136

-7,

£xeton Prepared by:

0 Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon)

PO Box 805398 Chicago, IL 60680-5398 Printed Name Siqnature Date Preparer: Julie A. Kim Reviewer: Kevin B. Hall S~

Approver: Douglas FCollins Peer Review Team Leader: Michael R. Dunlay Julie A. Kim I Lead Responsible Engineer: ~2' o/

Branch Manager: Douglas F. Collins 1 Senior Manager Design Engineering:

Brian L. Stedman __ / ,s:-

Corporate Acceptance: Jeffrey S Clark

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT IN RESPONSE TO THE 50.54(f) INFORMATION REQUEST REGARDING FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC for the QUAD CITIES GENERATING STATION UNIT 1 22710 2 0 6 TH AVENUE NORTH, CORDOVA, ILLINOIS 61242 Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-29 NRC Docket No. 50-254 Correspondence No.: RS-12-169 AE- Exelon.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon)

PO Box 805398 Chicago, IL60680-5398 Prepared by:

( Stevenson & Associates 1661 Feehanville Drive, Suite 150 Mount Prospect, IL60056 Report Number: 12Q0108.40-R-001, Rev. 3 Printed Name Signature Date Preparer: Marlene Delaney 10/3112012 Reviewer: Tony Perez 10/31/2012 Approver: Tony Perez 10/31/2012 Peer Review Team Leader: Walter Djordjevic 10/3112012 Lead Responsible Engineer: SULI_

Branch Manager: 1&t4TC"

/l,; * ,,!J/L.

Senior Manager Design Engineering: 13,4044J S To444,, I' /2 7/Ii Corporate Acceptance: ..r Cey S. CLty ,441m, .4 arr (

(

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Document

Title:

SEISMIC WALKDOWN REPORT IN RESPONSE TO THE 50.54(f) INFORMATION REQUEST REGARDING FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC for the QUAD CITIES GENERATING STATION UNIT 1 Document Type: Report Report Number: 12Q0108.40-R-001 Project Name:

NTTF R2.3 Seismic Walkdowns for Exelon - Quad Cities Job No.: 12Q0108.40 Client: AM E eto This document has been prepared in accordance with the S&A Quality Assurance Program Manual, Revision 17 and project requirements:

Initial Issue (Rev. 0)

Prepared by: Marlene Delaney Date: 10/19/2012 Reviewed by: Tony Perez Date: 10/19/2012 Approved by: Tony Perez Date: 10/19/2012 Revision Record (see previous revisions for signatures):

Revision Prepared by/ Reviewed by/ Approved by/ Description of Revision No. Date Date Date 1 M. Delaney T. Perez T. Perez Removed photos.

10/24/2012 10/24/2012 10/24/2012 Replaced pages C-329 through C-333.

2 M. Delaney T. Perez T. Perez Replaced pages vii and 2-1.

10/26/2012 10/26/2012 10/26/2012 3 M. Delaney T. Perez T. Perez Replaced pages i through ix, 10/31/2012 10/31/2012 10/31/2012 5-6, 5-7, 7-1, A-23, A-29, A-34, and E-2.

DOCUMENT CONTRACT NO.

APPROVAL SHEET 12Q0108 Stevenson & Associates

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Contents List o f T a ble s ......................................................................................................... iii Executive Sum mary ............................................................................................... iv I Introduction................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 P u rp o se ................................................................................................................. 1-1 1 .2 B a ckg ro u n d ........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Plant Overview ...................................................................................................... 1-1 1.4 A p p ro a ch ............................................................................................................... 1-2 1.5 C o n c lu s io n ............................................................................................................. 1-2 2 Seismic Licensing Basis........................................................................................ 2-1 2 .1 O ve rv ie w ............................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) ......................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Design of Seism ic Category I SSCs ....................................................................... 2-1 3 PersonnelQualifications........................................................................................ 3-1 3 .1 O ve rv ie w ............................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 W alkdown Personnel ............................................................................................. 3-1 3.3 Additional Personnel .............................................................................................. 3-2 4 Selection of SSCs .................................................................................................... 4-1 4 .1 O ve rv ie w ............................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 SW EL Development .............................................................................................. 4-1 4.2.1 SWEL 1 - Sample of Required Items for the Five Safety Functions ............. 4-1 4.2.2 SW EL 2 - Spent Fuel Pool Related Items .................................................... 4-3 4.2.3 SW EL 2 - Conclusion .................................................................................. 4-4 5 Seismic Walkdowns and Area W alk-Bys ................................................................ 5-1 5.1 Overview ....................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Seism ic Walkdowns ............................................................................................... 5-1 5.2.1 Adverse Anchorage Conditions .................................................................... 5-2 5.2.2 Configuration Verification ............................................................................. 5-2 5.2.3 Adverse Seism ic Spatial Interactions ............................................................ 5-3 5.2.4 Other Adverse Seismic Conditions ............................................................... 5-4 5.2.5 Issues Identification during Seism ic W alkdowns ........................................... 5-4

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 5.3 Area W alk-Bys .................................................................................................. 5-4 5.3.1 Issue Identification during Area Walk-bys ..................................................... 5-6 5.4 Supplemental Information on Electrical Cabinet Inspections .................................. 5-6 6 Licensing Basis Evaluations........................................................................................ 6-1 7 IPEEE VulnerabilitiesResolution Report .................................................................... 7-1 8 Peer Review .................................................................................................................. 8-1 9 References ....................................................................................................................... 1 Appendices Annex A. Updated Transmittal #1 ...................................................................................... Ai ii

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 List of Tables Table 3-1. Personnel Roles .................................................................................... 3-1 Table 5-1. Anchorage Configuration Confirmation ...................................................... 5-3 Table 5-2. Issues Identified during Seismic Walkdowns ............................................... 5-8 Table 5-3. Issues Identified during Area Walk-Bys ...................................................... 5-10 Table B-la. Base List 1a - Items Exclusive to Unit 1 ..................................................... B-3 Table B-lb. Base List lb - Items Common to Units 1 and 2 ....................................... B-15 T a ble B -2. S W E L 1 ............................................................................................. B-18 Table C-1. Summary of Seismic W alkdown Checklists ................................................ C-2 Table D-1. Summary of Area Walk-By Checklists ...................................................... D-2 Table E-1. Seismic Walkdown Inaccessible Items ....................................................... E-2 Table E-2. Deferred Internal Cabinet Inspection ......................................................... E-3 Table G-1. IPEEE Vulnerability Status ....................................................................... G-2 iii

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to provide information as requested by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in its March 12, 2012 letter issued to all power reactor licensees and holders of construction permits in active or deferred status. (Ref. 5) In particular, this report provides information requested to address Enclosure 3, Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, of the March 12, 2012 letter. (Ref. 5)

Following the accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant resulting from the March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and subsequent tsunami, the NRC established the Near Term Task Force (NTTF) in response to Commission direction. The NTTF issued a report - Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 2 1 st Century: The Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - that made a series of recommendations, some of which were to be acted upon "without unnecessary delay." (Ref. 6) On March 12, 2012, the NRC issued a letter to all power reactor licensees in accordance with 10CFR50.54(f). The 50.54(f) letter requests information to assure that certain NTTF recommendations are addressed by all U.S. nuclear power plants. (Ref. 5) The 50.54(f) letter requires, in part, all U.S. nuclear power plants to perform seismic walkdowns to identify and address degraded, non-conforming or unanalyzed conditions and to verify the current plant configuration is within the current seismic licensing basis. This report documents the seismic walkdowns performed at Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 in response, in part, to the 50.54(f) letter issued by the NRC.

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), supported by industry personnel, cooperated with the NRC to prepare guidance for conducting seismic walkdowns as required in the 50.54(f) letter, Enclosure 3, Recommendation 2.3: Seismic. (Ref. 5) The guidelines and procedures prepared by NEI and endorsed by the NRC were published through the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) as EPRI Technical Report 1025286, Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, dated June 2012; henceforth, referred to as the "EPRI guidance document." (Ref. 1) Exelon/Quad Cities has utilized this NRC endorsed guidance as the basis for the seismic walkdowns and this report. (Ref. 1)

The EPRI guidance document was used to perform the engineering walkdowns and evaluations described in this report. In accordance with the EPRI guidance document, the following topics are addressed in the subsequent sections of this report.

Seismic Licensing Basis

Personnel Qualifications

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

" Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys

Seismic Licensing Basis Evaluations

IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report

Peer Review iv

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Seismic Licensing Basis The Seismic Licensing Basis is briefly described in Section 2 of this report. The safe shutdown earthquake for the Quad Cities Generating Station site is 0.24g horizontal ground acceleration and 0.16g vertical ground acceleration. (Ref. 2 section 3.7)

Personnel Qualifications Personnel qualifications are discussed in Section 3 of this report. The personnel who performed the key activities required to fulfill the objectives and requirements of the 50.54(f) letter are qualified and trained as required in the EPRI guidance document.

(Ref. 1) These personnel are responsible for:

Selecting the SSCs that should be placed on the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL),

Performing the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys,

Performing the seismic licensing basis evaluations, as applicable,

Identifying the list of plant-specific vulnerabilities identified during the IPEEE program and describing the actions taken to eliminate or reduce them,

Performing the peer reviews Selection of SSCs Selection of SSCs is discussed in Section 4 of this report. The process used to select the items that were included in the overall Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL) is described in detail in the EPRI guidance document, Section 3: Selection of SSCs. (Ref.

1) The SWEL is comprised of two groups of items, which are described at a high level in the following subsections.

Sample of Required Items for the Five Safety Functions - SWEL 1 Screen #1 narrowed the scope of SSCs in the plant to those that are designed to Seismic Category I requirements because they have a seismic licensing basis.

Screen #2 narrowed the scope of SSCs by selecting only those that do not regularly undergo inspections to confirm that their configuration continues to be consistent with the plant licensing basis.

Screen #3 narrowed the scope of SSCs included on SWEL I as only those associated with maintaining the five safety functions. These five safety functions include the four safe shutdown functions (reactor reactivity control, reactor coolant pressure control, reactor coolant inventory control, and decay heat removal, which includes the Ultimate Heat Sink), plus the containment functions.

Screen #4 was a process intended to result in a SWEL 1 that sufficiently represented the broader population of plant equipment and systems needed to meet the objectives of the 50.54(f) letter. The following five sample attributes were used:

" A variety of types of systems

Major new or replacement equipment

" A variety of types of equipment

" A variety of environments v

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Equipment enhanced due to vulnerabilities identified during the IPEEE program Spent Fuel Pool Related Items - SWEL 2 Screen #1 and Screen #2 were used to narrow the scope of spent fuel pool related SSCs to those that have a seismic licensing basis and those that are appropriate for an equipment walkdown process. Screen #3 was a process intended to result in SWEL 2 that sufficiently represents the broader population of spent fuel pool Seismic Category I equipment and systems to meet the objectives of the 50.54(f) letter, and included the following sample selection attributes:

" A variety of types of systems

" Major new or replacement equipment

" A variety of types of equipment

A variety of environments Screen #4 identified items of the spent fuel pool that could potentially cause a rapid drain-down of the pool, even if such items are not Seismic Category I. Rapid drain-down is defined as lowering of the water level to the top of the fuel assemblies within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months after the earthquake. Any items identified as having the potential for rapidly draining the spent fuel pool were to be added to SWEL 2.

For Quad Cities Unit 1, the SWEL is comprised of:

SWEL 1 resulted with 104 items for walkdown.

SWEL 2 resulted with no items for walkdown.

" There are no SSCs associated with spent fuel pool rapid drain-down to be included on SWEL 2.

Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys Section 5, Appendix C, and Appendix D of this report documents the equipment Seismic Walkdowns and the Area Walk-Bys. The online seismic walkdowns for Quad Cities Unit 1 were performed during the week of August 20, 2012. During the majority of the walkdown activities, the walkdown team consisted of two (2) Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs), the station Lead Responsible Engineer (LRE) or designee, and a station Equipment Operator.

The seismic walkdowns focused on the seismic adequacy of the items on the SWEL.

The walkdowns focused on the following:

Adverse anchorage conditions

Adverse seismic spatial interactions

" Other adverse seismic conditions (e.g., degradation, configuration, etc.,)

Area Walk-Bys were conducted in each area of the plant that contained an item on the SWEL (generally within 35 feet of the SWEL component). The Area Walk-By was performed to identify potentially adverse seismic conditions associated with other SSCs located in the vicinity of the SWEL item. The key examination factors that were considered in the Area Walk-Bys included the following:

vi

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136

Anchorage conditions (if visible without opening equipment)

Significantly degraded equipment in the area

Potential seismic interaction

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

Potential adverse interactions that could cause flooding/spray and fire in the area

Other housekeeping items, including temporary installations The seismic walkdown team inspected 94 of the 104 components on the SWEL (comprised of SWEL 1 and SWEL 2). Walkdowns for 10 components were deferred due to accessibility issues such as being located in containment or energized equipment.

The 10 remaining Unit 1 items will be walked down during a unit outage or another time when the equipment is accessible, as appropriate. Anchorage verification was required for a minimum of 28 components. (Ref. 1) A total of 37 anchorage configurations were confirmed to be installed in accordance with the station documentation.

Following the completion of the online seismic walkdowns, the industry was made aware that the NRC staff had clarified a position on opening electrical cabinets to inspect for other adverse seismic conditions. Supplemental inspections of 18 electrical cabinets are planned and will be completed, as required, during a unit outage or another time when the equipment becomes accessible. The list of electrical cabinets along with the milestone completion schedule is provided in Table E-2.

During the seismic walkdowns at Quad Cities Unit I twenty (20) Issue Reports (IRs),

with one repeated, were issued for conditions such as open S-hooks and seismic housekeeping issues. Seismic housekeeping conditions were found to be the most common. After evaluation through the CAP, it was determined that none of the conditions identified in the IRs were adverse seismic conditions.

Seismic Licensinq Basis Evaluations The EPRI guidance document, Section 5: Seismic Licensing Basis Evaluation provides a detailed process to perform and document seismic licensing basis evaluations of SSCs identified when potentially adverse seismic conditions are identified. The process provides a means to identify, evaluate and document how the identified potentially adverse seismic condition meets a station's seismic licensing basis without entering the condition into a station's Corrective Action Program (CAP). In lieu of this process, Exelon/Quad Cities utilized the existing processes and procedures (Site CAP Expectations) to identify, evaluate and document conditions identified during the Seismic Walkdowns.

In accordance with Exelon/Quad Cities processes and procedures, all questionable conditions identified by the SWEs during the walkdowns were entered into the station CAP to be further evaluated and addressed as required. The SWEs provided input to support the identification and evaluation (including seismic licensing basis evaluations, as required) of the potentially adverse seismic conditions entered into the CAP. The station corrective action program is a more robust process than that provided in the EPRI guidance document; in part, ensuring each condition is properly evaluated for conformance with design and licensing bases and corrected as required.

vii

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 Conditions identified during the walkdowns were documented on the SWCs, AWCs, and entered into the CAP. Tables 5-2 and 5-3 in the report provide the IR, a summary of the condition, and the action completion status.

IPEEE Vulnerabilities IPEEE vulnerabilities are addressed in Section 7 of this report. No vulnerabilities were identified as a result of the effort that addressed the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE). (Ref. 3) However, plant improvements were identified in section 7 of Reference 3. Table G-1 provides the list of plant improvements, the IPEEE proposed resolution, the actual resolution and resolution date. All IPEEE improvement actions are complete.

Peer Reviews A peer review team consisting of at least two individuals was assembled and peer reviews were performed in accordance with Section 6: Peer Reviews of the EPRI guidance document. The Peer Review process included the following activities:

Review of the selection of SSCs included on the SWEL

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

Review of licensing basis evaluations, as applicable

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

Review of the submittal report

Provided a summary report of the peer review process in the submittal report Section 8 of this report contains a summary of the Peer Review. The Peer Review determined that the objectives and requirements of the 50.54(f) letter are met. Further, it was concluded by the peer reviews that the efforts completed and documented within this report are in accordance with the EPRI guidance document.

Summary In summary, seismic walkdowns have been completed at the Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 in accordance with the NRC endorsed walkdown methodology. All potentially degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions identified as a result of the seismic walkdowns have been entered into the corrective action program.

Evaluations of the identified conditions are complete and documented within the CAP.

These evaluations determined the Seismic Walkdowns resulted with no adverse anchorage conditions, no adverse seismic spatial interactions, and no other adverse seismic conditions associated with the items on the SWEL. Similarly, the Area Walk-Bys resulted with no adverse seismic conditions associated with other SSCs located in the vicinity of the SWEL item(s).

The Seismic Walkdowns identified several minor issues predominantly pertaining to seismic housekeeping. Other than these minor issues, the Seismic Walkdowns identified no degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions that required either immediate or follow-on action(s). No planned or newly identified protection or mitigation features have resulted from the efforts to address the 50.54(f) letter.

viii

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Follow-on activities required to complete the efforts to address Enclosure 3 of the 50.54(f) letter include inspection of 10 items deferred due to inaccessibility along with supplemental inspections of 18 electrical cabinets. Area Walk-Bys will be complete, as required, during these follow-on activities.

To address the items deferred due to inaccessibility and the supplemental inspection of electrical cabinets, follow-on Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys were conducted during the first quarter of 2013. No degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions that required either immediate or follow-on actions were identified.

Annex A to this report provides:

1) Additional information obtained from these follow-on inspections performed on open items listed on Table E-1 and E-2, and

2) Status updates on the conditions identified during the previous walkdowns and walk-Bys, listed on Table 5-2 and Table 5-3.

As of March 19, 2013, remaining follow-on activities required to complete the efforts to address Enclosure 3 of the 50.54(f) letter include the supplemental inspection of 6 electrical cabinets listed on Table E-2 of the initial report, which are to be completed on or before the original commitment date of Spring 2025 (Q1 R28 Outage). These items are listed in Table AE-2 of Annex A.

ix

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 I

Introduction 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to provide information as requested by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in its March 12, 2012 letter issued to all power reactor licensees and holders of construction permits in active or deferred status. (Ref. 5) In particular, this report provides information requested to address Enclosure 3, Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, of the March 12, 2012 letter. (Ref. 5)

1.2 BACKGROUND

Following the accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant resulting from the March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and subsequent tsunami, the NRC established the Near Term Task Force (NTTF) in response to Commission direction. The NTTF issued a report - Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21t Century: The Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - that made a series of recommendations, some of which were to be acted upon "without unnecessary delay." (Ref. 6) On March 12, 2012, the NRC issued a letter to all power reactor licensees in accordance with 10CFR50.54(f). The 50.54(f) letter requests information to assure that certain NTTF recommendations are addressed by all U.S. nuclear power plants. (Ref. 5) The 50.54(f) letter requires, in part, all U.S. nuclear power plants to perform seismic walkdowns to identify and address degraded, non-conforming or unanalyzed conditions and to verify the current plant configuration is within the current seismic licensing basis. This report documents the seismic walkdowns performed at Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 in response, in part, to the 50.54(f) letter issued by the NRC.

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), supported by industry personnel, cooperated with the NRC to prepare guidance for conducting seismic walkdowns as required in the 50.54(f) letter, Enclosure 3, Recommendation 2.3: Seismic. (Ref. 5) The guidelines and procedures prepared by NEI and endorsed by the NRC were published through the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) as EPRI Technical Report 1025286, Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, dated June 2012; henceforth, referred to as the "EPRI guidance document." (Ref. 1) Exelon/Quad Cities has utilized this NRC endorsed guidance as the basis for the seismic walkdowns and this report. (Ref. 1) 1.3 PLANT OVERVIEW Quad Cities Generating Station consists of two operating boiling water reactor (BWR) generating units. The site is located in Rock Island County, Illinois, in parts of sections 7, 8, 17, 18, 19 and 20, Township; 20 North, Range; 2 East. It is on the east bank of the Mississippi River opposite the mouth of the Wapsipinicon River, and about three (3) miles north of Cordova, Illinois. The site is about 20 miles northeast of the Quad Cities (Davenport, Iowa; Rock Island, Moline, and East Moline, Illinois). (Ref. 2 section 2.1.1) 1-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Both units have Mark I containments, are rated for 2957 MWt power (RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-29 (Unit 1) and DPR-30 (Unit 2)), and were originally designed and built by GE as prime contractor for Commonwealth Edison Company. The commercial service dates for Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 were February 18, 1973 and March 10, 1973 respectively. (Ref. 2 section 1.1.1) 1.4 APPROACH The EPRI Seismic Walkdown Guidance is used for the Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 engineering walkdowns and evaluations described in this report. (Ref. 1) In accordance with Reference 1, the following topics are addressed in the subsequent sections of this report:

Seismic Licensing Basis

Personnel Qualifications

Selection of SSCs

Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys

Licensing Basis Evaluations

IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report

Peer Review

1.5 CONCLUSION

Seismic walkdowns have been completed at the Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 in accordance with the NRC-endorsed walkdown methodology. All potentially degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions identified as a result of the seismic walkdowns have been entered into the corrective action program.

Evaluations of the identified conditions are complete and documented within the CAP.

These evaluations determined the Seismic Walkdowns resulted with no adverse anchorage conditions, no adverse seismic spatial interactions, and no other adverse seismic conditions associated with the items on the SWEL. Similarly, the Area Walk-Bys resulted with no adverse seismic conditions associated with other SSCs located in the vicinity of the SWEL item(s).

The Seismic Walkdowns identified several minor issues predominantly pertaining to seismic housekeeping. Other than these minor issues, the Seismic Walkdowns identified no degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions that required either immediate or follow-on action(s). No planned or newly identified protection or mitigation features have resulted from the efforts to address the 50.54(f) letter.

Follow-on activities required to complete the efforts to address Enclosure 3 of the 50.54(f) letter include inspection of 10 items deferred due to inaccessibility along with supplemental inspections of 18 electrical cabinets. Area Walk-Bys will be complete, as required, during these follow-on activities.

1-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 2

Seismic Licensing Basis 2.1 OVERVIEW This section of the report summarizes the seismic licensing basis for the Quad Cities Generating Station Unit I and Unit 2. The safe shutdown earthquake and a summary of the codes, standards, and methods used in the design of Seismic Category I SSCs are presented. This section does not establish or change the seismic licensing basis of the facility and is intended to provide a fundamental understanding of the seismic licensing basis of the facility.

2.2 SAFE SHUTDOWN EARTHQUAKE (SSE)

The safe shutdown earthquake for the Quad Cities Generating Station site is 0.24g horizontal ground acceleration and 0.16g vertical ground acceleration. (Ref. 2 section 3.7) 2.3 DESIGN OF SEISMIC CATEGORY I SSCs The input motions used to create the seismic design of Quad Cities are based on the Housner Ground Response Spectrum (GRS) and the south 80 degrees east (S80E) component of the 1957 San Francisco Golden Gate Park earthquake. The Quad Cities drywell was evaluated using the results of the Dresden drywell analysis, which used the north-south component earthquake record of El Centro of May 18, 1940, normalized to

0. 1Og for Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE (0.2g for Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE)). For the seismic analysis of the Seismic Class I structures and development of In-Structure Response Spectra (ISRS), the Housner GRS was used. (Ref. 2 section 3.7)

The Golden Gate earthquake time history was used to verify that when using the time-history method, the maximum OBE loadings did not occur in the valleys of the unsmoothed (Golden Gate) spectrum. The Quad Cities OBE is defined in the horizontal direction by the Housner GRS scaled to 0.12g peak ground acceleration (PGA) and the ISRS developed from the Golden Gate earthquake time history scaled to 0.12g. In addition, the OBE in the vertical direction is constant for all periods with a resulting PGA value of 0.08g. The Quad Cities SSE is defined by multiplying the OBE accelerations by a factor of 2, resulting in horizontal and vertical directions GRS PGA values of 0.24g and 0.16g respectively. (Ref. 2 section 3.7)

The response spectrum method was used to calculate the buildings' responses. For the Reactor Building, the SSE damping values used were 2% damping for steel and 5%

damping for concrete. For the Turbine Building, an SSE damping value of 5% was used.

The peaks of the time history-derived spectra were broadened by 15%. (Ref. 2 section 3.7).

The governing codes for the design of the structures were American Concrete Institute's ACI-318-63 for reinforced concrete, and American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)

Steel Construction Manual, 6th Edition for steel, and American Society of Mechanical 2-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Engineers (ASME) Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Section III 1965 for the containment.

(Ref. 2 section 3.7)

A full description of the Safe Shutdown Earthquake along with the codes, standards, and methods used in the design of the Seismic Class I (Category I) SSCs for meeting the seismic licensing basis requirements is provided in the following Quad Cities Generating Station UFSAR sections:

3.7 Seismic Design

3.8 Design of Category I Structures

3.9 Mechanical Systems and Components 0 3.10 Seismic Qualification of Seismic Category I Instrumentation and Electrical Equipment These UFSAR sections should be referred to for a detailed understanding of the seismic licensing basis.

2-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 3

Personnel Qualifications 3.1 OVERVIEW This section of the report identifies the personnel that participated in the NTTF 2.3 Seismic Walkdown efforts. A description of the responsibilities of each Seismic Walkdown participant's role(s) is provided in Section 2 of the EPRI Seismic Walkdown Guidance. (Ref. 1) Resumes provided in Appendix A provide detail on each person's qualifications for his or her role.

3.2 WALKDOWN PERSONNEL Table 3-1 below summarizes the names and corresponding roles of personnel who participated in the NTTF 2.3 Seismic Walkdown effort.

Table 3-1. Personnel Roles Equipment Naeeient Plant Seismic Walkdown Licensing IPEEE Peer Name Selection Basis Reiwr evwr Engineer Operations Engineer Review Reviewer Reviewer (SWE) Reviewer A. Perez X K.Hull X T.K. Ram X1 J. Griffith X X D. Carter X X M.Wodarcyk X X J. Kim (Exelon) X X X K.Hall (Exelon) X T. Bacon X W. Djordjevic x2 T. Fuhs (Exelon) X Notes: '

1. Peer Review Team member for SWEL review only.

2. Peer Review Team Leader.

3-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 3.3 ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL In addition to the S&A personnel listed above, Exelon Plant Operations, Tony Fuhs, reviewed the SWEL. Tony Fuhs is the Operation Support Manager at Quad Cities Station, a formerly licensed SRO that has worked at the Quad Cities for almost 30 years and is familiar with all aspects of the station operating procedures. Various station personnel also provided support to the SWEL preparer in identifying major equipment or system modifications, equipment and systems located in different environments, and equipment and systems that would be accessible for inspection during the plant walkdowns, in accordance with Reference 1.

3-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 4

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

Table B-la. Base List la - Items Exclusive to Unit 1

" Table B-i b. Base List lb - Items Common to Units 1 and 2

" Table B-2. SWEL 1 4.2 SWEL DEVELOPMENT The selection of SSCs process described in EPRI Technical Report 1025286, Seismic Walkdown Guidance for Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3: Seismic, dated June 2012, was utilized to develop the SWEL for Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1. (Ref. 1)

The SWEL is comprised of two groups of items:

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

" SWEL 2 is a list of spent fuel pool related items 4.2.1 SWEL 1 - Sample of Required Items for the Five Safety Functions The process for selecting a sample of SSCs for shutting down the reactor and maintaining containment integrity began with the composite Seismic Individual Plant Examination for External Events (IPEEE) Success Path Equipment List (SPEL). (Ref. 3)

The IPEEE SPEL was then subjected to the following four screens to identify the items to be included on the first Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL 1):

1. Screen #1 - Seismic Category 1 As described in Reference 1, only items that have a defined seismic licensing basis are to be included in SWEL 1. Each item on the IPEEE SPEL was reviewed to determine if it had a defined seismic licensing basis. All items identified as Class I, as defined in Quad Cities UFSAR Chapter 3, were identified as having a defined seismic licensing basis. (Ref. 2) Electrical enclosures containing Class I electrical devices were identified as Class I. Class I determination was made through a review of current design and licensing basis documentation.

4-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136

2. Screen #2 - Equipment or Systems This screen narrowed the scope of items to include only those that do not regularly undergo inspections to confirm that their configuration is consistent with the plant licensing basis. This screen further reduced the IPEEE SPEL of any Class I Structures, Containment Penetrations, Class I Piping Systems, cable/conduit raceways and HVAC ductwork.

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

A. Reactor Reactivity Control (RRC)

B. Reactor Coolant Pressure Control (RCPC)

C. Reactor Coolant Inventory Control (RCIC)

D. Decay Heat Removal (DHR)

E. Containment Function (CF)

The first four functions are associated with bringing the reactor to a safe shutdown condition. The fifth function is associated with maintaining containment integrity.

As described in Reference 3, the safety function for each item on the IPEEE SPEL was identified. It is noted that items on SWEL 1 with a specific safety function(s) are considered frontline systems. Items with a safety function of 'Auxiliary &

Support', 'Electrical Systems', or 'Racks & Panels' may be a frontline or support system. Items with a safety function of 'Auxiliary & Support', 'Electrical Systems',

or 'Racks & Panels' support at least one of the five safety functions however, the specific safety function(s) is not indicated as identification of the specific safety function(s) supported is not required by Reference 1.

The resultant equipment list after Screen #3 is defined in the EPRI guidance document as Base List 1 and is included in Appendix B. (Ref. 1)

4. Screen #4- Sample Considerations This screen is intended to result in a SWEL 1 that sufficiently represents a broad population of plant Seismic Category I equipment and systems to meet the objectives of the NRC 50.54(f) letter. The following attributes were considered in the selection process for items included on SWEL 1:

A. A Variety of Types of Systems The system is identified for each item on SWEL 1. The equipment included on SWEL 1 is a representative sample of several systems that perform one or multiple safety functions. Further, the systems represented include both frontline and support systems as listed in Reference 1 Appendix E: Systems to Support Safety Function(s).

B. Major New and Replacement Equipment The equipment on SWEL 1 includes several items that have been modified or replaced over the past several years. Each item on SWEL I that is new or replaced is identified.

4-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 C. A Variety of Types of Equipment The equipment class is identified for each item on SWEL 1. The equipment included on SWEL 1 is a representative sample from each of the classes of equipment listed in Reference 1 Appendix B: Classes of Equipment. Where appropriate, at least one piece of equipment from each class was included on SWEL 1.

Screening #1, #2, and #3 resulted in no equipment in the following classes:

(13) - Motor Generators

(19) - Temperature Sensors D. A Variety of Environments The location for each item is identified on SWEL 1. The equipment included on SWEL 1 is a representative sample from a variety of environments (locations) in the station.

E. Equipment Enhanced Due to Vulnerabilities Identified During the IPEEE Program The equipment on SWEL 1 includes several items that were enhanced as a result of the IPEEE program. Each item on SWEL 1 that was enhanced as a result of the IPEEE program is identified.

F. Contribution to Risk In selecting items for SWEL 1 that met the attributes above, some items with similar attributes were selected based on their higher risk-significance. To determine the relative risk-significance, the Risk Achievement Worth (RAW) and Fussell-Vesely importance for a Loss of Off-Site Power (LOOP) scenario from the internal plant PRA were used. Additionally, the list of risk-significant components for the LOOP PRA were compared with the draft SWEL 1 to confirm that a reasonable sample of risk-significant components (relevant for a seismic event) were included on SWEL 1. (Ref. 7) 4.2.2 SWEL 2 - Spent Fuel Pool RelatedItems The process for selecting a sample of SSCs associated with the spent fuel pool (SFP) began with a review of the station design and licensing basis documentation for the SFP and the interconnecting SFP cooling system. (Ref. 2 section 9.1 and Refs. 8, 9, 10, 11, &

12) The following four screens narrowed the scope of SSCs to be included on the second Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL 2):

1. Screen #1 - Seismic Category I Only those items identified as Seismic Category I (having defined seismic licensing basis) are to be included on SWEL 2 with exception to the SFP structure. As described in Reference 1, the adequacy of the SFP structure is assessed by analysis as a Seismic Category 1 (Class I) structure. Therefore, the SFP structure is assumed to be seismically adequate for the purposes of this program and is not included in the scope of items included on SWEL 2.

The review of design and licensing basis documentation for the SFP revealed no Class I equipment for Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1. (Ref. 2 section 9.1 and Refs. 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) 4-3

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Screen #1 resulted with no items added to SWEL 2. Therefore, Screens #2 and #3 below were not performed. However, Screens #2 and #3 are provided for completeness as they are part of the equipment selection process.

2. Screen #2 - Equipment or Systems This screen was to consider only those items associated with the SFP that were appropriate for an equipment walkdown process. This screen was not performed as Screen #1 resulted with no items added to SWEL 2.

3. Screen #3- Sample Considerations This screen represents a process that was intended to result in a SWEL 2 that sufficiently represents a broad population of SFP Seismic Category 1 (Class I) equipment and systems to meet the objectives of the NRC 50.54(f) letter. (Ref. 1)

The following attributes were to be considered in the development of SWEL 2:

A. A variety of types of systems B. Major new and replacement equipment C. A variety of types of equipment D. A variety of environments This screen was not performed as Screen #1 resulted with no items added to SWEL 2.

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

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

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

An assessment of the Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 spent fuel pools and their cooling systems was performed and found no SFP penetrations below 10 feet above the top of the fuel assemblies. (Ref. 2 section 9.1, and Refs. 8, 9, 10, 11, &

12) As such, and consistent with Reference 1, there is no potential for rapid drain-down and no items were added to SWEL 2.

4.2.3 SWEL 2- Conclusion No items were identified to be included in the scope of SWEL 2 for Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1.

4-4

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 5

Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys 5.1 OVERVIEW Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys were conducted by two (2) person teams of trained Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs), in accordance with the EPRI guidance document during the week of August 20, 2012. The Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys are discussed in more detail in the following sub-sections.

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

The SWEs conducted the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys together as a team.

During the evaluations, the SWEs actively discussed their observations and judgments with each other. The results of the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys reported herein are based on the comprehensive agreement of the SWEs.

5.2 SEISMIC WALKDOWNS The Seismic Walkdowns focused on the seismic adequacy of the items on the SWEL as provided in Appendix B of this report. It is noted, as discussed in Section 4 above, there were no items included on SWEL 2 for Quad Cities Unit 1. The Seismic Walkdowns also evaluated the potential for nearby SSCs to cause adverse seismic interactions with the SWEL items. The Seismic Walkdowns focused on the following adverse seismic conditions associated with the subject item of equipment:

" Adverse anchorage conditions

" Adverse seismic spatial interactions

Other adverse seismic conditions The results of the Seismic Walkdowns have been documented on the Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) provided in the EPRI guidance document, Appendix C.

Seismic Walkdowns were performed and a SWC completed for 94 of the 104 items identified on the Quad Cities Unit 1 SWEL. The completed SWCs are provided in Appendix C of this report. Additionally, photos have been included with most SWCs to provide a visual record of the item along with any comments noted on the SWC.

Drawings and other plant records are cited in some of the SWCs, but are not included with the SWCs because they are readily retrievable documents through the station's document management system. Information on anchorage that was obtained from the previously performed Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) walkdowns are included in the SWCs since this information, in part, was used for the anchorage verification.

5-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Seismic Walkdowns are deferred for the remaining 10 items to a unit outage or appropriate time when the equipment is accessible. These items could not be walked down during the 180-day period following the issuance of the 10CFR50.54(f) letter due to their being inaccessible. Inaccessibility of this equipment was either based on the location of the equipment (environment that posed personnel safety concerns while the unit is operating) or due to the electrical safety hazards posed while the equipment is operating. Appendix E of this report identifies the inaccessible equipment along with the plan for future Seismic Walkdowns.

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

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

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

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

" Bent, broken, missing, or loose hardware

" Corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation

Visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors

Other potentially adverse seismic conditions Based on the results of the visual inspection, the SWEs judged whether the anchorage was potentially degraded, non-conforming, or unanalyzed. The results of the visual inspection were documented on the SWC, as appropriate. If there was clearly no evidence of degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions, then it was indicated on the checklist and a licensing basis evaluation was not necessary. However, if it was not possible to judge whether the anchorage is degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed, then the condition was entered into the Corrective Action Program as a potentially adverse seismic condition.

5.2.2 ConfigurationVerification In addition to the visual inspections of the anchorage as described above, the configuration of the installed anchorage was verified to be consistent with existing plant documentation for at least 50% of the items on the SWEL.

5-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Line-mounted equipment (e.g., valves mounted on pipelines without separate anchorage) was not evaluated for anchorage adequacy and was not counted in establishing the 50% sample size.

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

" Design drawings

Seismic qualification reports of analyses or shake table tests

IPEEE or USI A-46 program documentation, as applicable The Table C-1 of Appendix C indicates the anchorage verification status for components as follows:

N/A: components that are line-mounted and/or are not directly anchored (with separate anchorage) to the civil structure and therefore do not count in the anchorage confirmation total Y: components that are anchored to the civil structure which were confirmed to be consistent with design drawings and/or other plant documentation N: components that are anchored to the civil structure for which anchorage drawings were not identified and/or retrieved See Table 5-1 below for the accounting of the 50% anchorage configuration confirmations, and the individual SWC forms in Appendix C for the specific drawings used for each anchorage verification confirmation.

Table 5-1. Anchorage Configuration Confirmation No. of SWEL N/A Items Required to SWEL Items Confirm? Items Confirmed (A) (B) (A-B)I2 Total 104 48 28 37 5.2.3 Adverse Seismic SpatialInteractions An adverse seismic spatial interaction is the physical interaction between the SWEL item and a nearby SSC caused by relative motion between the two during an earthquake. An inspection was performed in the area adjacent to and surrounding the SWEL item to identify any seismic interaction conditions that could adversely affect the capability of that SWEL item to perform its intended safety-related functions.

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

Proximity

Failure and falling of SSCs (Seismic II over I)

Flexibility of attached lines and cables 5-3

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Detailed guidance for evaluating each of these types of seismic spatial interactions is described in the EPRI guidance document, Appendix D: Seismic Spatial Interaction.

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

5.2.4 OtherAdverse Seismic Conditions In addition to adverse anchorage conditions and adverse seismic interactions, described above, other potentially adverse seismic conditions that could challenge the seismic adequacy of a SWEL item could have been present. Examples of the types of conditions that could pose potentially adverse seismic conditions include the following:

Degraded conditions

Loose or missing fasteners that secure internal or external components to equipment

Large, heavy components mounted on a cabinet that are not typically included by the original equipment manufacturer

Cabinet doors or panels that are not latched or fastened

Other adverse conditions Any identified other adverse seismic conditions are documented on the items' SWC, as applicable.

5.2.5 Issues Identification during Seismic Walkdowns Table 5-2 provides a summary of issues identified during the equipment Seismic Walkdowns. The equipment Seismic Walkdowns resulted with a total of eight (8) concerns identified and each of these was entered into the station's CAP. All of the identified concerns were assessed and it was concluded that the condition would not prevent the associated equipment from performing its safety-related function(s). None of the conditions identified by the SWEs during the equipment Seismic Walkdowns were concluded to be adverse seismic conditions.

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

Turbine Hall), then the vicinity is identified based on judgment, e.g., on the order of about 35 feet from the SWEL item. This vicinity is described on the Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC), shown in Appendix D of this report. A total of 26 AWCs were completed for Quad Cities Unit 1. It is noted that additional AWCs will be completed, as required, as deferred and supplemental inspections are completed.

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

Anchorage conditions (if visible without opening equipment)

" Significantly degraded equipment in the area 5-4

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136

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

" Potentially adverse seismic interactions including those that could cause flooding, spray, and fires in the area

Other housekeeping items that could cause adverse seismic interaction (including temporary installations and equipment storage)

Scaffold construction was inspected to meet Exelon Procedure NES-MS-04.1, Seismic Prequalified Scaffolds

Seismic housekeeping was examined to meet station procedure MA-QC-716-026-1001, Seismic Housekeeping The Area Walk-Bys are intended to identify adverse seismic conditions that are readily identified by visual inspection, without necessarily stopping to open cabinets or taking an extended look. Therefore, the Area Walk-By took significantly less time than it took to conduct the Seismic Walkdowns described above for a SWEL item. If a potentially adverse seismic condition was identified during the Area Walk-By, then additional time was taken, as necessary, to evaluate adequately whether there was an adverse condition and to document any findings.

The results of the Area Walk-Bys are documented on the AWCs included in Appendix D of this report. A separate AWC was filled out for each area inspected. A single AWC was completed for areas where more than one SWEL item was located.

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

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

One area of particular concern to the industry is threaded fire protection piping with long unsupported spans. If adequate seismic supports are present or there are isolation valves near the tanks or charging sources, flooding may not be a concern. Numerous failures have been observed in past earthquakes resulting from sprinkler head impact.

Less frequent but commonly observed failures have occurred due to flexible headers and stiff branch pipes, non-ductile mechanical couplings, seismic anchor motion and failed supports.

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

Fire protection piping with inadequate clearance around fusible-link sprinkler heads

" Non-ductile mechanical and threaded piping couplings can fail and lead to flooding or spray of equipment

" Long, unsupported spans of threaded fire protection piping

Flexible headers with stiffly supported branch lines 5-5

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136

Non-Seismic Category I tanks The SWEs exercised their judgment to identify only those seismically-induced interactions that could lead to flooding or spray.

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

Examples where seismically-induced fire interactions could occur include the following:

Hazardous/flammable material stored in inadequately anchored drums, inadequately anchored shelves, or unlocked cabinets

Natural gas lines and their attachment to equipment or buildings

Bottles containing acetylene or similar flammable chemicals

Hydrogen lines and bottles Another example where seismically-induced fire interaction could occur is when there is relative motion between a high voltage item of equipment (e.g., 4160 volt transformer) and an adjacent support structure when they have different foundations. This relative motion can cause high voltage busbars, which pass between the two, to short out against the grounded bus duct surrounding the busbars and cause a fire.

The Seismic Walkdown Engineers exercised their judgment to identify only those seismically-induced interactions that could lead to fires.

5.3.1 Issue Identificationduring Area Walk-bys Table 5-3 provides a summary of issues identified during the Area Walk-bys. Thirteen (13) issues were identified during the Area Walk-Bys and entered into the station CAP.

No potentially adverse seismic conditions were identified that resulted in a seismic licensing basis evaluation. No seismically-induced flooding or spray interactions were identified during the Area Walk-Bys. No seismically-induced fire interactions were identified during the Area Walk-Bys.

5.4 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ON ELECTRICAL CABINET INSPECTIONS Following the completion of the online seismic walkdowns, the industry was made aware that the NRC had clarified a position on opening electrical cabinets to inspect for adverse seismic conditions. The purpose for opening these cabinets is to inspect for evidence of:

internal components not being adequately secured,

whether fasteners securing adjacent cabinets together are in place, and

other adverse seismic conditions.

Appendix E of this report includes Table E-2 which identifies components in the specified equipment classes that would be considered as electrical cabinets:

5-6

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136

1. Motor Control Centers and Wall-Mounted Contactors

2. Low Voltage Switchgear and Breaker Panels

3. Medium Voltage, Metal-Clad Switchgear

4. Transformers

14. Distribution Panels and Automatic Transfer Switches

16. Battery Chargers and Inverters

20. Instrumentation and Control Panels Table E-2 indicates internal accessibility of each cabinet. Cabinets that have been identified as requiring these supplemental internal inspections are those with doors or panels with latches or thumbscrews and can be readily opened during normal maintenance activities. Also provided for each cabinet is a proposed milestone schedule for performing these internal inspections and the associated station tracking record (IR number).

Components identified on Table E-2 may also be identified on Table E-1 as items whose' walkdowns have been deferred to an outage.

The Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWC) for the components identified in Table E-2 that can be opened for internal inspections will be revised at the time of the supplemental walkdown to indicate the results of these internal inspections.

5-7

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Table 5-2. Issues Identified during Seismic Walkdowns Actions Action Complete Item ID Description of Issue Request Yes/No ID (IR) (See Notes 1 &2)

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that there is a 1/4 inch clearance between the Ul PI 1-4641-44 and the EDG Skid. There is a possibility that during a seismic event, the gauge could displace and contact the EDG skid. Due to the minimal weight of the gauge, the seismic displacement and inertia gained will be minimal. As such, 1-4699-226 the gauge impact with the skid will not cause significant 1403063 Yes damage to the gauge. Any damage to the gauge would be limited to minor surface damage. The gauge would not break apart, nor would it become unconnected from the air line. Therefore there is no concern that the equipment would be affected during a seismic event.

Loose nuts on threaded rods holding down light pack 1-8300-1 above charger. Still with full thread engagement. Light 1403065 Yes packs will not fall and impact equipment.

1 panel bolt missing on left side of panel, 3 panel bolts loose on right side of panel. Right side has locations for 16 bolts; 13 bolts acceptable. Left side has locations for 1-2251-113 11 bolts; 10 bolts acceptable. Number of properly- 1403068 No installed bolts is judged adequate to ensure panel is able to perform its design function.

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that there are 3 screws missing and 1 screw loose on the 250VDC Charger. Two screws are missing on the right side. One screw is missing on the left side and one screw is loose on the left side. There are 40 screws on each side of this 1-8350 charger holding the panel piece in place. Based on 1403079 No Engineering Judgment the remaining 38 of 40 screws per side are more than adequate to maintain the connection of the panel during a seismic event, thus preventing any adverse impact to the charger.

Two gas cylinders near the 1-8801 Valve on RB 623 are each restrained by a single chain that is not tight.

1-8801A-AO Adequate distance to safety-related components exists, 1403593 Yes so there is no seismic interaction concern.

5-8

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Item ID Description of Issue Request Yes/No ID (IR) (See Notes 1 & 2)

Instrument Air Lines connected to the 1-8801A, 8801 B, 8801C, 8802A, 8802B & 8802C valves are in contact with rigid insulation covering adjacent piping. Reference UFSAR 6.2.5.1, Oxygen content in primary containment is monitored by an oxygen analyzer at various locations within the containment to ensure the containment is maintained at the desired oxygen content below 4% by 1-8801A-AO volume during normal operation. During a seismic event, 1403596 Yes there is a possibility that the solenoid could move out of phase with the adjacent pipe. If the two items move out of phase, they could contact each other and the Instrument Air line may be damaged. A drawing review shows that the valves fail closed upon loss of air. Therefore, there is no immediate seismic concern.

During Fukushima seismic walkdowns, it was discovered that the angle brackets providing vertical support for the 1-0302-18 and 1-0302-19A lines are installed but not providing any support for the lines. There is a gap 1-0302-19A between the top of the brackets and the bottom of the 1403597 Yes lines. These are located at U1 RB 595, Col line 17-18 and L. No excessive deflection or distortion noted and nearby adjacent supports are in good condition. Therefore, there is no immediate seismic concern.

During the seismic walkdowns, a number of slightly open S-hooks and incorrectly-oriented beam clamps supporting light fixtures were found. The S-hook openings do not warrant concern since mitigating robust items limit the 1-7800- pendulum action of the light fixtures during a seismic 18195 event. Low vertical acceleration values and the minimal weight of the light fixtures are judged to provide significant margin against the beam clamps being dislodged during a seismic event.

Notes:

1) "Yes" indicates that any corrective actions resulting from the issue are complete

2) "No" indicates that any corrective actions resulting from the issue are NOT complete. Actions are tracked by the IR number in the station Corrective Action Program.

5-9

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Table 5-3. Issues Identified during Area Walk-Bys Action Actions Complete Item ID Description of Issue Request Yes/No (See ID (IR) Notes 1 & 2)

Several light fixtures supported by open S-hooks. Fixtures have long (approx. 4 feet) chains, minimizing ability of AWC-Ul-18 fixtures to fall from hook. Clearance between fixtures and 1402669 No conduits above (approx. 3 inches) is small, which minimizes pendulum motion of fixtures.

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that the light fixture between switchgear 18 and switchgear 19 has one unclosed S Hook. The other S Hook is closed.

Because one of the two S Hooks is closed, there is reasonable assurance that the light fixture will not fall AWC-Ul-20 during a seismic event. Should the one open S Hook 1403072 No become unhooked during a seismic event, there is sufficient clearance such that the switchgear will not be impacted. Additionally, there are no other components in the line of fire which would be adversely affected due to impact from the light fixture. Therefore there is no seismic concern regarding this unclosed S Hook.

Ten of over 100 screws loose or missing at back side of Bus 1 B1. Loose/missing screws spread over 4 different AWC-U1-2 locations along bus. Sufficient remaining engaged 1403074 No fasteners to maintain panel connection per engineering judgment.

Panel 2251-12 missing 2 panel assembly screws. Due to AWC-U1-9 abundance of remaining fasteners present, panel judged 1403076 No to be acceptable.

Light fixture above 1-1001-1 D valve with open S-hooks.

Valve is robust and would not be affected by light fixture AWC-U1-6 impact. Fixture above 1 D RHRSW pump with open S- 1403082 Yes hook. Hardwired power cable prevents light fixture from falling.

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that one of two bolts connecting HCUs together is missing. The two AWC-Ul-17 HCUs are the 1-0305-127-3051 and the 1-0305-107-3035. 1403391 No Remaining bolt is judged sufficient to prevent adverse seismic interaction between HCUs.

5-10

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Acpqtin Complete Description of Issue Request Yes/No (See ID (IR) Notes 1 & 2)

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that a conduit support located in the cable spreading room is missing anchor bolts. The location of this support is approximately 20 ft north of the south wall and 15 ft west AWC-Ul-13 of the east wall. This conduit support is a stanchion which 1403393 No holds a 2 inch and a 3 inch conduit approximately 18 inches off of the floor. Adjacent conduit supports are in good condition and are judged adequate to prevent damage to cables in conduit during a seismic event.

It was identified that the bottom of the concrete slab above EL 623' (i.e., the bottom of the EL 647' slab) in the vicinity of column lines L, 14-15 is spalling. Currently, there is some minor concrete debris on the EL 623' slab below the spalled area. In addition, there is a piece of concrete in the spalled area that is cracked through. This piece of AWC-Ul-14 concrete is being held in place by a conduit that is 1404147 No attached to the bottom of the slab and, therefore, there is no immediate concern that any additional concrete debris will fall. The spalled concrete slab is considered acceptable with deficiencies as defined in Procedure ER-AA-450 (Structures Monitoring) and the structural adequacy of the spalled slab is not compromised.

During the seismic walkdowns, a number of slightly open S-hooks and incorrectly-oriented beam clamps supporting light fixtures were found. The S-hook openings do not AWC-UI-10 warrant concern sincemitigating robust items limit the AWC-Ul-16 pendulum action of the light fixtures during a seismic 1404697 No AWC-Ul-17 event. Low vertical acceleration values and the minimal weight of the light fixtures are judged to provide significant margin against the beam clamps being dislodged during a seismic event.

Emergency light pack 42E (1-7900-42E) is missing the right side mounting fasteners. These mounting fasteners hold the light pack to the wall mounted tray. This is not a seismic concern because the left side is securely AWC-Ul-15 fastened. It should be noted that there is a lip on the wall 1405892 No so rotation cannot occur. There is also a considerable distance from any safety related component, so if the light pack were to fall out of the wall-mounted tray, no damage would occur.

5-11

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Action Actions Description of Issue Request Complete Item ID IR)

ID ID(IR) Notes 1 (See Yes/No & 2)

For the conduit that feeds valve 1-2301-6-MO, the first conduit support away from the valve is missing the conduit clamp. The conduit span from the valve to the next adequate conduit support (located at the manual operator junction box) is relatively short. Thus, by engineering judgment, sufficient design margin remains for the conduit to perform its design function during a seismic event.

The flexible portion of the same conduit at valve 1-2301 MO has a split in one side. Although this is not a seismic concern, the insulation on the cabling within the conduit in AWC-U1-24 conjunction with the results of recent surveillance testing 1404153 No for valve 1-2301-6-MO provides reasonable assurance that the valve remains fully operable.

One of the four bolts that mount the manual operator box for valve 1-2301-3-MO to the supporting Unistrut members is missing. By engineering judgment, the three remaining mounting bolts are adequate to support the manual operator box during a seismic event since the manual operator box weight is small and the seismic accelerations at El. 554 ft. in the Reactor Building are relatively low.

During the Unit 1 seismic walkdowns, 15 housekeeping issues were found throughout the plant. Per procedure Ue MA-QC-716-026-1001, staged materials near safety- 1405922 No related equipment must adhere to the listed requirements.

See IR for specific instances.

No measures in place to prevent trolleys on top of Switchgears 18, 19, and 29 from impacting trolley rail end AWC-Ul-20 stops during seismic event, thereby introducing vibration 1419584 No into Switchgears 18, 19, and 29. Trolley movement and impact is judged to be minimal due to cyclic motion of seismic event and relatively small weight of trolley.

Notes:

1) "Yes" indicates that any corrective actions resulting from the issue are complete

2) "No" indicates that any corrective actions resulting from the issue are NOT complete. Actions are tracked by the IR number in the station Corrective Action Program.

5-12

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 6 Licensing Basis Evaluations The EPRI guidance document, Section 5: Seismic Licensing Basis Evaluation provides a detailed process to perform and document seismic licensing basis evaluations of SSCs identified when potentially adverse seismic conditions are identified. The process provides a means to identify, evaluate and document how the identified potentially adverse seismic condition meets a station's seismic licensing basis without entering the condition into a station's Corrective Action Program (CAP). In lieu of this process, Exelon/Quad Cities utilized the existing processes and procedures (Site CAP Expectations) to identify, evaluate and document conditions identified during the Seismic Walkdowns.

In accordance with Exelon/Quad Cities processes and procedures, all questionable conditions identified by the SWEs during the walkdowns were entered into the station CAP to be further evaluated and addressed as required. The SWEs provided input to support the identification and evaluation (including seismic licensing basis evaluations, as required) of the potentially adverse seismic conditions entered into the CAP. The station corrective action program is a more robust process than that provided in the EPRI guidance document; in part, ensuring each condition is properly evaluated for conformance with design and licensing bases and corrected as required.

Conditions identified during the walkdowns were documented on the SWCs, AWCs, and entered into the CAP. Tables 5-2 and 5-3 in the report provide the IR, a summary of the condition, and the action completion status.

6-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 7

IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report Per the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) Submittal for Quad Cities and the Staff Evaluation Report of IPEEE submittal of Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 dated April 26, 2001, an explicit definition of vulnerability was not provided and no vulnerabilities with respect to potential severe accidents related to external events were identified. (Ref. 3 & 4) However, plant improvements and previously identified SQUG outliers were identified in Sections 3 and 7 of Reference 3.

Table G-1, in Appendix G, lists the plant improvements, the IPEEE/SQUG proposed resolution, the actual resolution and resolution date. All IPEEE improvement actions are complete.

7-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 8 Peer Review A peer review team consisting of at least two individuals was assembled and peer reviews were performed in accordance with Section 6: Peer Reviews of the EPRI guidance document. The Peer Review process included the following activities:

Review of the selection of SSCs included on the SWEL

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

Review of Licensing basis evaluations, as applicable

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

" Review of the submittal report

Provide a summary report of the peer review process in the submittal report The peer reviews were performed independently from this report and the summary Peer Review Report is provided in Appendix F of this report.

8-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 9 References Reference drawings related to SWEL items are provided in the Seismic Walkdown Checklists and if applicable, in the Area-Walkdown Checklists.

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

2. Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR),

Revision 11, October 2011

3. CoinEd Letter from R.M. Krich to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, dated July 29, 1999,

Subject:

Updated Individual Plant Examination of External Events Report

4. Staff Evaluation Report of Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) submittal of Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 dated April 26, 2001

5. NRC (E Leeds and M Johnson) Letter to All Power Reactor Licensees et al.,

"Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendation 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident," Enclosure 2.3, "Recommendation 2.3: Seismic," dated March 12, 2012

6. "Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 2 1 st Century: The Near-term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident," ADAMS Accession No. ML11186107, July 12, 2011

7. Internal RM document QC-MISC-12, Rev. 0, Quad Cities Risk Importance Listing to Support Development of the Seismic Walkdown Equipment List (SWEL)

8. Drawing M-38, Rev. AP, Diagram of Fuel Pool Cooling Piping

9. Drawing M-45, Rev. W, Diagram of Fuel Pool Filter Demineralizer Piping

10. Drawing B-262, Rev. S, Reactor Building Pool Liner Bottom Plan

11. Drawing B-263, Rev. L, Reactor Building Pool Sections & Details

12. Drawing B-264, Rev. M, Reactor Building Pool Sections & Details 9-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Annex A NRC Transmittal Update 1 Ai

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Contents of Annex A Al Introduction........................................................................................................ A M-A 1 .1 P u rp o se .............................................................................................................. A l-1 A1.2 Background ....................................................................................................... Al-1 A1.3 Plant Overview .................................................................................................. Al-1 A 1 .4 Ap p ro a c h ........................................................................................................... A l-1 A1.5 Conclusion ...................................................................................................... A1-2 A2 Seismic Licensing Basis .......................................................................................... A2-1 A3 Personnel Qualifications...................................................................................... A3-1 A3.1 Overview ............................................................................................................ A3-1 A3.2 Walkdown Personnel .......................................................................................... A3-1 A3.3 Additional Personnel ............................................................................................ A3-2 A4 Selection of SSCs ..................................................................................................... A4-1 A5 Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys .................................................................. A5-1 A5.1 Overview ........................................................................................................... A5-1 A5.2 Seism ic W alkdowns ............................................................................................ A5-1 A5.2.1 Adverse Anchorage Conditions .............................................................. A5-2 A5.2.2 Configuration Verification ........................................................................ A5-2 A5.2.3 Adverse Seism ic Spatial Interactions ...................................................... A5-2 A5.2.4 Other Adverse Seismic Conditions ........................................................ A5-2 A5.2.5 Issues Identification during Seism ic W alkdowns ...................................... A5-2 A5.3 Area Walk-Bys .................................................................................................... A5-2 A5.3.1 Issues Identification during Area W alk-Bys .............................................. A5-3 A5.4 Supplemental Information on Electrical Cabinet Inspections ............................... A5-3 A6 Licensing Basis Evaluations..................................................................................... A6-1 A7 IPEEE VulnerabilitiesResolution Report ............................................................ A7-1 A8 PeerReview ............................................................................................................... A8-1 A9 References ................................................................................................................ A9-1 Aii

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Appendices AA ProjectPersonnelResumes and SWE Certificates................................................ AA-1 AB Equipment Lists........................................................................................................ AB-1 AC Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWCs) ................................................................... AC-1 AD Area Walk-By Checklists (AWCs) ............................................................................ AD-1 AE Plan for Future Seismic Walkdown of InaccessibleEquipment............................. AE- 1 AF PeerReview Report ............................................................................................. AF-I AG IPEEE Vulnerability Status .......................................................................................... AG-I Tables Table A3-1. Personnel Roles .................................................................................... A3-1 Table A5-2. Issues Identified during Seismic Walkdowns ............................................... A5-4 Table A5-3. Issues Identified during Area Walk-Bys ..................................................... A5-9 Table AC-1. Summary of Seismic Walkdown Checklists ............................................. AC-1 Table AD-I. Summary of Area Walk-By Checklists ...................................................... AD-1 Table AE-1. Inaccessible and Deferred Equipment ..................................................... AE-2 Table AE-2. Deferred Internal Cabinet Inspections ....................................... AE-3 Table AF3-1. Table of SWC and AWC Samples from Seismic Walkdown Inspection ........... AF-5 Aiii

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A I introduction A1.1 PURPOSE This updated transmittal report is being provided in compliance with the requirements contained in Enclosure 3 of the NRC 50.54(f) letter dated March 12, 2012 (Annex Ref.

2). This new report section, Annex A, contains the results of the follow-on inspection activities that have been completed to address commitments contained in Exelon letter to the NRC, "180-day Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident," dated November 27, 2012 (Annex Ref. 3). Annex A, includes follow-on seismic walkdown results associated with NRC Commitment Nos. 1 and 3 listed in Enclosure 3 of the above Exelon letter.

Additionally, the update includes the current status of the resolution of issues found during the initial seismic walkdowns and area walk-bys as documented in Tables A5-2 and Table A5-3, respectively.

Commitment No. 1 is closed. All remaining inspections of (SWEL) items previously deferred due to inaccessibility listed in Table AE-1 have been completed.

Commitment No. 3 remains open. All twelve internal electrical cabinet inspections scheduled for QI R22 have been completed. Six items remain for future walkdowns, as shown in Table AE-2.

The initial NRC transmittal report (Annex Ref. 3) documented that issues identified during the seismic walkdowns, remained open. This update provides documentation that all previous issues are now resolved as listed in Table A5-2 and Table A5-3.

Annex A, includes updates to each report section where the status has changed or new information is available in accordance with Section 8 of EPRI 1025286, "Seismic Walkdown Guidance - For Resolution of Fukushima Near Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3 Seismic" (Annex Ref. 1). This report follows the same structure as the previous transmittal (Annex Ref. 3); however, every section begins with an "A" to differentiate from the previous report. The previous transmittal was referenced in sections of this report that were not updated.

A

1.2 BACKGROUND

See Section 1.2 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A1.3 PLANT OVERVIEW See Section 1.3 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

Al-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A1.4 APPROACH See Section 1.4 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A

1.5 CONCLUSION

Seismic Walkdowns scheduled for QI R22 were completed by March 19, 2013 at the Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1. The ten items deferred due to inaccessibility and the twelve remaining supplemental inspections of electrical cabinets scheduled for QI R22 were performed in accordance with the NRC endorsed walkdown methodology.

The six remaining internal cabinet walkdowns will be completed prior to the Annex Ref 3 commitment date. All potentially degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions identified as a result of the seismic walkdowns have been entered into the corrective action program (CAP). No planned or newly identified protection or mitigation features have resulted from the efforts to address the 50.54(f) letter.

Evaluations of the identified issues are complete and documented within CAP. These evaluations were completed with no adverse anchorage conditions, no adverse seismic spatial interactions, and no other adverse seismic conditions associated with the items on the SWEL. Similarly, the Area Walk-Bys resulted with no adverse seismic conditions associated with other Systems, Structures, and Components (SSCs) located in the vicinity of the SWEL item(s).

The follow-on Seismic Walkdowns identified minor issues pertaining to loose bushings, un-taped spare cables, and missing fasteners, listed on A5-2. Other than these minor issues, the Seismic Walkdowns identified no degraded, nonconforming, or unanalyzed conditions that required either immediate or follow-on action(s). No planned or newly identified protection or mitigation features have resulted from the efforts to address the 50.54(f) letter.

As of March 25, 2013, all issues identified during the initial Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys as documented in the Issue Reports listed in Table 5-2 and Table 5-3 have been resolved. The updated completion status and resolutions for the previous Issue Reports are shown in Table A5-2 and Table A5-3 in Section A5 of this Annex A.

A1-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A2 Seismic Licensing Basis See Section 2 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A2-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A3 Personnel Qualifications A3.1 OVERVIEW This section of the report identifies the personnel that participated in the NTTF 2.3 Seismic Walkdown efforts. A description of the responsibilities of each Seismic Walkdown participant's role(s) is provided in Section 2 of the EPRI Seismic Walkdown Guidance. (Annex Ref. 1) Resumes provided in Appendix AA provide detail on the additional personnel's qualifications for his or her role.

A3.2 WALKDOWN PERSONNEL Table A3-1 below summarizes the names and corresponding roles of personnel who participated in the NTTF 2.3 Seismic Walkdown effort. Two additional peer reviewers were added to the follow-on inspections to ensure compliance with EPRI 1025286, "Seismic Walkdown Guidance - For Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.3 Seismic" (Annex Ref. 1).

Table A3-1 Personnel Roles Eqipet Equipment lat Plant Walkdown Seismic Licensing L IPEEE Peer Name Selection Basis ieer Reer Engineer Operations Engineer Review Reviewer Reviewer (SWE)

A.Perez X K.Hull X T.K. Ram X1 J. Griffith X X D.Carter X X M.Wodarcyk X X J. Kim (Exelon)* X X X K. Hall (Exelon)* X T. Bacon X W. Djordjevic X_2 T. Fuhs (Exelon) X M. Dunlay (Exelon)* X2 D.Damhoff (Exelon)* X Notes:

1. Peer Review Team member for SWEL review only.

2. Peer Review Team Leader.

Additional Personnel for follow-on inspections A3-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A3.3 ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL Exelon Engineering staff members Michael Dunlay and Dustin Damhoff performed a peer review of the Report Annex as well as observed a sample of the follow-on walkdown activities.

Prior to participating in the follow-on walkdowns and the peer review, both Mr. Dunlay and Mr.

Damhoff thoroughly reviewed and familiarized themselves with the EPRI guidance document and used it as the basis for the preparation of their peer review report.

Mr. Dunlay is a Mechanical Engineer in the Exelon Engineering Department. He has a Bachelor of Science degree in mechanical engineering. He has worked at Quad Cities Station since 2010, has his seismic qualification, and VT-1, VT-2, VT-3 Level IIVisual Examination qualification. Mr. Dunlay is currently the seismic engineer in which he reviews seismic qualification reports and modifications for seismic impacts. Mr. Dunlay is familiar with plant design, operation, documentation and the seismic licensing basis.

Mr. Damhoff is a Structural Engineer in the Exelon Engineering Department. He has a Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering. He has worked at Quad Cities Station since 2010, has his structural qualification, structures monitoring qualification, and is in the process of attaining his seismic qualification. Mr. Damhoff s prior experience includes four years of design and inspection of bridges and commercial/industrial structures. This included the design and inspection of concrete structures, structural steel framing for main force resisting systems, component supports, and equipment anchorage. Mr. Damhoff is a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Illinois.

A3-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A 4Selection of SSCs See Section 4 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A4-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A 5 Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys A5.1 OVERVIEW Follow-on Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys were conducted by a two person team of Seismic Walkdown Engineers (SWEs) trained in accordance with the EPRI guidance document. The Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys are discussed in more detail in the following sub-sections.

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

The SWEs conducted the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys together as a team.

During the evaluations, the SWEs actively discussed their observations and judgments with each other. The results of the Seismic Walkdowns and Area Walk-Bys reported herein are based on the comprehensive agreement of the SWEs.

A5.2 SEISMIC WALKDOWNS These follow-on Seismic Walkdowns focused on the items previously deferred due to inaccessibility. These items are listed on Table AE-1 of this report. The Seismic Walkdowns also evaluated the potential for nearby SSCs to cause adverse seismic interactions with the items being inspected. The Seismic Walkdowns focused on the following adverse seismic conditions:

Adverse anchorage conditions

" Adverse seismic spatial interactions

Other adverse seismic conditions Also included in this report are Supplemental Internal Cabinet Inspections. All twelve items scheduled for Q1 R22 have been completed. The Supplemental Checklist documents any other adverse conditions and references the previous Checklist from Enclosure 1 (Annex Ref. 3). The updated status of the Deferred Internal Cabinet Inspections is shown in Table AE-2.

The results of the follow-on Seismic Walkdowns are documented in Appendix AC of this Annex A, using the Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) template provided in the EPRI guidance document. Seismic Walkdowns were performed and SWCs were completed for the ten items identified on Table AE-1 of this report and the twelve internal cabinet inspections shown in Table AE-2. Additionally, photos have been included with most SWCs to provide a visual record of the item along with any comments noted on the SWC. Appendix AE of this Annex A identifies the inaccessible equipment along with the plan for future Seismic Walkdowns.

A5-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 The following subsections describe the approach followed by the SWEs to identify potentially adverse anchorage conditions, adverse seismic interactions, and other adverse seismic conditions discovered during the Seismic Walkdowns.

A5.2.1 Adverse Anchorage Conditions See Section 5.2.1 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A5.2.2 ConfigurationVerification See Section 5.2.2 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A5.2.3 Adverse Seismic SpatialInteractions See Section 5.2.3 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A5.2.4 OtherAdverse Seismic Conditions See Section 5.2.4 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A5.2.5 Issues Identification during Seismic Walkdowns During the previous seismic walkdowns, issues were identified and entered into CAP.

Subsequent to the issuance of the last report, corrective actions were completed for all previous issues. Table A5-2 of this Annex A provides an updated summary and the status of the corrective actions to address these issues.

Minor issues were identified during the follow-on walkdowns, as listed on Table A5-2. No issues were identified which challenged the current licensing basis and none were identified as adverse seismic conditions. All corrective actions have been completed for the follow-on inspections.

A5.3 AREA WALK-BYS The purpose of the Area Walk-Bys is to identify potentially adverse seismic conditions associated with other SSCs located in the vicinity of the items being inspected. Vicinity is generally defined as the room containing the item. If the room is very large (e.g.,

Turbine Hall), then the vicinity is identified based on judgment, e.g., on the order of about 35 feet from the item. Additional vicinity associated with these follow-on seismic walkdowns but not covered in Appendix D, is described on the Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC), shown in Appendix AD of this Annex A. A total of four additional AWCs were completed for Quad Cities Unit I as a result of these follow-on walkdowns.

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

Anchorage conditions (if visible without opening equipment)

Significantly degraded equipment in the area

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

" Potentially adverse seismic interactions including those that could cause flooding, spray, and fires in the area A5-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136

Other housekeeping items that could cause adverse seismic interaction (including temporary installations and equipment storage)

Scaffold construction was inspected to meet Exelon Procedure NES-MS-04. 1, Seismic Prequalified Scaffolds

Seismic housekeeping was examined to meet station procedure MA-QC-716-026-1001, Seismic Housekeeping The Area Walk-Bys are intended to identify adverse seismic conditions that are readily identified by visual inspection, without necessarily stopping to open cabinets or taking an extended look. Therefore, the Area Walk-By took significantly less time than it took to conduct the Seismic Walkdowns described above. If a potentially adverse seismic condition was identified during the Area Walk-By, then additional time was taken, as necessary, to evaluate adequately whether there was an adverse condition and to document any findings.

The results of the Area Walk-Bys were documented on the AWCs included in Appendix AD of this Annex A. A separate AWC was filled out for each area inspected. A single AWC was completed for areas where more than one item was located.

Additional details for evaluating the potential for adverse seismic interactions that could cause flooding, spray, or fire in the area are provided in Section 5.3 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A5.3.1 Issues Identification duringArea Walk-Bys No issues were identified during the Area Walk-Bys associated with the follow-on walkdowns.

During the previous seismic walkdowns, issues identified were entered into CAP.

Subsequent to the issuance of the last report, corrective actions were completed to address these conditions. Table A5-3 of this Annex A provides an updated summary of the conditions and the status of the corrective actions to address these conditions.

A5.4 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ON ELECTRICAL CABINET INSPECTIONS The follow-on walkdowns completed the supplemental internal inspections of twelve open items scheduled for Q1 R22 on Table E-2 (Annex Ref. 3). Issue reports were generated and entered into CAP, as shown in Table AE-2. The majority of these minor issues consisted of: loose bushings, un-taped spare cable ends, and missing fasteners.

Any cabinet with missing fasteners had redundant means of securing the cabinets together. Cabinets that have been identified as requiring supplemental internal inspections are those with doors or panels with latches or thumbscrews and can be readily opened during normal maintenance activities.

The Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWC) for these components were revised and documented in Appendix AC of this Annex A to indicate the results of these internal inspections. Table AE-2 provides an updated status of the identified electrical cabinet inspections.

A5-3

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Table A5-2. Issues Identified during Seismic Walkdowns Actions Action Complete Item ID Description of Issue Request Yes/No Resolution /

ID (IR) (see Action taken notes 1 &2)

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that there is a 1/4 inch clearance between the U1 PI 1-4641-44 and the EDG Skid. There is a possibility that during a seismic event, the gauge Reviewed could displace and contact the EDG piping skid. Due to the minimal weight of the calculations gauge, the seismic displacement and that showed inertia gained will be minimal. As such, displacement 1-4699-226 the gauge impact with the skid will not 1403063 Yes was less cause significant damage to the gauge. than Any damage to the gauge would be distance saw limited to minor surface damage. The in field, gauge would not break apart, nor would evaluated as it become unconnected from the air line. acceptable.

Therefore there is no concern that the equipment would be affected during a seismic event.

Loose nuts on threaded rods holding Tightened down light pack above charger. Still with nuts on 1-8300-1 full thread engagement. Light packs will 1403065 Yes threaded not fall and impact equipment. rods.

1 panel bolt missing on left side of panel, 3 panel bolts loose on right side of panel. Right side has locations for 16 bolts; 13 bolts acceptable. Left side has Replaced 1-2251-113 locations for 11 bolts; 10 bolts 1403068 Yes* missing acceptable. Number of properly-installed bolts.

bolts is judged adequate to ensure panel is able to perform its design function.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-4

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Item ID Description of Issue Request Yes/No Resolution /

ID (IR) (see Action taken notes 1 &2)

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that there are 3 screws missing and 1 screw loose on the 250VDC Charger. Two screws are missing on the right side. One screw is missing on the left side and one screw is Replaced loose on the left side. There are 40 missing 1-8350 screws on each side of this charger 1403079 Yes* screws and holding the panel piece in place. Based tightened on Engineering Judgment the remaining loose screw.

38 of 40 screws per side are more than adequate to maintain the connection of the panel during a seismic event, thus preventing any adverse impact to the charger.

Two gas cylinders near the 1-8801 The chains Valve on RB 623 are each restrained by have been 1-8801A-AO a single chain that is not tight. Adequate 1403593 Yes verified to be distance to safety-related components installed exists, so there is no seismic interaction properly.

concern.

Instrument Air Lines connected to the 1-8801A, 8801 B, 8801 C, 8802A, 8802B &

8802C valves are in contact with rigid The valves insulation covering adjacent piping. are currently Reference UFSAR 6.2.5.1, Oxygen open as content in primary containment is required a monitored by an oxygen analyzer at requeand various locations within the containment the issue to ensure the containment is maintained does their affect not 1-8801A-AO at the desired oxygen content below 4% 1403596 Yes ability to by volume during normal operation. close with During a seismic event, there is a either the CS possibility that the solenoid could move out of phase with the adjacent pipe. If or on a the two items move out of phase, they signal, could contact each other and the evaluated as Instrument Air line may be damaged. A acceptable.

drawing review shows that the valves fail closed upon loss of air. Therefore, there is no immediate seismic concern.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-5

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Item ID Description of Issue Request Yes/No Resolution /

ID (IR) (see Action taken notes 1 &2)

During Fukushima seismic walkdowns, it was discovered that the angle brackets providing vertical support for the 1-0302-18 and 1-0302-19A lines are installed Adjusted but not providing any support for the angle lines. There is a gap between the top of bracket 1-0302-19A the brackets and the bottom of the lines. 1403597 Yes supports to These are located at U1 RB 595, Col provide line 17-18 and L. No excessive adequate deflection or distortion noted and nearby support.

adjacent supports are in good condition.

Therefore, there is no immediate seismic concern.

During the seismic walkdowns, a number of slightly open S-hooks and incorrectly-oriented beam clamps supporting light fixtures were found. The Closed S-hook openings do not warrant S-hooks and 1-7800- concern since mitigating robust items 1404697 Yes* placed beam 18195 limit the pendulum action of the light clamps in the fixtures during a seismic event. Low proper vertical acceleration values and the orientation.

minimal weight of the light fixtures are judged to provide significant margin against the beam clamps being dislodged during a seismic event.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-6

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Iotion Yes/No Resolution /

Item ID Description of Issue Request (see Action taken ID (IR) notes 1&2)

Screw found at the bottom of cubicle D.

All connections were inspected for a missing fastener, none were found. The screw was approximately 1/4" long and 1478958 Yes Removed could not short or damage anything in screw.

the panel during a seismic event, based 1-7018 on the size and location of the FME.

There is no seismic concern.

Wire found without end covered in cubicle A. Wire was secured and will not contact any part of the cabinet 1478964 Yes Taped wire during an event. There is no seismic end.

concern.

A missing screw was found on a mid-panel inside Cubicle A. This was found The internal during a visual inspection of the back component cabinets of the MCC. There is no was seismic concern because there is 1478972 Yes adequately adequate restraint. The panel is secured, misaligned from the mounting hole and evaluated a screw cannot be installed in the as current configuration. This appears to acceptable.

be an as-built condition.

Two bolts (Top and Bottom) were found missing which join cubicle C and D in 250VDC MCC 250VDC MCC 1A. This was found 1A** during a visual inspection of the back cabinets of the MCC. The typical bolting configuration consists of a top, middle and bottom bolt. There is no seismic concern with the missing bolts because Replaced there are additional restraints. At the 1478981 Yes missing bottom, the cubicles are welded bolts.

together, as well as a common bar bolted to each cabinet. At the top another bar common to both cubicles provides restraint. It should be noted no other bolts are missing on adjacent cubicles.

- Denotes new item from follow-on walkdowns5 A5-7

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Item ID Description of Issue Request Yes/No Resolution /

ID (IR) (see Action taken notes 1&2)

Three snap-in bushings were found to be loose in cubicle E of 250VDC MCC 1A. This was found during a visual inspection of the back cabinets of the MCC. This bushing provides assurance Replaced that the cable/cable insulation will not the three 1478987 Yes snap-in be affected by the sharp edge of the cabinet. There is no seismic concern bushings.

with the bushings.

One snap-in bushing was found to be loose in cubicle F of 250VDC MCC 1A.

This was found during a visual inspection of the back cabinets of the Replaced MCC. This bushing provides assurance 1478991 Yes snap-in that the cable/cable insulation will not 1 1snin be affected by the sharp edge of the bushing.

cabinet. There is no seismic concern 250VDC MCC with the bushing.

1A**

Four snap-in bushings were found to be loose in cubicle G of 250VDC MCC 1A.

This was found during a visual inspection of the back cabinets of the Replaced MCC. This bushing provides assurance 1478994 Yes four snap-in that the cable/cable insulation will not 1usnin be affected by the sharp edge of the bushings.

cabinet. There is no seismic concern with the bushings.

One snap-in bushing was found to be loose in cubicle K of 25OVDC MCC 1A.

This was found during a visual inspection of the back cabinets of the MCC. This bushing provides assurance Replaced that the cable/cable insulation will not 1478999 Yes snap-in be affected by the sharp edge of the bushing.

cabinet. There is no seismic concern with the bushing.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-8

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete totion Yes/No Resolution /

Item ID Description of Issue Request (see Action taken ID (IR) notes 1&2)

One bolt (middle) which joins the cubicles D and E of 250VDC MCC 1 was missing. This was found during a visual inspection of the back cabinets of the MCC. The typical bolting configuration consists of a top, middle and bottom bolt. There is no seismic concern with the missing bolt because both the top and bottom bolts are Replaced 1479002 Yes secured and there are additional missing bolt.

restraints. At the bottom the cubicles are welded together, as well as a common bar bolted to each cabinet. At the top another bar common to both cubicles provides restraint. No other bolts are missing on adjacent cubicles.

One snap-in bushing was found loose in cubicle G of 250VDC MCC 1. This was 250VDC MCC found during a visual inspection of the 1**

back cabinets of the MCC. This bushing provides assurance that the cable/cable insulation will not be affected by the Taped wire sharp edge of the cabinet. Also, it was ends and noted that Cable 14034-Spare end was 1479009 Yes replaced found not taped. This cable is bushing.

adequately restrained so in an event, the cable would not contact any part of the cubicle. There are no seismic concerns with this issue.

Cable 15279/15277-Spare end was found not taped in Cubicle H of 250VDC MCC 1. This was found during a visual inspection of the back cabinets of the MCC. This cable is adequately Taped wire 1479018 Yes restrained so in an event, the cable ends.

would not contact any part of the cubicle. There is no seismic concern with this issue.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-9

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Item ID Description of Issue Request Yes/No Resolution /

ID (IR) (see Action taken notes 1&2)

A deficient latch was found on the battery charger. The bottom latch needs to be secured. The top latch was Reworked 1-8350** functional. The engaged latch keeps 1476892 Yes bottom the charger door closed; therefore, latch.

there is no seismic concern with this issue.

A piece of screw was found in the bottom of 901-62. All connections were inspected and none were found to be 901-62** missing a fastener. The piece was 1476936 Yes Removed approximately 1/4" long. During a screw.

seismic event, no damage would have occurred due to the size and location of the object.

Notes:

1) "Yes" indicates that any corrective actions resulting from the issue are complete

2) "No" indicates that any corrective actions resulting from the issue are NOT complete. Actions are tracked by the IR number in the station CAP.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-10

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Table A5-3. Issues Identified during Area Walk-Bys Actions Action Complete Resolution Yes/No Item ID Description of Issue Request (See Action ID (IR) Notes 1 & taken 2)

Several light fixtures supported by open S-hooks. Fixtures have long (approx. 4 feet) chains, minimizing ability of fixtures Closed AWC-U1-18 to fall from hook. Clearance between 1402669 Yes* S-hooks.

fixtures and conduits above (approx. 3 inches) is small, which minimizes pendulum motion of fixtures.

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that the light fixture between switchgear 18 and switchgear 19 has one unclosed S Hook. The other S Hook is closed. Because one of the two S Hooks is closed, there is reasonable assurance that the light fixture will not fall during a seismic event. Should the one open S Closed AWC-Ul-20 Hook become unhooked during a seismic 1403072 Yes* S-hooks.

event, there is sufficient clearance such that the switchgear will not be impacted.

Additionally, there are no other components in the line of fire which would be adversely affected due to impact from the light fixture. Therefore there is no seismic concern regarding this unclosed S Hook.

Ten of over 100 screws loose or missing Installed at back side of Bus 1B1. Loose/missing missing AWC-U1-2 screws spread over 4 different locations 1403074 Yes* and along bus. Sufficient remaining engaged tightened fasteners to maintain panel connection loose per engineering judgment. screws.

Panel 2251-12 missing 2 panel assembly Installed AWC-U1-9 screws. Due to abundance of remaining 1430735* Yes* missing fasteners present, panel judged to be 1403076 acceptable. screws.

Light fixture above 1-1001-1 D valve with open S-hooks. Valve is robust and would AWC-IU1-6 not be affected by light fixture impact. 1403082 Yes Closed Fixture above 1 D RHRSW pump with S-hooks.

open S-hook. Hardwired power cable prevents light fixture from falling.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-11

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Yes/No Resolution Item ID Description of Issue Request ID (IR) (ee/N (See1 & Action tae Notes taken 2)

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that one of two bolts connecting HCUs together is missing. The two HCUs Installed AWC-U1-17 are the 1-0305-127-3051 and the 1-0305- 1403391 Yes* missing 107-3035. Remaining bolt is judged bolt.

sufficient to prevent adverse seismic interaction between HCUs.

During the Seismic Walkdowns it was identified that a conduit support located in the cable spreading room is missing anchor bolts. The location of this support is approximately 20 ft north of the south Bolted wall and 15 ft west of the east wall. This AWC-Ul-13 conduit support is a stanchion which 1403393 Yes* bracketto holds a 2 inch and a 3 inch conduit floor.

approximately 18 inches off of the floor.

Adjacent conduit supports are in good condition and are judged adequate to prevent damage to cables in conduit during a seismic event.

It was identified that the bottom of the concrete slab above EL 623' (i.e., the Removed bottom of the EL 647' slab) in the vicinity loose of column lines L, 14-15 is spalling. concrete Currently, there is some minor concrete from debris on the EL 623' slab below the spalling spalled area. In addition, there is a piece area.

of concrete in the spalled area that is Installed cracked through. This piece of concrete is anchor AWC-Ul-14 being held in place by a conduit that is 1404147 Yes* bolts and attached to the bottom of the slab and, welded therefore, there is no immediate concern unistrut to that any additional concrete debris will install fall. The spalled concrete slab is mesh to considered acceptable with deficiencies prevent as defined in Procedure ER-AA-450 debris (Structures Monitoring) and the structural from adequacy of the spalled slab is not falling.

compromised.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-12

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Yes/No Resolution Item ID Description of Issue Request (See / Action ID (IR) Note taken Notes 1 &

2)

During the seismic walkdowns, a number of slightly open S-hooks and incorrectly-oriented beam clamps supporting light Closed fixtures were found. The S-hook openings S-hooks AWC-Ul-10 do not warrant concern since mitigating and placed AWC-Ul-16 robust items limit the pendulum action of 1404697 Yes* beam AWC-Ul-17 the light fixtures during a seismic event, clamps in Low vertical acceleration values and the the proper minimal weight of the light fixtures are orientation.

judged to provide significant margin against the beam clamps being dislodged during a seismic event.

Emergency light pack 42E (1-7900-42E) is missing the right side mounting fasteners. These mounting fasteners hold the light pack to the wall mounted tray.

This is not a seismic concern because Replaced AWC-U1-15 the left side is securely fastened. It 1405892 Yes* missing should be noted that there is a lip on the fasteners.

wall so rotation cannot occur. There is also a considerable distance from any safety related component, so if the light pack were to fall out of the wall-mounted tray, no damage would occur.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-13

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Request Complete Yes/No Resolution IAto Item ID Description of Issue Request (Sees/ Action ID (IR) Note taken Notes 1 &

2)

For the conduit that feeds valve 1-2301 -

6-MO, the first conduit support away from the valve is missing the conduit clamp.

The conduit span from the valve to the next adequate conduit support (located at the manual operator junction box) is relatively short. Thus, by engineering judgment, sufficient design margin remains for the conduit to perform its design function during a seismic event.

The flexible portion of the same conduit at valve 1-2301-6-MO has a split in one side. Although this is not a seismic concern, the insulation on the cabling Replaced within the conduit in conjunction with the missing AWC-U 1-24 1404153 Yes*

results of recent surveillance testing for strap and valve 1-2301-6-MO provides reasonable bolt.

assurance that the valve remains fully operable.

One of the four bolts that mount the manual operator box for valve 1-2301 MO to the supporting Unistrut members is missing. By engineering judgment, the three remaining mounting bolts are adequate to support the manual operator box during a seismic event since the manual operator box weight is small and the seismic accelerations at El. 554 ft. in the Reactor Building are relatively low.

.1 I.

Mounted QCARP cabinets to During the Unit 1 seismic walkdowns, 15 floor. All housekeeping issues were found other throughout the plant. Per procedure MA- issues U1 - QC-716-026-1001, staged materials near were 1405922 Yes*

General resolved safety-related equipment must adhere to the listed requirements. See IR for during the specific instances. walkdowns or shortly after.

Revised

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-14

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Actions Action Complete Yes/No Resolution Item ID Description of Issue Request (See / Action ID (IR) Note taken Notes 1 &

2) procedure to include closure of S-hooks during installation

/ rework of light fixtures.

No measures in place to prevent trolleys Installed on top of Switchgears 18, 19, and 29 lanyard pin from impacting trolley rail end stops for trolley during seismic event, thereby introducing and tie AWC-U1-20 vibration into Switchgears 18, 19, and 29. 1419584 Yes* strap to Trolley movement and impact is judged to secure be minimal due to cyclic motion of hoist on seismic event and relatively small weight trolley of trolley.

Notes:

1) "Yes" indicates that any corrective actions resulting from the issue are complete

2) "No" indicates that any corrective actions resulting from the issue are NOT complete. Actions are tracked by the IR number in the station Corrective Action Program.

Denotes updated item from previous walkdowns A5-15

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A6 Licensing Basis Evaluations See Section 6 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A6-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A7 IPEEE Vulnerabilities Resolution Report See Section 7 of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

A7-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 A8 Peer Review A peer review team consisting of at least two individuals was assembled and peer reviews were performed in accordance with Section 6: Peer Reviews of the EPRI guidance document. The peer reviewers observed walkdowns of a complete inspection of a deferred item, internal inspection of an electrical cabinet and an area walk-by. The Peer Review process included the following activities:

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

Review of Licensing basis evaluations, as applicable

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

Review of the submittal report

Provide a summary report of the peer review process in the submittal report The peer reviews were performed independently from this report and the summary Peer Review Report is provided in Appendix AF of this Annex A.

A8-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 A9 Rferences

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

2. NRC (E Leeds and M Johnson) Letter to All Power Reactor Licensees et al.,

"Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendation 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident," Enclosure 2.3, "Recommendation 2.3: Seismic," dated March 12, 2012

3. RS-12-169 "180-day Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident,", dated November 27, 2012 A9-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 AA Project Personnel Resumes and SWE Certificates During the follow-on inspections, two additional personnel were used as Peer Reviewers. The resumes of the Seismic Walkdown Team can be found in the Section A of the previous submittal (Ref. 3). Resumes for the following people are found in Appendix AA:

M. Dunlay, Peer Reviewer Team Leader (follow-on inspections) .................................. AA-2 D. Damhoff, Peer Reviewer (follow-on inspections) ................................................... AA-4 AA-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Exeton.

Michael R. Dunlay EXPERIENCE

SUMMARY

2010-present Exelon Generation, Cordova, IL Michael joined Exelon in 2010 as a design engineer. Since 2010, he has designed and evaluated systems, structures, and components with regards to mechanical performance. He has also reviewed seismic qualification reports and reviewed modifications for seismic impact.

ACCOMPLISHMENT

SUMMARY

Component Seismic Qualification Responsible Engineer Responsible for reviewing seismic Responsible engineer for various qualification reports, preparing seismic engineering changes including jet qualification analyses, and reviewing pump weld repair and chemical modifications for impact on seismic separation modifications.

qualification of systems.

NRC Inspection Counterpart Acted as counterpart for NRC inspectors for Fire Protection, Component Design Basis Inspection, and Mods / 50.59 inspections.

EDUCATION Iowa State University - Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering, May 2010 Iowa State University - Master of Engineering in Mechanical Engineering, Expected graduation December 2013.

AA -2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Exe.on.

QUALIFICATIONS AND TRAINING Exelon Qualified Component Seismic Qualification Exelon Qualified NDE VT-I, VT-2, VT-3 Level IIVisual Examination AA -3

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Exeton.

Dustin D. Damhoff EXPERIENCE

SUMMARY

2010-present Exelon Generation, Cordova, IL Dustin joined Exelon in 2010 as a structural design engineer. Since 2010, he has designed, evaluated and inspected systems, structures and components with regards to structural adequacy, aging management and seismic interactions.

Dustin has significant experience in the design and evaluation of systems, structures and components with consideration to seismic demand.

2006-2010 Willett, Hofmann & Associates, Dixon, IL Dustin began his professional career at Willett, Hofmann & Associates in Dixon, IL. His experience includes structural design of many different types of structures including bridges, commercial and industrial buildings, environmental structures, and earth retaining structures. The design of all of these structures involves the consideration of the seismic demand requirements. Additionally, Dustin performed structural inspections and assessments of bridges, commercial and industrial buildings, and other miscellaneous structures.

ACCOMPLISHMENT

SUMMARY

Professional Engineer Fukushima Flood Earned a professional engineering Walkdowns license in the state of Illinois. License Site Lead Responsible Engineer for number 062.063423. Flood Walkdowns in accordance with NEI 12-07 in response to NRC's Qualified Structures information request and associated Monitoring Engineer 50.54(f) letter.

Responsible for performing, evaluating and administering the Structures Fukushima Flood Hazard Monitoring Program at Quad Cities Reevaluation Station.

Site Lead Responsible Engineer for Flood Reevaluations in accordance Fukushima Seismic with NUREG/CR-7046 in response to Walkdowns NRC's information request and associated 50.54(f) letter.

Assisted in initial Seismic Walkdowns at Quad Cities Station.

AA-4

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Exeton.

EDUCATION University of Wisconsin-Platteville, WI - Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering, May 2006 QUALIFICATIONS AND TRAINING Professional Engineering license in the state of Illinois. License number 062.063423.

Exelon Qualified Structures Monitoring Engineer Exelon Qualified Structural Engineer AA-5

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 AB Equipment Lists See Appendix B of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

AB-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 Appendix A C Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWCs)

Table AC-1 provides a description of each item, anchorage configuration verification, a list of Area Walk-By Checklists associated with each item, comments, and page numbers of each Seismic Walkdown Checklist.

Table AC-1. Summary of Seismic Walkdown Checklists Anchorage Area ID Description Configuration Walk- Comments Page Verified By 2201-73A RACK Y* 13* Internal Cabinet AC-3 Inspection 901-61 PNL, CONTROL Y* 13* Internal Cabinet AC-6 Inspection 901-62 PNL, CONTROL Y* 13" InspernlCabione AC-8 1-8300-1 CHRGR #1, 125V Y* 2* Internal Cabinet Inspection AC-11 1-8350 CHRGR #1, 250V Y* 2* Internal Cabinet AC-14 2251-10 RACK, U-1 DG RELAY & Y* 9* Internal Cabinet AC-17 METERING Inspection 2251-113 RACK, DG ENGINE N 9* Internal Cabinet AC-20 CONTROL Inspection 25OVDC MCC MCC Y* 2* Internal Cabinet AC-23 1 Inspection 250VDC MCC MCC N 23* Internal Cabinet AC-26 1A Inspection 1-7100-18 SWGR 18 Y* 20* Internal Cabinet AC-29 Inspection 1-7800-18-1B MCC - MCC 18-1B N 23* Internal Cabinet AC-32 Inspection 2201-32 RACK, AUTO BLOWDOWN N 14* Internal Cabinet Inspection AC-35

Denotes completed during initial walkdowns AC- 1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Anchorage Area ID Description Configuration Walk- Comments Page Verified By Complete AC3 1-0203-1A-1 SOV, FOR MSIV N/A Al Inspection AC-37 1-0203- VLV, PNEUMATIC MAIN 0001AH25 STEAM INBOARD ISOLATION VLEInspection N/A Al Complete AC-40 VALVE 1-1301-16 M VLV, ISOLATION -RCIC N/A Al Complete AC-43 STEAM SUPPLY ISOL VLV Inspection 1-1201-2 VALVE - *PMP SUCT ISOL N/A A2 Complete AC-46 VLV (HW) Inspection 1-0203-3A VALVE,ERV N/A ACompleteInspection AC-49 1-0203-4A VALVE, SRV N/A A2 Complete AC-52 VLV, ISOLATION - *U1 MAIN Complete 1-1301-17-MO STM TO RCIC N/A A3 Compete AC-55 DOWNSTREAM SV (HW) Inspection 1-1201-5 VALVE - RECIRC PMP SUCT N/A A4 Complete AC-58 ISOL VLV Inspection VALVE, PNUEMATIC 1B Complete 1-0220-45 RECIRC LOOP SMPL N/A A4 Compete AC-61 DOWNSTREAM SV Inspection 1-6705-13-1 SWGR 13-1 Y 20* Anchorage AC-64 Inspection

Denotes completed during initial walkdowns AC - 2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: -III N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2201-73A (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-390)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks Equipment

Description:

RACK Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): SB, 609.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5, Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects 7, Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures?

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC -3

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 Status: LY N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2201-73A (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-390)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks Ecuipment

Description:

RACK Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internal components secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacent cabinets secured together? N U

c. No other adverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 2/18/13 Opened back panel door, no adjacent cabinets.

Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 2-18-13 4*%,f Kevin Hall 2-18-13 Photos ChWA(SWC)SUPPLEMENTAL CABINIT ISPEC11Q 2-18-13 Quad Cities 1 (1) 2-18-13 Quad Cities 2 (2)

AC - 4

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 Status: YI--N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2201-73A (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-390)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks Equipment

Description:

RACK AC - 5

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: j N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 901-61 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-459)

Equipment Class: (14) Distribution Panels Eauioment

Description:

PNL. CONTROL Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): SB, 609.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC-6

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y-j

] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 901-61 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-459)

Equipment Class: (14) Distribution Panels Eauipment

Description:

PNL. CONTROL Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internalcomponents secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacent cabinets secured together? N U

c. No other adverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall- 2/18/13 Opened all cabinet doors, no adjacent cabinets.

Evaluated by: Julie Kim_-- Date: 2-18-13 K7l

__Kevin Hall2-81 2-18-13 Quad Cities 5 (2)

AC-7

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 Status: LII N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 901-62 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-463)

Equipment Class: (14) Distribution Panels Eauioment DescriDtion: PNL. CONTROL Project: Quad Cities I SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): SB, 609.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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.

Anchoraae

1. Is anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 8

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 901-62 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-463)

Equipment Class: (14) Distribution Panels EauiDment DescriDtion: PNL. CONTROL Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internalcomponents secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacent cabinets secured together? N U

c. No other adverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 2/18/13 Opened all panel doors, no adjacent panels.

IR 01476936- A small piece of a screw was found at the bottom of panel 901-62. All connections were checked for a missing fastener, none were found missing. The FME was removed.

Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 2-18-13

-" - Kevin Hall 2-18-13 Photos AC - 9

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y-I N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 901-62 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-463)

Equipment Class: (14) Distribution Panels D3 AC - 10

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: LY-] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-8300-1 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-346)

Equipment Class: (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters Equipment

Description:

CHRGR #1, 125V Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): TB, 615.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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.

Anchoraae

1. Is anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 11

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: FY-] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-8300-1 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-346)

Equipment Class: (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters EauiDment DescriDtion: CHRGR #1. 125V Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Intemal components secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacentcabinets secured together? N U

c. No other adverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall- 2/18/13 Open both charger doors, no adjacent cabinets.

Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 2-18-13 Kevin Hall 2-18-13 Photos AC - 12

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: EYII N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-8300-1 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-346)

Equipment Class: (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters AC - 13

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-8350 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-354)

Equipment Class: (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters EauiDment

Description:

CHRGR #1. 250V Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): TB, 615.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 14

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: LFY N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-8350 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-354)

Equipment Class: (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters EauiDment DescriDtion: CHRGR #1. 250V Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internalcomponents secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacent cabinets secured together? N U

c. No other adverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall- 2/18/13 Opened all charger doors, no adjacent cabinets.

IR 01476892- The latch on the 1-8350 250V Battery Charger was found to be deficient. The top latch engaged, while the bottom was missing. The seismic adequacy was not impacted because the top latch is functional.

Evaluated by: ,-_ Julie Kim Date: 2-18-13 Kevin Hall 2-18-13 Photos 2-18-13 Quad Cities 14 (1)

AC - 15

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: [J N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-8350 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-354)

Equipment Class: (16) Battery Chargers and Inverters

1, 250V AC - 16

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2251-10 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-401)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks Equipment

Description:

RACK, U-1 DG RELAY & METERING Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): DG, 595.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 17

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F-i N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2251-10 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-401)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks Eauioment

Description:

RACK. U-1 DG RELAY & METERING Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internalcomponents secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacent cabinets secured together? N U

c. No otheradverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall- 2/21/13 Opened front panel door.

Evaluated by: X Julie Kim Date: 2-21-13 Kevin Hall 2-21-13 Photos AC - 18

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2251-10 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-401)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks Equipment

Description:

RACK, U-1 DG RELAY & METERING 2-21-13 Quad Cities 20 (3)f 2-21-13 Quad Cities 21 (4)

AC - 19

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y-I N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2251-113 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-405)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks Equipment

Description:

RACK, DG ENGINE CONTROL Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): DG, 595.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 20

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F-ý N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2251-113 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-405)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks EauiDment DescriDtion: RACK. DG ENGINE CONTROL Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internal components secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacent cabinets secured together? N U

c. No other adverseseismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall- 2/21/13 Opened front panel door.

Evaluated by: ý,ý,;ýý-zýýrýý0,

-r t- -

Julie Kim Date: 2-21-13 Kevin Hall 2-21-13 AC - 21

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2251-113 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-405)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks RACK.

- DG..... ENGINE CONTROL 2 AC - 22

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Liii N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 250VDC MCC 1 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-428)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers Equipment

Description:

MCC Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): TB, 615.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies ifthe item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 23

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 25OVDC MCC 1 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-428)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers Equipment

Description:

MCC Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internalcomponents secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacent cabinets secured together? N U

c. No otheradverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 2/21/13 Open all back panel doors.

IR 1479002 - One 1/" bolt (middle) which joins the cubicles D and E of 250VDC MCC 1 was missing. The top and bottom bolt ensures the seismic adequacy of the cabinet.

IR 1479009 - One snap-in bushing was found loose in cubicle G of 250VDC MCC 1. This bushing provides assurance that the cable/cable insulation will not be affected by the sharp edge of the cabinet. There are no seismic concerns with this issue.

IR 1479018 - Spare cable end was found not taped in Cubicle H of 250VDC MCC 1. This cable is adequately restrained so in an event, the cable would not contact any part of the cubicle. There is no seismic concern with this issue.

Julie Kim Evaluated by: Date: 2-21-13 Kevin Hall 2-21-13 AC - 24

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: [] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 250VDC MCC 1 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-428)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers AC - 25

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 250VDC MCC 1A (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-434)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers Equipment

Description:

MCC Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 623.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 26

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: ELI N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 250VDC MCC 1A (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-434)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers Equipment

Description:

MCC Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internalcomponents secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacentcabinets secured together? N U

c. No otheradverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall- 2/21/13 Opened all back panel doors.

IR 1478972 - A missing screw was found on a mid-panel inside Cubicle A. There is no seismic concern because there is adequate restraint provided by the other three screws.

IR 1478981 - Two screws (Top and Bottom) were found missing which join cubicle C and D in 250VDC MCC 1A. At the bottom, the cubicles are welded together, as well as a common bar bolted to each cabinet. At the top another bar common to both cubicles provides restraint. The seismic adequacy was not degraded because there are additional restraints.

IR 1478987 - Three snap-in bushings were found to be loose in cubicle E of 250VDC MCC 1A. These bushings provide assurance that the cable/cable insulation will not be affected by the sharp edge of the cabinet. There is no seismic concern with the bushings.

IR 1478991 - One snap-in bushing was found to be loose in cubicle F of 250VDC MCC 1A. This bushing provides assurance that the cable/cable insulation will not be affected by the sharp edge of the cabinet. There is no seismic concern with the bushing.

IR 1478994 - Four snap-in bushings were found to be loose in cubicle G of 25OVDC MCC IA. These bushings provide assurance that the cable/cable insulation will not be affected by the sharp edge of the cabinet. There is no seismic concern with the bushings.

IR 1478999 - One snap-in bushing was found to be loose in cubicle K of 250VDC MCC IA. This bushing provides assurance that the cable/cable insulation will not be affected by the sharp edge of the cabinet. There is no seismic concern with the bushing.

Evaluated by: _ __ _ Julie Kim __ Date: 2-21-13 Ki Kevin a2-21-13 Hall AC - 27

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 250VDC MCC 1A (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-434)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers Z-1-i-AC - 28

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: EYI N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-7100-18 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-320)

Equipment Class: (2) Low Voltage Switchgear Eauioment

Description:

SWGR 18 Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 647.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 29

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: jYj-jI N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-7100-18 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-320)

Equipment Class: (2) Low Voltage Switchgear Equipment

Description:

SWGR 18 Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Intemal components secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) U

b. Are adjacentcabinets secured together? U

c. No other adverse seismic conditions? U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 2/21/13 One of the six cubicles was inspected from the back. Both end cubicles were bolted shut. The other cubicles were operational risk to open.

Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/19/13 All cubicles front and back, were inspected. One cubicle had a partial inspection from the back due to a safety risk.

This walkdown was observed by peer reviewer D. Damhoff.

Evaluated by: _ 7

Julie Kim Date: 3-19-13 Kevin Hall 3-19-13 Photos AC - 30

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-7100-18 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-320)

Equipment Class: (2) Low Voltage Switchgear 3-19-13 AC - 31

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Eli N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-7800-18-1B (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-334)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers Equipment

Description:

MCC- MCC 18-lB Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 623.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 32

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F-] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-7800-18-1B (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-334)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers Equipment

Description:

MCC - MCC 18-1B Other Adverse Conditions SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION

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

a. Internal components secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacentcabinets secured together? N U

c. No other adverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall- 2/21/13 Opened all back cabinet doors.

IR 1478958 - Small screw found at the bottom of Cubicle D of MCC 18-1B. The screw was approximately 1/4" long and could not short or damage anything in the panel during a seismic event, based on the size and location of the screw.

There is no seismic concern.

IR 1478964 - A wire was found not taped or covered in the bottom of Cubicle A of MCC 18-1 B. Wire was secured and will not contact any part of the cabinet during an event. There is no seismic concern.

Evaluated by: ,- - Julie Kim Date: 2-21-13 Kevin Hall 2-21-13 2-21-13 Quad Cities 47 (2)

AC - 33

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: [I N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 1-7800-18-1B (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-334)

Equipment Class: (1) Motor Control Centers AC - 34

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2201-32 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-372)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks Equipment

Description:

RACK, AUTO BLOWDOWN Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 623.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50%

of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

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

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note:

This question only applies if the item is one of the 50% for which an anchorage configuration verification is required.)

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

SEE SWC IN APPENDIX C FOR RESPONSES AC - 35

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: EY- N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC) SUPPLEMENTAL CABINET INSPECTION Equipment ID No.: 2201-32 (SEE APPENDIX C PAGE C-372)

Equipment Class: (18) Instruments on Racks EauiDment

Description:

RACK. AUTO BLOWDOWN ffk , AA--ýý t' ~H**.^-ý Q1 1001 MUCKITAI PAINKICT IMCCIMPTIMI

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

a. Internal components secured? (i.e. no loose or missing fasteners) N U

b. Are adjacent cabinets secured together? N U

c. No other adverse seismic conditions? N U Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 2/21/13 Opened all panel doors, no adjacent cabinets.

Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 2-21-13

/

Kevin Hall 2-21-13 Photos Wklkdown Checkalit (SWC})bU9?Lr-C- It Equlomefn 0 No, 2?!1 S PENY .PArF C Equwpmnefl Class. 118)~~ cj RackiU pmfW:c QuadCities I SWElL EW %opNArea): _RE. 6n20Q0ft AU 2-21 -13 Quad Cities 50 (1)

AC - 36

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: [] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-lA-1 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

SOV, FOR MSIV Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 592.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

Interaction Effects AC - 37

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: FT] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-1A-1 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

SOV, FOR MSIV

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

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

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/11/13 Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 3-11-13 Kevin Hall 3-11-13 AC - 38

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F-IY N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-1A-1 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves EauiDment

Description:

SOV. FOR MSIV Photos AC - 39

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-0001AH25 Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VLV, PNEUMATIC MAIN STEAM INBOARD ISOLATION VALVE Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 592.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

AC - 40

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: ] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-0001AH25 Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves EauiDment Descriotion: VLV. PNEUMATIC MAIN STEAM INBOARD ISOLATION VALVE Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/11/13 Evaluated by: JulieKim--.- Date: 3-11-13 Kevin Hall 3-11-13 AC - 41

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-0001AH25 Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VLV, PNEUMATIC MAIN STEAM INBOARD ISOLATION VALVE Photos 57 (4)

AC - 42

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: LYI N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1301-16-MO Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves EauiDment

Description:

VLV. ISOLATION -RCIC STEAM SUPPLY ISOL VLV Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 592.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures? Yes AC - 43

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: ] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1301-16-MO Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VLV, ISOLATION -RCIC STEAM SUPPLY ISOL VLV

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

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/11/13 Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 3-11-13 evin a3-11-13 Photos AC - 44

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1301-16-MO Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VLV, ISOLATION -RCIC STEAM SUPPLY ISOL VLV AC - 45

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1201-2 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VALVE - *PMP SUCT ISOL VLV (HW)

Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 614.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 findinas. Additional space is provided at the end of this checklist for documenting other comments.

Anchorage

1. Is anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

Interaction Effects AC - 46

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1201-2 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VALVE - *PMP SUCT ISOL VLV (HW)

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

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

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/11/13 Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 3-11-13

/ A<-~/~-Kevin Hall 3-11-13 Photos AC - 47

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F-1 N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1201-2 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves T ISOL VLV AC - 48

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Ij ] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-3A Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VALVE, ERV Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 614.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures? Yes AC - 49

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: EL] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-3A Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VALVE, ERV

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

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/11/13 Evaluated by: Kieiim - Date: 3-11-13 Kevin Hall 3-11-13 AC - 50

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: LYIII N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-3A Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VALVE, ERV Photos AC - 51

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-4A Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VALVE, SRV Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 614.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

AC - 52

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-4A Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Eauioment Descriotion: VALVE. SRV Interaction Effects

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

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

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/11/13 Evaluated by: , Julie Kim Date: 3-11-13 Kevin Hall 3-11-13 AC - 53

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0203-4A Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Eauioment Descriotion: VALVE. SRV Photos AC - 54

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: ELI N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1301-17-MO Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VLV, ISOLATION - *U1 MAIN STM TO RCIC DOWNSTREAM SV (HW)

Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 591.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 documentinq other comments.

Anchorage

1. Is anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures? Yes AC - 55

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: I--YN U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1301-17-MO Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VLV, ISOLATION - *U1 MAIN STM TO RCIC DOWNSTREAM SV (HW)

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

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/12/13 Peer reviewer M. Dunlay attended this walkdown.

Evaluated by: - Julie Kim Date: 3-12-13 Kevin Hall AC - 56

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: FY--] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1301-17-MO Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VLV, ISOLATION - *U1 MAIN STM TO RCIC DOWNSTREAM SV (HW)

Photos AC - 57

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1201-5 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves EouiDment DescriDtion: VALVE - RECIRC PMP SUCT ISOL VLV Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 623.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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.

Anchoragqe

1. Is anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures? Yes AC - 58

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1201-5 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves EauiDment DescriDtion: VALVE - RECIRC PMP SUCT ISOL VLV

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

Masonry wall was reinforced, no concerns.

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/12/13 Peer reviewer M. Dunlay attended this walkdown.

Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 3-12-13 Kevin Hall 3-12-13 Photos AC - 59

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-1201-5 Equipment Class: (8) Motor-Operated and Solenoid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VALVE - RECIRC PMP SUCT ISOL VLV AC - 60

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: -Y-- N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0220-45 Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves EquiDment DescriDtion: VALVE. PNUEMATIC 1B RECIRC LOOP SMPL DOWNSTREAM SV Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): RB, 623.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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.

Anchorane

1. Is anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Not Applicable

3. Is the anchorage free of corrosion that is more than mild surface oxidation? Not Applicable

4. Is the anchorage free of visible cracks in the concrete near the anchors? Not Applicable

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Not Applicable potentially adverse seismic conditions?

This in-line component does not have anchorageto evaluate.

Interaction Effects AC - 61

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: r-Y N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0220-45 Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves EauiDment DescriDtion: VALVE. PNUEMATIC 1B RECIRC LOOP SMPL DOWNSTREAM SV

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

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

Masonry wall was reinforced, no concerns.

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall- 3/12/13 Peer reviewer M. Dunlay attended this walkdown.

Mild surface corrosion on base plate of pipe support, no section loss. Cosmetic corrosion only, no seismic concern.

Evaluated by: lDate: 3-12-13 Kevin Hall3-21 AC - 62

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: FY] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-0220-45 Equipment Class: (7) Fluid-Operated Valves Equipment

Description:

VALVE, PNUEMATIC 1B RECIRC LOOP SMPL DOWNSTREAM SV 1-0220-45 (7)

Photos AC - 63

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F-] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-6705-13-1 Equipment Class: (3) Medium Voltage Switchgear Eauioment Descriotion: SWGR 13-1 Project: Quad Cities 1 SWEL Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): TB, 639.00 ft, ALL Manufacturer/Model:

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 anchorage configuration verification required (i.e., is the item one of the 50% No of SWEL items requiring such verification)?

2. Is the anchorage free of bent, broken, missing or loose hardware? Yes Exterior base anchorageat south end observed. Top east-west wall braces observed. Anchorage observed at north (exterior)end (11/6/12).

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

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

5. Is the anchorage configuration consistent with plant documentation? (Note: Not Applicable 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 Yes potentially adverse seismic conditions?

Interaction Effects

7. Are soft targets free from impact by nearby equipment or structures? Yes AC - 64

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: FT] N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-6705-13-1 Equipment Class: (3) Medium Voltage Switchgear EauiDment

Description:

SWGR 13-1

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

Overhead light fixtures judged to be acceptable. Masonry wall restrainedat top.

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

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

Other Adverse Conditions

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

This internalinspect is scheduled and tracked, see Table AE-2. Currently, it is operationalrisk to open.

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: D. Carter & J. Griffith - 8/20/2012 Per Operations, switchgear door was not opened.

Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 11/6/2012 Opened switchgear door (cubicle 11) and verified anchorage Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 11/6/2012 11/6/2012 Kevin Hall AC - 65

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: E-i N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-6705-13-1 Equipment Class: (3) Medium Voltage Switchgear Equipment

Description:

SWGR 13-1 Photos Ikdown Cimeldist (swc)

Equipment (DNo 1-6705-13-1 Equipment Ctass k3) Medium Voltage Sw~tpea

)ment Descniptbw'n SWOR 13-1 0*

AC - 66

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 Status: - N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-6705-13-1 EauiDment Class: (3) Medium Voltaae Switchaear inment Descrintion:

AC - 67

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: Y-LIN U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-6705-13-1 Equipment Class: (3) Medium Voltage Switchgear AC - 68

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: r-1 N U Seismic Walkdown Checklist (SWC)

Equipment ID No.: 1-6705-13-1 Equipment Class: (3) Medium Voltage Switchgear r-IA-;- QlfA'- VI

"* A 8-AC - 69

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Appendix AD Area Walk-By Checklists (AWCs)

Table AD-1 provides the building, elevation, and location of each area as well as a list of walkdown items associated with each area, and page numbers of each Area Walk-By Checklist.

Table AD-1. Summary of Area Walk-By Checklists AWC-U1-XX Building Elevation Location Base Component ID Page 1-0203-IA-I Al Reactor 592 Unit 1 Drywell 592 - West 1-0203-0001AH25 AD-2 1-1301-16 MO 1-1201-2 A2 Reactor 614 Unit I DW 614 - NW and S 1-1201-2 1-0203-3A AD-5 1-0203-4A A3 Reactor 591 Unit 1 MSIV Room 1-1301-17-MO AD-8 A4 Reactor 623 Unit 1 RWCU HX Room 1-1201-5 AD-1I 1-0220-45 AD-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A1 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 Yes adverse seismic conditions (if visible without necessarily opening cabinets)?

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

Mild surface corrosion found on IC Drywell Cooler footing, no section loss observed. Cosmetic corrosiononly, no seismic concern.

3. Based on a visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and Yes HVAC ducting appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g.,

condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appears to be inside acceptable limits)?

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

5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes that could cause flooding or spray in the area?

6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes that could cause a fire in the area?

AD - 2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A1

7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations(e.g., scaffolding, lead shielding)?

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/11/13 Includes: 1-203-1A-1, 1-203-0001AH25, and 1-1301-16-MO.

Evaluated by: 4~f~ Julie Kim Date: 3-11-13 3-11-13 Kevin Hall Photos 3-11-13 Quad Cities 63 (2) 3-11-13 Quad Cities 62 (1)

AD -3

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-Ul-Al 3-11-13 Quad Cities 65 (4) 3-11-13 Quad Cities 64 (3)

AD -4

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A2 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 Yes adverse seismic conditions (if visible without necessarily opening cabinets)?

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

3. Based on a visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and Yes HVAC ducting appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g.,

condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appears to be inside acceptable limits)?

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

Rod hangerguide in contact with rod. Slight wearing of the rod was observed, no seismic concern.

5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes that could cause flooding or spray in the area?

6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes that could cause a fire in the area?

AD -5

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A2

7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations(e.g., scaffolding, lead shielding)?

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/11/13 Includes: 1-1201-2, 1-0203-3A, and 1-0203-4A

~-*7~-~ <'~

Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 3-11-13 Kevin Hall 3-11-13 Photos 3-11-13 uuac uities 7a (1) j-ii-ij wuaa s.ýmes tit tz)

AD -6

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-UI-A2 3-11-13 Quad Cities 81 (4) 3-11-13 Quad Cities 80 (3)

AD - 7

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: F N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A3 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 Yes adverse seismic conditions (if visible without necessarily opening cabinets)?

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

3. Based on a visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and Yes HVAC ducting appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g.,

condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appears to be inside acceptable limits)?

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

Pipe is in contact with insulation of an adjacent pipe. Based on the distance between both pipes and supports, no damage would occur in a seismic event.

5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes that could cause flooding or spray in the area?

6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes that could cause a fire in the area?

AD - 8

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A3

7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations(e.g., scaffolding, lead shielding)?

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

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/12/13 Peer reviewer M. Dunlay attended this walkdown.

Includes: 1-1301-17 Evaluated by: Julie Kim Date: 3-12-13

'-f-I-Kevin Hall 3-12-13

/

4 Photos 3-12-13 Quad Cities 94 (1) 3-12-13 Quad Cities 95 (2)

AD - 9

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A3 3-12-13 Quad Cities 97 (4) 3-12-13 Quad Cities 96 (3)

AD - 10

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A4 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 Yes adverse seismic conditions (if visible without necessarily opening cabinets)?

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

Mild surface corrosion at anchorplates, no section loss. Cosmetic corrosion only, no seismic concern.

3. Based on a visual inspection from the floor, do the cable/conduit raceways and Yes HVAC ducting appear to be free of potentially adverse seismic conditions (e.g.,

condition of supports is adequate and fill conditions of cable trays appears to be inside acceptable limits)?

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

5. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes that could cause flooding or spray in the area?

6. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes that could cause a fire in the area?

AD - 11

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-UI1-A4

7. Does it appear that the area is free of potentially adverse seismic interactions Yes associated with housekeeping practices, storage of portable equipment, and temporary installations(e.g., scaffolding, lead shielding)?

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

Masonry wall was reinforced, no seismic concern.

Comments Seismic Walkdown Team: J. Kim & K. Hall - 3/12/13 Peer reviewer M. Dunlay attended this walkdown.

Includes: 1-1201-5 and 1-0220-45 Evaluated by: - ,7~,, Julie Kim Date: 3-12-13 3-12-13 Kevin Hall Photos 3-12-13 uuad Cities 99 (2) 3-12-13 Quacd cities vu (1)

AD - 12

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Status: M N U Area Walk-By Checklist (AWC)

Location (Bldg, Elev, Room/Area): AWC-U1-A4 3-12-13 Quad Cities 101 (4)

AD - 13

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Appendix AE Plan for Future Seismic Walkdown of Inaccessible Equipment Table AE-1 lists the current status of the deferred equipment inspections. All items have been completed. The Area Walk-By in the vicinity of this equipment was completed and documented in Appendix AD of this report.

Per Section 5.4, supplemental internal inspections of certain cabinets are required due to clarification provided by the NRC after the online seismic walkdowns were completed.

All items scheduled for Q1 R22 have been completed, as shown in Table AE-2. The remaining electrical cabinet inspections are being tracked for completion during the next upcoming bus outage.

AE-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 Table AE-1. Inaccessible and Deferred Equipment RS-13-136 Component Reason for Action Resolution/ Milestone ID Description Inaccessibility Request Status Completion ID (IR)

Anchorage 1-6705 SWGR 13-1 check only- 1412648 Complete 11-6-12 1 equipment is energized VLV, PNEUMATIC 1-0203- MAIN STEAM Located in 0001AH25 INBOARD Drywell ISOLATION VALVE 1-0203-1A- Located in 1 SOV, FOR MSIV Drywell VALVE, ERV Located Lctdi in 1-0203-3A Drywell 1404698 Complete 3-11-13 Located in 1-0203-4A VALVE, SRV Drywedi Drywell VALVE - *PMP 1-1201-2 SUCT ISOL VLV Locaedi (HW) Drywell 1-1301 VLV, ISOLATION - Located in RCIC SUPPLYSTEAM ISOL VLV Drywell MO VALVE, Located in PNUEMATIC 1B Clean-up Heat 1-0220-45 RECIRC LOOP Exchanger SMPLRoom DOWNSTREAM SV VALVE - RECIRC Located in 1-1201-5 PMP SUCT ISOL Clean-up Heat 1404698 Complete 3-12-13 VLV Exchanger Room VLV, ISOLATION -

1-1301 RCICMAIN STM TO

UI Located in MSIV MO RCCRoom DOWNSTREAM SV (HW)

Denotes completed during follow-on inspections AE-2

- Denotes completion with No Other Adverse Seismic Conditions

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Table AE-2. Deferred Internal Cabinet Inspection If not Tracking Status /

Compt Description Equipment Accessible accessible, Milestone Number Results ID Class (YIN) why Completion (IR **

Number)

Filled with oil, and no 1-7100 T 184160V-480V (04)

Transformers NO jiecabinet is otithis joined to transformer.

(20)

Instrumentation 901-33 PANEL and Control YES N/A 8/20/2012 N/A Complete Panels and Cabinets (20)

Instrumentation 901-39 PANEL and Control YES N/A Panels and Cabinets (20)

Instrumentation 901-3 PANEL and Control Panels and N/A Complete Cabinets N/A 8/20/2012 (No Photos (20) Allowed)

Instrumentation 901-5 PANEL and Control Panels and Cabinets PNL, (14) 901-61 PONTL CONTROL Distribution Pnl Panels (14) 901-62* PNL, CONTROL Distribution Pnl Panels YES N/A 2/18/2013 1422578 Complete 1-8300-1 CHRGR #1, (16) Battery 125V Chargers and Inverters 1-8350 CHRGR #1, (16) Battery 250V Chargers and Inverters (18) 2201-73A* RACK Instruments on Racks

Denotes completed during follow-on inspections AE-3

- Denotes completion with No Other Adverse Seismic Conditions

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Table AE-2 Cont. Deferred Internal Cabinet Inspection If not Tracking Status /

Compt Description Equipment Accessible accessible, Milestone Number Results ID Class (Y/N) why Completion (IR R u why Number) 1-7800 MCC - MCC (01) Motor 1B* 18-1B Control Centers 25OVDC (01) Motor MCC 1* MCC Control Centers 2RACK,AUTO (18) 2201-32 RACKAUTOW BLOWDOWN Instruments Rak on YES N/A 2/21/2013 1422578 Complete 250VDC (01) Motor MCC 1A* MCC Control Centers RACK, U-1 (18) 2251-10* DG RELAY & Instruments on METERING Racks RACK,DG (18) 2251-113* ENGINE Instruments on CONTROL Racks (02) Low 1-7100-18* SWGR 18 Voltage YES N/A 3/19/2013 1422578 Complete Switchgear 1-7800 MCC - MCC (01) Motor 1 19-1 Control YES N/A Q1 R23 1422578 Tracking Centers (18) 2251-87 RACK Instruments on YES N/A Q1R25 1422578 Tracking Racks 1-6705 (03) Medium 1 SWGR 13-1 Voltage Switchgear 1-7800- MCC -MCC (01) Motor 18195 18/19-5 Cetr Control YES N/A Q1R26 1422578 Tracking Centers (18) 2251-86 RACK Instruments on Racks 1-7800 MCC - MCC (01) Motor 2 18-2 Control YES N/A Q1R28 1422578 Tracking Centers

Denotes completed during follow-on inspections AE-4

- Denotes completion with No Other Adverse Seismic Conditions

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Appendix AF Peer Review Report This appendix includes the Peer Review Report on the follow-on seismic Walkdowns and Walk-Bys.

AF-1

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 Peer Review Report For Near Term Task Force (NTTF) Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Walkdown Inspection of Quad Cities Nuclear Station Unit 1 5/10/2013 Prepared by Peer Reviewers Michael Dunlay (Team Leader)

Dustin Damhoff Michael Dunlay ,--iJ{4 Peer Review Team leader Certification Signature Date AF-2

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 IIntroduction 1.1 OVERVIEW This report documents the independent peer review for the Near Term Task Force (NTTF)

Recommendation 2.3 Seismic Walkdowns Annex A for Unit 1 of Quad Cities Nuclear Station (QCNS). The peer review addresses the following activities:

Observation of seismic walkdowns on March 12, 2013 by Mr. Michael Dunlay. Mr.

Dustin Damhoff observed seismic walkdowns on March 19, 2013.

" Review of a sample of the checklists prepared for the Seismic Walkdowns & Walk-Bys

Review of any licensing basis evaluations

Review of the decisions for entering the potentially adverse conditions in to the plant's Corrective Action Plan (CAP)

" Review of the final submittal report The peer reviewers for QCNS, Unit 1, Annex A are Messrs. Michael Dunlay and Dustin Damhoff, both Exelon engineers. Mr. Dunlay is designated the Peer Review Team Leader.

Neither engineer has been involved in the seismic walkdown inspection process so that they can maintain their independence from the project.

Mr. Dunlay is qualified for Exelon Component Seismic Qualification. He is currently the point of contact for Seismic Qualification Reporting and Testing Standardization (SQURTS) for Quad Cities. Mr. Damhoff is a licensed Professional Engineer, qualified for Exelon Structural Activities and knowledgeable in seismic/structural design.

This independent peer review covered information provided in Annex A. A selection of Unit 1 Seismic Walkdown Checklists (SWCs) and Area Walk-By Checklists (AWCs) were reviewed.

Observations of walkdowns were performed. Review of the final report was performed and verified to include the required information for Annex A.

No issues were identified which challenged the current licensing basis.

AF-3

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 2Peer Review - Selection of SSCs All peer reviews were completed in the initial submittal for selection of SSCs. No changes have been made to the SWEL.

AF-4

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 31Review of Sample Seismic Walkdown & Area Walk-Bys Checklists 3.1 OVERVIEW A peer review of the SWCs and AWCs was performed on the scope of Annex A. Interviews were performed to ensure all requirements have been met. Peer Reviewers attended all five walkdowns.

3.2 SAMPLE CHECKLISTS Table AF3-1 lists the SWC and AWC samples which were reviewed. The samples represent 18% of the SWCs and 25% of the AWCs. The sampling was selected on a random basis to ensure independence from the inspectors. The sampling was representative of the Annex A population, including a review of a switchgear.

Thhle AF3-1 : Thhle of SWC *nd AWC F;mnle* from Seismirc Walkdown Indirection for Unit 1 Equipment Equipment Walkdown Item Observations Identification Class 1-1201-5

8 Recirc Pump Suction No concerns Isolation Valve 1-1301-17

8 Isolation Valve - Main No concerns Steam to RCIC 1-0220-45

7 Valve, Pnuematic 1B Recirc No concerns Loop Smpl Downstream SV 1-7100-18

2 SWGR 18 No concerns Area Walkdown Description Observations HaeRoom Discussions on whether block wall in room was reinforced. Shown to be acceptable.

Indicates Peer Reviewer attended the walkdown 3.3 EVALUATION OF FINDINGS There were no findings that challenged the licensing basis.

For the RWCU Heat Exchanger Room, no issues were identified. There is a block wall nearby the 1-1201-5 valve. After the walkdown, an interview was conducted with the inspectors to verify the wall is properly braced. Inspectors, through review of design drawings and photographs, demonstrated the wall is properly reinforced and braced.

AF-5

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-1 3-136 4Review of Assessment of Identified Issues Table A5-2 and A5-3 provides a list of the issues encountered during the Unit 1 seismic walkdown inspections for the SWEL components and how they were addressed. Items which were added during the most recent walkdowns were reviewed. No potentially adverse seismic conditions were identified that resulted in a seismic licensing basis evaluation. The peer reviewers concur with this outcome.

AF-6

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 5Review Final Submittal Report & Sign-off The entire final submittal report of Annex A has been reviewed by Messrs. M. Dunlay and D.

Damhoff and found to meet the requirements of the EPRI 1025286 - Seismic Walkdown Guidance. Annex A covers the necessary open items from the original submittal. The Peer Review determined that the objectives and requirements of the 50.54(f)] letter are met for Annex A. Additionally, the efforts completed and documented within the final submittal report are in accordance with the EPRI guidance document.

1 NRC Letter to All Power Reactor Licensees et al., "Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendation 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident," Enclosure 3, "Recommendation 2.3: Seismic," dated March 12, 2012 AF-7

Quad Cities Generating Station Unit 1 RS-13-136 GIPEEE Vulnerability Status See Appendix G of Enclosure 1 in Annex Reference 3.

AG - I

RS-13-136, Supplemental Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident

Text

Subject:

References:

Enclosures:

Title:

1.2 BACKGROUND

1.5 CONCLUSION

Subject:

1.2 BACKGROUND

1.5 CONCLUSION

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Description:

Navigation menu

Search